Where do people get the idea the USPS delivers to every address?

In My Humble Opinion
81

Things I learned while reading this thread:
[ul][li] Although it seems to be true that the USPS delivers to almost every address in America, discounting those like Ted Kaczynski that are trying to live in the middle of nowhere, ten Dopers quickly showed up to announce that the USPS doesn’t deliver to them. I’ve long thought you guys were weird; this rather confirms it. (Don’t worry, I only skimmed the thread. Whether you’re living in Area 61 or the wilds of Montana, I respect your privacy!)[/li]
[li] A new word! ‘Leftyfit.’ It’s not in any dictionaries and you need quotes to get meaningful Google hits. It seemed to be in vogue in 2017 (if 8 total hits qualifies as ‘in vogue’). Here’s one:[/li]

[li] Although we have a sample-size of only 1, the people who use the word “leftyfit” in the thread have no understanding of the lefty word “negative externalities.”[/li][/ul]

But let me report on mail deliveries to my rural location, over an hour’s drive from Nowhere City:

Cite for the song, please? Unless you’re thinking of the horse with no name.

I live on a street with no name. (This disturbed me so much I once went around asking everyone what the road’s name was. They all just looked at me funny, except one old woman who told me the old road’s old name. I forgot to write it down, so asked her again years later. By then she too had forgotten! :frowning: )

The post office assigned us a House number — “97/2” because our driveway was adjacent to House 97. I put my foot down, insisting we got a proper number! So we’re House 233. (House 232 may be miles away.) Yet mail is delivered to us regularly, with the postman driving up our 200-meter driveway and braving the barking dogs!

That postman is not employed by the USPS — I live in the Land of Smiles — but much of the mail comes from U.S.A. and the only payment for the postage is what the USPS received to begin with.

Occasionally some Usanian insists on sending via FedEx or DHL. (I refuse DHL — they had the habit of forging and demanding customs fees.) The best I can hope for from FedEx is that will pay the Thai Post to deliver to my house, but they prefer to try to find my house: one time they wasted a week of phone calls, and postcards to do so!

Lately, Kerry Express (a competitor to FedEx I guess) has taken over the country; their orange vans are ubiquitous.

82

Where the Streets Have No Name, by U2

83

Thanks. I honestly thought it was obvious.

84

It was.

85

Rohnert Park (aka Robot Park, Rodent Park, Rat Town), Sonoma County, California contains No Name Street. That’s what is says on the city street sign.

86

:o I’m an isolated hermit. I’ve not even visited North America during this millennium.

87

It’s not that simple.

1 - USPS is legally required to pay the retiree health benefits, regardless of whether they have the money or not.

2 - USPS revenue is dropping and expenses increasing - they have lost money most years recently even if you remove the prefunding (which they simply haven’t paid anyway since 2010, so it can’t really be hammering them too much)

3 - USPS has 500,000 employees, and they have currently have 600,000 retirees
If your assumption is that the USPS will be able to be profitable indefinitely, then pay as you go makes sense.

If your assumption is that the mail delivery business has changed significantly and will continue to change, revenue will drop, and that it will be challenging for the USPS to remain profitable/pay their bills, then setting aside money makes sense.

88

No one sets aside that much. It was just a move to hurt the USPS by a Republican congress that is paid by UPS and Fedex. It is that simple.

89

I’m sure there were ulterior motives, but let’s stick to analysis of the facts.

Given that USPS hasn’t made any of those payments since 2010, it isn’t hurting them and it’s not why they are losing money most years.

In addition, according to the GAO, they are currently paying those health benefits out of a fund that will be depleted by 2030. They are pulling out about $4 billion per year and were supposed to be paying into it about $5 billion per year but aren’t paying in anything.
So, in 2030 when the fund is depleted, and USPS is still losing money, and they can’t borrow any more due to already being at max, how are the retirees going to get their health premiums payed?
What do you think is a better model, is it just to allow USPS to pay as they go and hope that they stop losing money?

What should happen if the USPS can’t make the health premium payments and they can’t borrow any more money (they are legally at max), then what?

90

If it’s such a great idea to prepay 75 years of retiree health care costs, how come no one else does the same thing?

91

Agreed. The USPS has gotten into a problem that many states have gotten into by offering far too generous pension benefits that they simply cannot pay for. Yet they have promised this money to a whole bunch of people. So, as you said, require them to set aside that money now and not in 20 years when they will likely have gone the way of the dodo bird.

Politics aside, the USPS was set up to deliver residential mail: letters, bills, magazines and the like. UPS and FedEx came along and deliver packages. In ten years, I predict that nothing tangible will be shipped in the United States except packages and products.

