Why The Postal Service Doesn't Want T...

Why The Postal Service Doesn't Want To Be Rescued

There are 71 comments on the National Public Radio story from Apr 26, 2012, titled Why The Postal Service Doesn't Want To Be Rescued. In it, National Public Radio reports that:

A bill passed by the Senate yesterday would give the U.S. Postal Service an $11 billion bailout, NPR reports .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at National Public Radio.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#1 Apr 26, 2012



FORD didn't need the Bail Out to FIX their Massive Problems and the USPS needs to do the same. Make the right business decisions instead of Borrowing More and only exacerbating the problems.


No More BAIL OUTS Obama!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#2 Apr 26, 2012


The pathetic USPS had a DIRECT Line of Borrowing into the US Treasury for years which ended. Now instead of acting like a typical broken Obama gov agency that borrows to stay afloat, they now have to act like a real business and try to embrace the grown up idea of "Making Ends Meet."


Gravediggers

Lynwood, CA

#3 Apr 26, 2012
Continued waste by elected officials.

Postal Service is billions in the red. Cut service!

Education Department needs to also be downsized OR eliminated.

We are seeing too much failure with the federal government and WASTE!

and we asked to do without so they can continue the WASTE.

Eating kobe beef at the White House and drinking expensive wines, excessive personal travel by the Obamas with the taxpayer picking up the costs.

The excessive in the government must stop.

We thought Obama would do it, but he has joined in the spending.

NO to Obama!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#4 Apr 26, 2012
Obamafail 2011

The U.S. Postal Service is in such dire financial condition that if it were a regular corporation, it would be preparing to file bankruptcy.

Over the last five years, the postal service has lost about $20 billion, with another $9 billion loss likely for 2011.


Cash flow is tight/negative due to Pelosi/Obama's Congress forcing the postal service to make a big payment due to its retiree healthcare plan at the end of September.

That would be the equivalent of a default on its obligations. By next summer, there may not be enough money to meet payroll. The postal service would be insolvent, and the mail would stop coming.



“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#5 Apr 26, 2012

Hamstringing its finances.

The post office's biggest problem has nothing to do with the price of stamps. More than anything, costs related to pensions, healthcare and workers compensation are what's pushing the USPS off a cliff.


Those costs add up to about $22 billion per year, or 30 percent of all postal expenses, according to the Government Accounting Office.


Other companies have faced similar problems, but the postal service faces unusual limits on its ability to manage costs, such as an obligation imposed by a 2006 Obama/Pelosi/Reid law to "prefund" a large portion of its retiree healthcare plan, instead of a more typical pay-as-you-go arrangement.

The postal service also claims that mandated payments to its pension plans since the 1970s have left them overfunded by somewhere between $57 billion and $82 billion. That's money, in other words, that has been unavailable to help fund everyday operations.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#6 Apr 26, 2012


Legislation proposed by Democratic Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware would let the USPS tap those surpluses to help finance healthcare premiums, and provide more flexibility in terms of how it manages worker benefits.

But begging Congress for permission is about the worst imaginable way to grapple with costs that other big companies battle every day, with the most inventive (and sometimes ruthless) measures they can devise. No company can be efficient if it must seek regulatory relief to rein in its biggest and hardest-to-control costs.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#7 Apr 26, 2012

USPS: A Gov F-Up

Making it obsolete.

The postal service still has the essential mission of delivering mail to every community in America, which private companies like FedEx or UPS would probably charge a lot more for, especially for rural addresses that are hard to reach. But Congress has still micromanaged the postal service through a strict set of rules governing what it can and can't do while fulfilling its mandate of universal mail service.


The USPS can't deliver wine or beer, for instance, even though FedEx and UPS can. It can't sell non-postal products, even though it controls an enviable network of retail outlets in central locations in most towns and cities.


And even though it's technically allowed to close post offices on its own, without seeking Congressional approval, that's often impossible in reality, since members of Congress routinely pull strings to make sure no town on their turf loses its post office—no matter how unprofitable it may be.


http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#8 Apr 26, 2012



The postal service also has a basic business problem:

Its core business—delivering physical products by the mail—is in natural decline, thanks to the Internet and digital communication. Some companies, such as IBM and Apple, have found ways to reinvent themselves as their core product line seemed headed for the dustbin.


It usually takes strong leadership, insight into the future and a willingness to take risks. Other companies, like General Motors, Kodak and Sears, clung to a dying business model for way too long, and paid the price. The postal service has some innovative ideas of its own, such as closing many underperforming post offices, opening low-cost kiosks or postal stations inside grocery stores and other retailers, and offering other services at its own retail outlets, to bring in some extra cash. It has also been lobbying hard to end Saturday delivery, which it says will save $3 billion per year.

Private companies make those kinds of changes to their business model all the time—at least the survivors do.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/...

“i hope we can change this!”

