Minor things that bother you

[Scott5114]

Quoting from a prior thread since many people here haven't seen it regarding different inflation calculations:

A few notes:

[snip]

A few years back, I stumbled across an interesting piece where someone was trying to calculate the value of a Dungeons & Dragons gold piece in USD. The article walks you through the math, but the most successful conversion involved the price of a pound of wheat, which can be tracked all the way back to the 1200s in England and which also has a price in D&D. The article author came up with 1 gp = $35.66 in 2017 dollars.

I recently ran the same calculations using 2025 dollars and got 1 gp = $46.88.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yes, privatize governmental postal services so they can charge even more than they already do.

Canada Post sucks too, but it's good to have an alternative that's not owned by a trillion dollar corporation.

THANK YOU! Yes, the post office may not be as efficient as it should same thing with Amtrak, but not every single aspect of our lives should be made possible by those who want to make a profit off of it. I know this is probably a scary thing a lot of people, especially in this day and age, but some socialism is a good thing. In fact, even a lot of people who think that word would only be uttered by the devil himself probably benefit from socialism like using subsidize roads or power or water, etc..

[Walnut2]

The post office has been a part of the U.S. federal government in one form or another since the beginning. If the hardcore small-government/free-market enthusiasts were right that it would be inherently better for it to belong to the private sector, you'd think the idea would have gained traction a long time ago.

[Scott5114]

Yes, privatize governmental postal services so they can charge even more than they already do.

Canada Post sucks too, but it's good to have an alternative that's not owned by a trillion dollar corporation.

THANK YOU! Yes, the post office may not be as efficient as it should same thing with Amtrak, but not every single aspect of our lives should be made possible by those who want to make a profit off of it. I know this is probably a scary thing a lot of people, especially in this day and age, but some socialism is a good thing. In fact, even a lot of people who think that word would only be uttered by the devil himself probably benefit from socialism like using subsidize roads or power or water, etc..

And everyone should keep in mind that there are already a hell of a lot of people making a profit off of USPS already, they're just not the USPS. There's plenty of businesses out there offering free shipping because they can afford to pay USPS rates to ship their goods. If they had to pay UPS rates they would have to charge the customers a shipping and handling fee.

Amazon doesn't have its delivery network set up in many rural areas, so what it does is get the packages as far as they can on its delivery network and then mail it the rest of the way. There are enough Amazon packages in the USPS system in these areas that it already gets backed up because they don't have the manpower to deliver them fast enough, and that's with six-day delivery, never mind this alternating-day horseshit or whatever other bizarre solution-in-search-of-a-problem behavior is being advocated for in this thread.

[gonealookin]

I haven't advocated for punting all mail delivery to UPS and FedEx.  As Scott noted regarding the cost of getting drugs delivered from the tribal pharmacy in Oklahoma, USPS provides an affordable option.  Given the lower cost, though, the recipient probably shouldn't expect the same level of service UPS and FedEx provide.

And with the 50% decline in first-class mail volume over the last 20 years, yes, it's time to cut costs.  Scott casts me as a Douglas County right-winger with the Joey Gilbert reference (long story there), but I thought he knew that isn't true.  Douglas went about 2 to 1 on Trump vs. Harris, and I'm on the left half of that blue side.  I think of myself as a practical liberal, though, and don't like seeing government or quasi-government agencies such as USPS throwing money away wastefully, such as by not cutting home delivery service when mail volume has been reduced so drastically, and especially with time-essential money-related things like bill payments and government benefits being delivered electronically.

I mentioned above, I have had ZERO USPS delivery to my residence since I moved to this area 16 years ago, so that's definitely coloring my perspective here.  It did take some getting used to, but on a scale of 0 to 100, the negative effect on my life of having to go the Post Office in the shopping center a mile away to pick up mail is a 0.  Scott and his wife, who sounds like she has some mobility issues, need prescriptions delivered to their doorstep 12 times a year, but it's wasteful to think a USPS delivery person should be required to drive a route that stops there 300 days a year in order to make those 12 deliveries.  150 days a year should be fine, and if they really really want the 300-day service, well they can pay for that, but I don't care to subsidize it.

[TheCatalyst31]

Yes, privatize governmental postal services so they can charge even more than they already do.

Canada Post sucks too, but it's good to have an alternative that's not owned by a trillion dollar corporation.

