On the other hand…
The Post Office has had some major unexpected expenses recently, with the anthrax infections and mail. I’m not at all surprised that they might want a bit more money to deal with shortfalls.
I am not opposed to paying what is necessary to cover the cost of getting an item of mail to the recipient.
What angers me is the USPS bulk rate provisions.
Anybody can pay $50 and get a license to saturate the world with mailings selling whatever they happen to feel like promoting. The USPS will lean over backwards to make sure that they get all the addresses they need. And they’re given a substantial discount from normal first class postage to do so. If they can show non-profit status, they get an even greater discount.
(BTW, your state and local governments must pay full price – the USPS doesn’t think they’re eligible for non-profit status.)
So not only do we have to deal with junk mail as the overwhelming major ingredient of our incoming mail, we’re subsidizing it by the cost of first class postage.
And Jerry Falwell, if he takes it into his pointy little head to do so, could send his hate-based drivel at about a third the cost you or I would pay.
I had a summer job delivering mail in the early 1960’s. I made minimum wage. Experienced postmen made only a small amount above minimum wage. They couldn’t support a family on that amount of money. Some had second jobs. Some were preparing for other careers. Some simply lived in near poverty.
Today, as I understand it, Post Office wages and benefits are enough to live a decent life.
If the Post Office were a private company, they’d never have increased their wage scale. They’d still be paying near minimum wage, and stamps could be a lot cheaper.
Hey, Ivylass! If you’re like the average person, you mail, what, maybe 20 pieces of mail a month (that’s probably an over-estimation). At 3 cents each, that caculates out to about 60 cents more per month you’ll be spending in postage. Multiply that by 12 and it comes in at about $7.20 extra for the whole year.
I’ll give you $10 to cover it, if it means you’ll shut your piehole.
You sure about that, Polycarp? Certainly bulk mail rates are less than what normal first class rates are, but I thought that the reduced PO labor required substantiated the reduced cost of bulk rate. In fact, in this thread, Yarster claims that “more profitable forms of mail (like bulk rate junk) are used to subsidize more razor thin margin stuff (like first class) [italics mine],” a claim which is is in direct opposition to your statement. I hunted around the Web a bit for a citation that would state which forms of mail subsidize what, but I couldn’t find anything either way. Anyone else got the Straight Dope?
Well, that just proves it for me…
What a load of bullshit. Nothing against the Libertarian party, but every ass who makes these claims does not realize that the Post Office must deliver the mail, regardless of profit margin. So let’s privatize it, and put the USPS out of its misery, and forget about inexpensive mail delivery to Bumfuck, Nowhere (population 15) because a private company can’t make a profit off of it. Or perhaps you think UPS and FedEx will accept the losses.
So, you say, let the others compete, but with the same rules. Surprise Snookums, take away the revenue and the USPS can’t provide the same level of service as cheaply, and yes, it is extraordinarily cheap. And, splitting the revenue, neither will FedEx, UPS et al be able to provide the service as cheaply as the USPS.
Now while you’re sitting there bitching and moaning, here’s a better link:
Is it true U.S. postage rates are among the lowest in the developed world?
I sort of wish stamps would cost multiples of five cents. It just would be easier, I think.
Hey, I guess that the price increase makes $.32 stamps real collectors items. Anybody want one? I have a few and would be willing to let them go at the reasonable price of $1.00 each.
Anybody?
Structure: Former Government Department, now a “Government Business Enterprise”, ie. a corporation with the Australian Federal Government being a 100% share holder.
Price of stamp: AUD 0.45 (USD 0.25 approx.)
for delivery of a standard letter anywhere within Australia (by air) inside a day or two for the major cities, or slightly longer for remote areas.
Reliability: Normally, over 94% of articles are delivered on time. Of the remaining 6%, most are delivered only one day late.
**Damage to mail: **On a typical day at the facility I work at, we handle up to a million letters. There may be four or five letters which have come to grief in the machinery, and this is usually because the sender has put hard items inside a standard envelope.
Most recent price hike: mid-1991 -up two cents.
Profitability: Australia Post returns a modest dividend of a few million dollars to the government each year.
I’m not normally so nice to Australia Post. I’ve worked for them for twelve years, and I’m sick of it, but I must admit they are doing quite well. Yet people still complain about the price of postage, the service, and they still mistakenly believe the taxpayer is propping the postal system up.
Yeah, screw those mail carriers! Any schmuck can haul a thirty-pound bag of mail through blazing sun, chilling rain, blinding sleet, and rabid dogs, why bother to give them a decent salary? Just toss 'em their $7/hour and be done with it! :rolleyes:
Only in part. The USPS has had “revenue shortfalls” for many consecutive years now. Who do you think is making up that deficit? The USPS 2000 Annual report admits a shortfall of $199 million, calling that “just about to the break-even mark for the year.”
The fiscal year (ended Sept 30 2001, so they cannot blame very much of this on the anthrax mess, or 9/11 losses) report claims a Net (loss) Income of $1.680 billion, despite what they call a “Capital Contribution of U.S. Government” totalling $3.034 billion. That 3 billion is about 5% of their claimed revenue of $65.834 billion.
And then there’s this:
This is most definitely a taxpayer expense. You may argue that it is mandated by Congress and would not be a USPS service, but it is still direct support from the taxpayer.
The upshot of all this is that yes, the taxpayer does provide substantial support to the USPS.
rjung, there’s no reason you can’t buy $0.55 stamps today and save yourself the trouble right now.