Since: Aug 08

usa

#9 Apr 26, 2012
why do it the right way when the feds can piss away ANOTHER $11 billion of OUR money doing it THEIR way...?

just ONE MORE reason to vote EVERY incumbent out!
Makes sense

Dearborn, MI

#10 Apr 26, 2012
Why don't we cut spending on pensions for postal workerss that aren't even born yet? These Democrats spend spend spend.
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

#11 Apr 26, 2012
It is true that USPS is facing fiscal challenges — it lost nearly $20 billion over the last four years and is at risk of not being able to meet a $5.5 billion mandated payment to the Treasury at the end of this month (which has been put off six weeks thanks to the last continuing resolution in Congress).

But what has been lost in the political debate over the Post Office is why it is losing this money. Major media coverage points to the rise of email or Internet services and the inefficiency of the post model as the major culprits. While these factors may cause some fiscal pain, almost all of the postal service’s losses over the last four years can be traced back to a single, artificial restriction forced onto the Post Office by the Republican-led Congress in 2006.

At the very end of that year, Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (PAEA). Under PAEA, USPS was forced to “prefund its future health care benefit payments to retirees for the next 75 years in an astonishing ten-year time span”— meaning that it had to put aside billions of dollars to pay for the health benefits of employees it hasn’t even hired yet, something “that no other government or private corporation is required to do.”

It wouldn't be in trouble if teabaggers didn't MANDATE it to be.

Teabaggers whine about excessive corporate taxes and companies going broke because of it, how bout paying $5.5 BILLION a year?

Limbaughtomy and Rannity would be dead from a heart attack, if this was forced on a private company.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#12 Apr 26, 2012


The postal service is stuck with a business model that has barely changed in decades, and so far Congress has resisted most of the changes it has sought.

It doesn't take an MBA or a Congressional hearing to realize that clinging to mail service in the digital era is a formula for going broke.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#13 Apr 26, 2012
The laughing liberal wrote:
FORD didn't need the Bail Out to FIX their Massive Problems and the USPS needs to do the same. Make the right business decisions instead of Borrowing More and only exacerbating the problems.
No More BAIL OUTS Obama!
No money unless they drop the union and executive bonus's for losing money.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#14 Apr 26, 2012
Wall Street Government wrote:
It is true that USPS is facing fiscal challenges — it lost nearly $20 billion over the last four years and is at risk of not being able to meet a $5.5 billion mandated payment to the Treasury at the end of this month (which has been put off six weeks thanks to the last continuing resolution in Congress).
But what has been lost in the political debate over the Post Office is why it is losing this money. Major media coverage points to the rise of email or Internet services and the inefficiency of the post model as the major culprits. While these factors may cause some fiscal pain, almost all of the postal service’s losses over the last four years can be traced back to a single, artificial restriction forced onto the Post Office by the Republican-led Congress in 2006.
At the very end of that year, Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (PAEA). Under PAEA, USPS was forced to “prefund its future health care benefit payments to retirees for the next 75 years in an astonishing ten-year time span”— meaning that it had to put aside billions of dollars to pay for the health benefits of employees it hasn’t even hired yet, something “that no other government or private corporation is required to do.”
It wouldn't be in trouble if teabaggers didn't MANDATE it to be.
Teabaggers whine about excessive corporate taxes and companies going broke because of it, how bout paying $5.5 BILLION a year?
Limbaughtomy and Rannity would be dead from a heart attack, if this was forced on a private company.
Yes, but if the UAW had had the same program the government wouldn't have had to give them billions of other peoples money.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#15 Apr 26, 2012

No Subsidies for the USPS!



End Corporate Welfare!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#16 Apr 26, 2012


Dem Congressman Undermines Ed Schultz's Claim That Postal Service Receives No Subsidy

By Jack Coleman
April 19, 2012


How can you tell when Ed Schultz doesn't know what he's talking about? When Schultz boasts, "I know what the hell I'm talking about."

Most recent example -- Schultz's bloviations about the postal service on his radio show Tuesday (audio)--

"The Treasury doesn't fork a dime over to run the postal service. It's stamps, that's right, and anything else that you have to purchase when it comes to moving the commodity which is the mail. That's what pays for everything."

Sorry to dampen your huff-and-puff bluster, Ed, but the postal service does receive funding from the federal government. And while it's not $10 billion, it's substantially more than 10 cents -- closer to $100 million annually -- to provide free mail services for the blind and overseas voters.

Even though it represents less than one percent of its annual budget, this is hardly the only way the agency benefits from government policy. Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby elaborates --

The Internet Age may be wreaking havoc with the post office and its mail-delivery business, but what industry in America isn't going through the same wrenching experience? And not many institutions enjoy the benefits that federal law confers on the Postal Service: It pays no income or property taxes, it's exempt from vehicle licensing requirements and parking fines, and it has the power of eminent domain. Most significant of all, it has a legal monopoly on the delivery of mail: The federal Private Express statutes make it a crime for any private carrier to deliver letters. The only exemption is for "extremely urgent" letters, and even those may be delivered by a private company only if it's willing to charge a much higher rate than the Postal Service would have charged.