THANK YOU! Yes, the post office may not be as efficient as it should same thing with Amtrak, but not every single aspect of our lives should be made possible by those who want to make a profit off of it. I know this is probably a scary thing a lot of people, especially in this day and age, but some socialism is a good thing. In fact, even a lot of people who think that word would only be uttered by the devil himself probably benefit from socialism like using subsidize roads or power or water, etc..

And everyone should keep in mind that there are already a hell of a lot of people making a profit off of USPS already, they're just not the USPS. There's plenty of businesses out there offering free shipping because they can afford to pay USPS rates to ship their goods. If they had to pay UPS rates they would have to charge the customers a shipping and handling fee.

Amazon doesn't have its delivery network set up in many rural areas, so what it does is get the packages as far as they can on its delivery network and then mail it the rest of the way. There are enough Amazon packages in the USPS system in these areas that it already gets backed up because they don't have the manpower to deliver them fast enough, and that's with six-day delivery, never mind this alternating-day horseshit or whatever other bizarre solution-in-search-of-a-problem behavior is being advocated for in this thread.

I collect license plates, which is a hobby that involves shipping a lot of small packages if you buy/sell/trade online, and there's a reason nearly every US-based collector I know ships through USPS. It's way more affordable (as long as you're not shipping internationally), and the service is pretty good, occasional gripes aside.

Anyway, back on topic... people who ship license plates, through any shipping service, and don't put any cardboard or something like it in to keep the package from getting bent. You can write "Do Not Bend" all you want, but that won't help with sorting machines and heavy packages. In my experience DMVs are the worst offenders in that regard, too, which sucks because nobody wants to fix a bend in their brand new license plate before putting it on their car.

[jeffandnicole]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized. When has the government ever been truly responsive to consumer complaints?

Local mail (from one PO box to another) now goes to Louisville to be sorted before it's delivered. In the past, a piece of local mail was sorted in-house and ever left the county. Then, it started going to the regional post office (Campton, KY 41301), then to Lexington, now to Louisville. That's ridiculous and inefficient.

Last week, I got a newspaper from the first week of July. If a private business ran so poorly,it would go out of business.But since the post office is a government operation, it just chugs along and there's nothing anybody can do.

And don't get me started on the redundancy and inefficiency of there being a post office every five miles in some rural areas of Kentucky and West Virginia, that aren't open but a couple of hours each day with the federal government renting space in a country store somewhere.

The equivalent local devices are UPS and FedEx, and you can expect to pay $25-$30 for equivalent delivery.

[kkt]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized. When has the government ever been truly responsive to consumer complaints?

Local mail (from one PO box to another) now goes to Louisville to be sorted before it's delivered. In the past, a piece of local mail was sorted in-house and ever left the county. Then, it started going to the regional post office (Campton, KY 41301), then to Lexington, now to Louisville. That's ridiculous and inefficient.

Last week, I got a newspaper from the first week of July. If a private business ran so poorly,it would go out of business.But since the post office is a government operation, it just chugs along and there's nothing anybody can do.

And don't get me started on the redundancy and inefficiency of there being a post office every five miles in some rural areas of Kentucky and West Virginia, that aren't open but a couple of hours each day with the federal government renting space in a country store somewhere.

I seem to have missed the part where UPS or Fedex never misdeliver, lose, or damage their packages.

[oscar]

Amazon doesn't have its delivery network set up in many rural areas, so what it does is get the packages as far as they can on its delivery network and then mail it the rest of the way.

Amazon does that in my very urban area, at least for apartment complexes like mine. Paying USPS for "last mile" package delivery is a real convenience for me, since USPS can drop off my package inside a locked entryway door next to my mailbox, where "porch pirates" can't steal it. FedEx and UPS don't do that. That gives Amazon a competitive edge. I especially despise UPS for its customer service, and will try not to do business with shippers that insist on using UPS.

[jeffandnicole]

Amazon doesn't have its delivery network set up in many rural areas, so what it does is get the packages as far as they can on its delivery network and then mail it the rest of the way.

Amazon does that in my very urban area, at least for apartment complexes like mine. Paying USPS for "last mile" package delivery is a real convenience for me, since USPS can drop off my package inside a locked entryway door next to my mailbox, where "porch pirates" can't steal it. FedEx and UPS don't do that. That gives Amazon a competitive edge. I especially despise UPS for its customer service, and will try not to do business with shippers that insist on using UPS.

