"Why is the United States Post Office, which is losing many billions of dollars a year, while charging Amazon and others so little to deliver their packages, making Amazon richer and the Post Office dumber and poorer?
The postal service is providing a service to the public at a rate set by them. They're in direct competition with UPS and Fedex and shouldn't have HIGHER prices than their competition.
But as for those in REMOTE areas or PO Boxes that UPS and Fedex won't service affordably...... the USP
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Friday December 29, 2017 @06:51PM (#55831055)
But as for those in REMOTE areas or PO Boxes that UPS and Fedex won't service affordably...... the USPS serve a useful public function. They're not subsidizing Amazon so much as they're subsidizing mail order: but for some in remote areas, mail order is the only practical way of purchasing some simple necessities that can't be had from a local Walmart, because there is no local Walmart.
First off, the President of the United States should not be referring to individual companies that should be charged more. If the postal rates are incorrect, they should be adjusted for everyone.
Second off, the postal service does serve a useful purpose for areas that are not served well by alternatives and we should preserve that, even if it costs some money. Package rates to and from those areas can and should be a bit higher to deal with reality. Subsidies if they exist should mainly be for standard first class letters, but not for junk mail and other crap.
Postal service is a fundamental piece of our infrastructure, just as roads, just as well internet is these days. If you want jobs in an area, you need all three and various other things as well. Some of the blue states have very nice infrastructure which makes it attractive for people with certain skills which then makes it attractive for companies...
Competitive market (Score:2)
"Why is the United States Post Office, which is losing many billions of dollars a year, while charging Amazon and others so little to deliver their packages, making Amazon richer and the Post Office dumber and poorer?
The postal service is providing a service to the public at a rate set by them. They're in direct competition with UPS and Fedex and shouldn't have HIGHER prices than their competition.
But as for those in REMOTE areas or PO Boxes that UPS and Fedex won't service affordably...... the USP
Re:Competitive market (Score:2, Insightful)
But as for those in REMOTE areas or PO Boxes that UPS and Fedex won't service affordably...... the USPS serve a useful public function. They're not subsidizing Amazon so much as they're subsidizing mail order: but for some in remote areas, mail order is the only practical way of purchasing some simple necessities that can't be had from a local Walmart, because there is no local Walmart.
First off, the President of the United States should not be referring to individual companies that should be charged more. If the postal rates are incorrect, they should be adjusted for everyone.
Second off, the postal service does serve a useful purpose for areas that are not served well by alternatives and we should preserve that, even if it costs some money. Package rates to and from those areas can and should be a bit higher to deal with reality. Subsidies if they exist should mainly be for standard first class letters, but not for junk mail and other crap.
Postal service is a fundamental piece of our infrastructure, just as roads, just as well internet is these days. If you want jobs in an area, you need all three and various other things as well. Some of the blue states have very nice infrastructure which makes it attractive for people with certain skills which then makes it attractive for companies...