In the 1960s, 83 percent of the agency's budget went to wages and benefits, Jacoby writes. As of 2011, despite billions of dollars spent on automation over the decades, that percentage dropped -- to 80 percent. This compared to 53 percent for UPS and 32 percent at FedEx, according to the New York Times.

"Only in a government-sheltered monopoly like the Postal Service would labor costs remains as bloated as they have, year in and year out," Jacoby writes.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/201...





“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#17 Apr 26, 2012

Congressman Peter Welch, Democrat of Vermont, wasn't aware of Schultz's omniscience on all matters postal (audio)--

SCHULTZ:
What's happening with the postal service? Why are they doing this? I mean, I know why they're doing it, but ...

WELCH:
"There's a, it's ideological. In other words, what they constantly do is say, hey, why don't they run it like a business and they point to FedEx or they point to UPS, forgetting the fact that the postal service has to deliver everywhere. Rural areas like Vermont, you know, we get our mail out on these back country roads. I live on a dirt road that's eight miles long. Postal service gets up there. That's not a great profitable route for UPS or FedEx.

So, there's always been some subsidy for the postal service."

The postal service has always had to make some adjustments. It used to be pony express and then we had the telegraph and they had to make adjustments. And obviously with the Internet, we have to make adjustments now. But there's an ideological view that you could outsource this, privatize it, but basically that would mean that you'd be denying service, especially to rural America."

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/201...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#18 Apr 26, 2012
Wall Street Government wrote:
It is true that USPS is facing fiscal challenges — it lost nearly $20 billion over the last four years and is at risk of not being able to meet a $5.5 billion mandated payment to the Treasury at the end of this month (which has been put off six weeks thanks to the last continuing resolution in Congress).
But what has been lost in the political debate over the Post Office is why it is losing this money. Major media coverage points to the rise of email or Internet services and the inefficiency of the post model as the major culprits. While these factors may cause some fiscal pain, almost all of the postal service’s losses over the last four years can be traced back to a single, artificial restriction forced onto the Post Office by the Republican-led Congress in 2006.
At the very end of that year, Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (PAEA). Under PAEA, USPS was forced to “prefund its future health care benefit payments to retirees for the next 75 years in an astonishing ten-year time span”— meaning that it had to put aside billions of dollars to pay for the health benefits of employees it hasn’t even hired yet, something “that no other government or private corporation is required to do.”
It wouldn't be in trouble if teabaggers didn't MANDATE it to be.
Teabaggers whine about excessive corporate taxes and companies going broke because of it, how bout paying $5.5 BILLION a year?
Limbaughtomy and Rannity would be dead from a heart attack, if this was forced on a private company.



As can be seen in the legislative history of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA), the law was sponsored by GOP Rep. Thomas Davis of Virginia -- and co-sponsored by Rep. Lanny Davis, D-Ill., Rep. John McHugh, R-N.Y., and Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif.


YOU MAKE A STRONG CASE FOR WHY BUSINESSES SHOULD NEVER BE RUN BY GOVERNMENT!!!!


Thanks Idiot!

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/201...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#19 Apr 26, 2012
With fewer and few people using the Postal Service these days, the USPS lost $3.8 billion last year and stands to lose more than that in 2010.

In addition to putting an end to Saturday deliveries, the Postmaster has suggested cutting back on payments to the pension plan. An inspector general report shows that the USPS has been required to overfund the pension by $75 billion, as well as having to prepay billions into a fund that covers health benefits for retired USPS employees.

"Over the past three years, the Postal Service has paid $15.4 billion to Treasury to prefund future retiree health benefits. During that same time, the Postal Service borrowed more than $8 billion from Treasury so that it could make those payments," says Ruth Goldway, chair of the Postal Regulatory Commission. "Borrowing by the Postal Service to make the payments does not make sense."

For some reason, USPS is the only federal agency required to make these pre-payments, and only Congress can eliminate the requirements. Additionally, by law USPS can only borrow from the U.S. Treasury to make these payments.

However, Postmaster Potter believes that even if the entire $75 billion in over-payments were to be returned, the decrease in the amount of mail would still ultimately require the cut to Saturday service.


http://consumerist.com/2010/04/postmaster-usp...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Palm Bay, FL

#20 Apr 26, 2012


End the Monopoly


No More Fed Gov Entity status. No More Congressional/WH control of this business.


Let them succeed of fail on their own. They've already proven they can fail with Federal Gov "Help."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

The Postal Service Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News How Doomed Is the U.S. Postal Service? (Jun '13) Tue Uber-Bro of the U... 8
Package delivery Sep 7 Jim 1
News Chamber working to expand Vale Post Office Aug '17 Kimberlylyda 2
frustrated delivering apartments Aug '17 minkhollow 1
Disabled mail carrier Jul '17 Jay 1
News Five Houston post offices off chopping block, E... (Mar '17) Mar '17 FivePharts 1
News 1 billion delivered annually: Houston installs ... (Mar '17) Mar '17 DeliveredPhartz 1
More from around the web