We are the opposite - UPS much better around here. Once FedEx misdelivered a package and didn't accept our claim it was misdelivered. The kicker...it was a security camera system which should've proved it wasn't delivered had we had one installed.

[Scott5114]

Scott casts me as a Douglas County right-winger with the Joey Gilbert reference (long story there), but I thought he knew that isn't true.  ... I'm on the left half of that blue side.  I think of myself as a practical liberal, though ...

If that's the case, then your insistence on this issue is even more puzzling, because it doesn't square with that statement of beliefs. The problem here is that just about any subsidy is going to be going to something that some portion of the populace can make no use of. But the idea is that will be canceled out by subsidies to things you do use that other people don't. And on balance everyone will benefit more or less equally.

Put another way, it's dangerous to adopt the mantra of "I don't want to subsidize this because I don't use it" when there are thousands of folks in Clark County who would have that exact belief about, say, maintaining US-50, or NV-28, or the upkeep of government buildings in Carson City, or really funding just about anything in Northern Nevada. (I think that's total baloney, mind you—Northern Nevada of course deserves to be as well-funded as Southern Nevada—but I know that it's a belief that more people have down here than they should, and they got to it with that exact "well I don't use anything in Northern Nevada so I don't want to pay for it" line of logic.)

I think we can both agree that there are a lot of things government does that is wasteful that should be cut. USPS, though, has real, tangible benefits to a lot of people, so if the goal is to make government more efficient, it would be much more practical to focus on things that cost a lot more and benefit people a lot less than USPS does.

And, if it were up to me, I'd happily throw in a quarter or whatever on the price of each package I send or receive to get you the option to have six-day home delivery if you want it, same as I have.

[gonealookin]

Scott casts me as a Douglas County right-winger with the Joey Gilbert reference (long story there), but I thought he knew that isn't true.  ... I'm on the left half of that blue side.  I think of myself as a practical liberal, though ...

If that's the case, then your insistence on this issue is even more puzzling, because it doesn't square with that statement of beliefs. The problem here is that just about any subsidy is going to be going to something that some portion of the populace can make no use of. But the idea is that will be canceled out by subsidies to things you do use that other people don't. And on balance everyone will benefit more or less equally.

Put another way, it's dangerous to adopt the mantra of "I don't want to subsidize this because I don't use it"...

We might be getting closer to agreement here.  I do support "lifeline" level subsidies, such as making sure kids graduate from high school with computer literacy, and making sure families have some access to the Internet so they can pay bills electronically rather than having to spend 78 cents to stick a Forever stamp on an envelope that's going to NVEnergy each month with a paper check inside.  That would include financial assistance for the phones, Chromebooks, etc. that provide that access.

I draw my line at "premium access", which seems to be what you are asking for to maintain USPS service to your doorstep 300 days a year.  That's not lifeline, it's wasteful given the 50% decline in usage.  Your house should get doorstep delivery 50% of the days, the other side of town would get the delivery the other 50%, and if you think you need to upgrade to daily service you should be willing to pay for it.  You wouldn't do that, and I'd say you're overestimating the level of USPS service you really need; honestly I only go to the Post Office a couple times a week to empty out the commercial junk mail and make room for more of that.

I should probably start counting the times I get actual non-junk first-class mail I really need.  The only recent time I can recall was when somebody got my credit card number and charged a plane flight in Australia or New Zealand to that.  So the bank had to close that account and send me the new physical credit card via USPS.  Other than something like that, it's rare.  Just about everything can be sent electronically, such as the e-mail "You have an Explanation of Benefits in your health insurance account.  Log in to download."  The USPS men and women at the Post Office counter mostly hand me my packages; I count 10 from Amazon so far in 2025 and there have been a few others from other merchants.

And, if it were up to me, I'd happily throw in a quarter or whatever on the price of each package I send or receive to get you the option to have six-day home delivery if you want it, same as I have.

I think the reason we don't have USPS home delivery is that so many of the places here are second homes/vacation rentals.  Mailboxes would get stuffed with the junk mail for, at times, weeks on end without being emptied.  To my knowledge nobody here complains about the lack of home delivery; it's just the way it is.