All of those documents mentioned above, like deeds and contracts and the like which require physical paper to change hands is only that way now because of cranky old farts in legislatures and courthouses who simply do not have the desire to do things a better way and stubbornly hold on to old traditions because they fear change. When those creaky, crusty old bastards retire and are replaced by a new generation, those things will all be paperless.

There is no reason today why you cannot review a deed or contract in PDF format, securely electronically sign it, and then electronically file it at the courthouse.

When that happens, the USPS is screwed whether anyone likes it or not, and they are already 3/4 of the way there now. Why fight it?

92

Again, what will happen to the poorest segment of the American public (and it’s still a substantial amount of people) who can’t afford a computer or an internet connection? Again, the fact that you don’t regularly receive letters, magazines, and newspapers doesn’t mean that nobody else does. I can’t predict the future, and neither can you.

93

A similar statement in 1910 would have been true: Sure, you and your rich buddies have these new “automobiles” but the regular guy rides a horse. And the fact that you and your fat cat buddies don’t need livery stables, watering troughs, or hitching posts doesn’t mean that nobody else does.

We cannot predict this future, but this one is pretty much unassailable as we have already seen the transition to online documents. We will do what this country has always done which is provide a social safety net to the poor, but allow technology to progress and allow the outdated technology to fall into the bin of history.

94

You don’t know that will happen. Nobody can. You also don’t know how soon it will happen. Read some books about how hard forecasting is. I suggest Superforecasting by Philip E. Tetlock and Dan Gardner, Future Babble by Dan Gardner, The Signal and the Noise by Nate Silver, and Expert Political Judgment by Philip E. Tetlock.

95

It’s not just that the Post Office has to pre-fund their future pensions to an insane degree; it’s also that they’re legally prevented from raising rates.

How isn’t it clear that Republicans and FedEx, UPS, and DHL have been intentionally attempting to destroy the Post Office? Republican-led Congresses have repeatedly required increased outlay of money and simultaneously prevented bringing in more, while refusing to allocate any funds, even during a pandemic.

96

So, the USPS won’t pay its pensions unless it gets taxpayer assistance? What about the Defense Department? When’s the last time it showed a profit?

Or, for that matter, Wall St. investment banks? Their business model has devolved into “Heads we win, tails the taxpayer bails us out.” Shouldn’t they have to prepay? How about the airlines? Have tobacco companies prepaid enough to cover cancer liabilities if the judicial winds change?

Health insurance premiums in 2030? Maybe it’s the health insurance companies that should be prefunding their employees’ pensions! :cool:

97

How will that help? That’s the last gasp of any business. Nobody is coming at the current rates, so why would they come to pay more?

Was the reason that buggy whip manufacturers went out of business because they didn’t charge enough?

98

If they’re gone in twenty years, why the need to pre-fund retiree health care costs so far in the future? Surely there won’t be any living retirees at that point.

99

Nobody paid or was asked to pay 75 years of anything, that is the political spin associated with this type of info.

“how come no one else does the same thing?”:
Private companies have been required to fund their pensions since 1974. Currently, if the pension fund is less than 90% funded for three years, or less than 80% funded for one year, they are required to make cash contributions to make up the shortfall.
Comparison of private vs USPS:
Private companies:
1 - Pensions: required to prefund
2 - Health benefits: can be cancelled at any time (unless stated otherwise in plan), therefore not required to prefund

USPS
1 - Pensions: required to prefund (and is currently in good shape)
2 - Health benefits: required to pay them, can not be legally cancelled, therefore required to prefund

USPS was given a short amount of time, 10 years, to catch up on the health benefits, which is more aggressive than the 30 to 40 years that private companies were given to fund there pensions starting in 1974.
Questions for you:
1 - Do you think the health benefits should be protected? Or should we change the law so USPS can just cancel them when they aren’t able to pay?

2 - If you think they should remain protected, given that revenues are dropping and expenses rising, how would you protect those benefits? USPS is at max on their borrowing so your answer can’t be: “well, they should borrow $5 billion per year to pay for the health benefits”

Or maybe you think that taxpayers should pay for any shortfall, is that your position?

100

This is the real issue.

Seems like something like this would make sense:
1 - Keep the mailbox restriction to USPS because opening it up to other companies creates too many security issues. Plus, consumers can just add a 2nd box at their house for parcel/other carriers if they feel like, that’s not a huge burden.

2 - Remove the mail monopoly - e.g. allow parcel companies to legally carry non-urgent letters (but delivered to non-usps box)

3 - Give USPS the flexibility to set prices according to circumstances. They will need to compete to survive, so they need to be given the freedom to adapt.

4 - Require all mail carriers to deliver to every address, and with a capped relative price - meaning highest price letter delivery must be within X% of median delivery price. This ensures that all addresses are covered and at a reasonable price.