[Scott5114]

I draw my line at "premium access", which seems to be what you are asking for to maintain USPS service to your doorstep 300 days a year.  That's not lifeline, it's wasteful given the 50% decline in usage. Your house should get doorstep delivery 50% of the days, the other side of town would get the delivery the other 50%, and if you think you need to upgrade to daily service you should be willing to pay for it.  You wouldn't do that, and I'd say you're overestimating the level of USPS service you really need; honestly I only go to the Post Office a couple times a week to empty out the commercial junk mail and make room for more of that.

The problem with this is that First Class mail service, which is indeed much less used than in the past, is not the only service USPS provides. USPS actually brings in the plurality of its income through package service, which includes Ground Advantage and Priority Mail—package service brought in $7.7 billion in revenue Q3 FY 2025, compared to only $5.9 billion for First-Class mail.^[1] (Marketing mail is not generally sent First Class, but rather Standard; this category represents $3.5 billion in revenue.^[1] I learned that this is a distinct class of mail from a postal employee on Reddit, who sadly informed me that whenever I stamp marketing mail "Return to Sender" it is just thrown out by USPS, as the Standard rate doesn't include return service.)

I happen to have here my most recent shipment of meds, which indicates it was not sent First Class, but rather Ground Advantage; I don't have any of my wife's, but I seem to recall hers are sent Priority. Neither of these would be included in the count of First Class mail pieces.

I am having a hard time finding historical data to back this up, but I recall reading articles indicating that package service is actually way, way up over the last twenty years; while the Internet killed the market for First-Class letters, it also created ecommerce, which more than makes up for it in revenue. As I mentioned above, in some areas USPS is handling so many ecommerce (primarily Amazon) packages, they physically cannot deliver them fast enough to keep up with the rate at which they arrive. It has gotten to the point that some local postmasters banned using sick time in order to keep the packages moving.^[2]

If that's the case, and the package volume is so great they have to keep moving all the time just to keep the system from backing up, there's little reason to not have the same carriers delivering the First Class mail at the same time that they're out delivering packages.


1. "U.S. Postal Service Reports Third Quarter Fiscal Year 2025 Results - Newsroom." USPS News, US Postal Service, 7 Aug. 2025.
2. O'Donovan, Caroline, and Bogage, Jacob. "A rural post office was told to prioritize Amazon packages. Chaos ensued." The Washington Post, 28 Nov. 2023.

[SEWIGuy]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized.

Absolutely not. It provides a universal service for a still relatively cheap price. There are some things they can do to cut costs no doubt, but full privatization? Not a chance. It's an enumerated power in the Constitution for a reason.

[1995hoo]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized.

Absolutely not. It provides a universal service for a still relatively cheap price. There are some things they can do to cut costs no doubt, but full privatization? Not a chance. It's an enumerated power in the Constitution for a reason.

Presumably, Congress could choose to privatize it. Or eliminate it. Article I, Section 8, simply says, "The Congress shall have Power ... To establish Post Offices and post Roads ... [a]nd To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof." It doesn't say Congress must establish post offices, nor does it say how that must be done. Congress could conclude that it would be more efficient, or cheaper, to outsource the responsibility, and the Constitution's literal wording doesn't seem to prohibit them from doing just that.

[formulanone]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized.

Absolutely not. It provides a universal service for a still relatively cheap price. There are some things they can do to cut costs no doubt, but full privatization? Not a chance. It's an enumerated power in the Constitution for a reason.

People have been bitching about the Post Office's "ineptitude" for at least 50 years, and yet nobody complains about the 95-99% of mail that arrives mostly on-time. They can't control long holiday lines or that someone ahead of in line doesn't know how to use the automated postage machines. But if there's no line ahead of you, they're suddenly a wasteful entity, instead of "efficient". Pick a lane and stay in it.

The fact of the matter is that they're usually more adept than inept for the price of mail, and while it wavers between making a profit and losing millions one year after another, it's a pretty good deal. It's rather ironic that the very folks who enjoy travel to all these rural small towns are advocating eradicating one of their last remaining third spaces and their ability to send/access goods from outside their town.

[SEWIGuy]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized.

Absolutely not. It provides a universal service for a still relatively cheap price. There are some things they can do to cut costs no doubt, but full privatization? Not a chance. It's an enumerated power in the Constitution for a reason.

Presumably, Congress could choose to privatize it. Or eliminate it. Article I, Section 8, simply says, "The Congress shall have Power ... To establish Post Offices and post Roads ... [a]nd To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof." It doesn't say Congress must establish post offices, nor does it say how that must be done. Congress could conclude that it would be more efficient, or cheaper, to outsource the responsibility, and the Constitution's literal wording doesn't seem to prohibit them from doing just that.

I understand that. My point is that the Founding Fathers thought the service so important, that they expressly gave Congress the ability to make laws around it. I was not questioning the legality of privatizing it. I just think that is a universally terrible idea.

[SEWIGuy]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized.

Absolutely not. It provides a universal service for a still relatively cheap price. There are some things they can do to cut costs no doubt, but full privatization? Not a chance. It's an enumerated power in the Constitution for a reason.

People have been bitching about the Post Office's "ineptitude" for at least 50 years, and yet nobody complains about the 95-99% of mail that arrives mostly on-time. They can't control long holiday lines or that someone ahead of in line doesn't know how to use the automated postage machines. But if there's no line ahead of you, they're suddenly a wasteful entity, instead of "efficient". Pick a lane and stay in it.

The fact of the matter is that they're usually more adept than inept for the price of mail, and while it wavers between making a profit and losing millions one year after another, it's a pretty good deal. It's rather ironic that the very folks who enjoy travel to all these rural small towns are advocating eradicating one of their last remaining third spaces and their ability to send/access goods from outside their town.

And I genuinely don't care that it loses money. Of all the things this government wastes money on, a universal service that delivers mail across the country isn't one I am all that concerned about.

[hbelkins]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized. When has the government ever been truly responsive to consumer complaints?

Local mail (from one PO box to another) now goes to Louisville to be sorted before it's delivered. In the past, a piece of local mail was sorted in-house and ever left the county. Then, it started going to the regional post office (Campton, KY 41301), then to Lexington, now to Louisville. That's ridiculous and inefficient.

Last week, I got a newspaper from the first week of July. If a private business ran so poorly,it would go out of business.But since the post office is a government operation, it just chugs along and there's nothing anybody can do.

And don't get me started on the redundancy and inefficiency of there being a post office every five miles in some rural areas of Kentucky and West Virginia, that aren't open but a couple of hours each day with the federal government renting space in a country store somewhere.

I seem to have missed the part where UPS or Fedex never misdeliver, lose, or damage their packages.

You also seem to have missed the place in my post where I said anything about that. Because I didn't.

[SEWIGuy]

The current level of ineptitude with USPS delivery is begging for it to be privatized. When has the government ever been truly responsive to consumer complaints?

Local mail (from one PO box to another) now goes to Louisville to be sorted before it's delivered. In the past, a piece of local mail was sorted in-house and ever left the county. Then, it started going to the regional post office (Campton, KY 41301), then to Lexington, now to Louisville. That's ridiculous and inefficient.

Last week, I got a newspaper from the first week of July. If a private business ran so poorly,it would go out of business.But since the post office is a government operation, it just chugs along and there's nothing anybody can do.

And don't get me started on the redundancy and inefficiency of there being a post office every five miles in some rural areas of Kentucky and West Virginia, that aren't open but a couple of hours each day with the federal government renting space in a country store somewhere.

I seem to have missed the part where UPS or Fedex never misdeliver, lose, or damage their packages.

You also seem to have missed the place in my post where I said anything about that. Because I didn't.

Well you said that a private company would go out of business based on your late newspaper. But UPS and FedEx are still in business despite occasionally having similar issues.

Regardless, USPS isn't a business. It's a government service. Yes, they should strive to be more efficient, but government services cost money. Why should we expect them to be profitable?  Do we expect the same of other services like the Department of Transportation?

[vdeane]

I should probably start counting the times I get actual non-junk first-class mail I really need.  The only recent time I can recall was when somebody got my credit card number and charged a plane flight in Australia or New Zealand to that.  So the bank had to close that account and send me the new physical credit card via USPS.  Other than something like that, it's rare.  Just about everything can be sent electronically, such as the e-mail "You have an Explanation of Benefits in your health insurance account.  Log in to download."  The USPS men and women at the Post Office counter mostly hand me my packages; I count 10 from Amazon so far in 2025 and there have been a few others from other merchants.

I wish I could do all my statements/billing electronically.  It works for my electric service, my lease, and my credit cards, but not for insurance or anything health related.  State Farm says they can't do all-electronic billing because they're required to mail the proof of insurance card, most of my doctors still send bills by mail (well, Lab Corp tries to send them via text first, but I'm not going to trust that it's not phishing so I just wait for the mailed bill), and all my health insurance statements are by mail too with no obvious way to move most of them over (and it doesn't help that NY splits the state health plan into six pieces, all of which are handled by different companies; I'd need to set up an account with the medical/surgical program, the hospital program, the mental health program, and the dental program - the prescription program and the vision program don't send statements).

Local mail (from one PO box to another) now goes to Louisville to be sorted before it's delivered. In the past, a piece of local mail was sorted in-house and ever left the county. Then, it started going to the regional post office (Campton, KY 41301), then to Lexington, now to Louisville. That's ridiculous and inefficient.

Keep in mind that mail is no longer sorted by humans, so that's why.  They have to go to a sorting machine first so they can be sent on their way, the mail carrier is no longer going through the mail to pull out the local ones.  In fact, the first time a human is even likely to see a piece of mail is when your mail carrier is grabbing it from the truck to place in your mailbox.

As I mentioned above, in some areas USPS is handling so many ecommerce (primarily Amazon) packages, they physically cannot deliver them fast enough to keep up with the rate at which they arrive. It has gotten to the point that some local postmasters banned using sick time in order to keep the packages moving.

That explains why they were so willing to accept Amazon's Sunday delivery, and even sometimes deliver packages on Sunday even if it's not something that was sent that way.

Do we expect the same of other services like the Department of Transportation?

Oddly enough, actually yes.  Not roads, but for transit and passenger rail there does seem to be an expectation of profitability.

[kphoger]

I maintain that banning plastic bags while corporations burn hundreds of acres of forests down for AI shit is a shitlib thing.

I maintain that banning plastic bags while pretending that paper and cotton bag production doesn't pollute the planet is a shitlib thing.

I don't think anyone contends that paper and cotton bag production don't pollute the environment. But trees and cotton plants are renewable resources, and create a product that biodegrades.

That being said, I would be annoyed if my state outlawed plastic bags entirely because they are useful.

Yes but, considering the higher overall environmental toll of paper production compared to plastic production, you have to use a paper bag three times just to break even with a single use plastic bag.

Our family reuses pretty much every plastic bag we get, but we reuse substantially fewer paper bags.  When we go grocery shopping, almost all of our groceries go in a couple of big cardboard tray-box-things from Aldi, a cooler, and one reusable bag from Aldi (the latter of which, by the way, has substantially more plastic in its construction than a single use plastic bag, but I'm sure this was offset months ago).  Anything that won't fit in those goes into plastic bags, which ends up being only about four to six per month.  All of those four to six per month get reused, whether for bagging up dirty diapers or soiled clothes (my wife operates a home daycare) or for containing soupy leftovers before disposal.  So that's two uses per plastic bag, which has the environmental equivalent of six uses of paper bags.  But paper bags almost never get reused in our house:  they're useless for putting anything stinky or wet in and, once the top gets ripped they're almost useless for carrying heavy groceries again.  The only thing we sometimes reuse them for is carrying games or food over to someone else's house.

For our family, then, banning plastic bags but keeping paper bags available would result in greater overall negative impact on the environment.

they are literal garbage

So are paper bags.

[hbelkins]

Regardless, USPS isn't a business. It's a government service. Yes, they should strive to be more efficient, but government services cost money. Why should we expect them to be profitable?  Do we expect the same of other services like the Department of Transportation?

In many cases, state DOTs contract out basic services such as patching, guardrail repair, excavation, paint striping, signage, etc., to private businesses. For many of those contracts, there are financial incentives in place for projects to be completed ahead of schedule, and penalties if they are finished late.

[Rothman]

Regardless, USPS isn't a business. It's a government service. Yes, they should strive to be more efficient, but government services cost money. Why should we expect them to be profitable?  Do we expect the same of other services like the Department of Transportation?

In many cases, state DOTs contract out basic services such as patching, guardrail repair, excavation, paint striping, signage, etc., to private businesses. For many of those contracts, there are financial incentives in place for projects to be completed ahead of schedule, and penalties if they are finished late.

*searches for profit in HB's post and finds none*

[kphoger]

Do we expect the same of other services like the Department of Transportation?

Oddly enough, actually yes.  Not roads, but for transit and passenger rail there does seem to be an expectation of profitability.

Ah, I see Amtrak has entered the chat.