Someone who apparently thinks it's cool for the USPS to subsidize Amazon shipping, and also can't even get straight what media companies Bezos owns, should not be modded up. I invite everyone to head over to MetaMod [slashdot.org], where you can rate the choices the moderators make and give these moderators a bit of a spanking.
I'm baffled as to how many people could have forgotten what the US Post looked like 10 years ago (pre-Amazon-boom).
It was failing and they were talking about reducing their delivery days even more than they already had. They were hemorrhaging money and could not find a way to bring themselves back from the brink. Why? Because they don't receive Government Funding and people had stopped sending letters.
Amazon made them relevant again, although I'm not terribly surprised that our current Drumpfster Fire is gl
I don't mind the postal service at all, as you've said they have improved.
But I do think Amazon could pay them more and the government prop up the post office less. Why does that have to hurt the post office? They could still deliver Amazon packages, just pay what it actually costs to ship them.
Then they have to charge everyone else higher rates, even those on low incomes. It's the equivalent of net neutrality. The post office can charge different rates for parcels by their size, their weight, or the distance being shipped, but they can't charge by who is sending the parcel or who is receiving the item.
Fake News (Score:4, Interesting)
While they probably should, Trump feels this way because Jeff Bozo, who owns Amazon, also owns the NYT - or as Trump says "Fake News"...
Off to MetaMod (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone who apparently thinks it's cool for the USPS to subsidize Amazon shipping, and also can't even get straight what media companies Bezos owns, should not be modded up. I invite everyone to head over to MetaMod [slashdot.org], where you can rate the choices the moderators make and give these moderators a bit of a spanking.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm baffled as to how many people could have forgotten what the US Post looked like 10 years ago (pre-Amazon-boom).
It was failing and they were talking about reducing their delivery days even more than they already had. They were hemorrhaging money and could not find a way to bring themselves back from the brink. Why? Because they don't receive Government Funding and people had stopped sending letters.
Amazon made them relevant again, although I'm not terribly surprised that our current Drumpfster Fire is gl
Re: (Score:1)
I don't mind the postal service at all, as you've said they have improved.
But I do think Amazon could pay them more and the government prop up the post office less. Why does that have to hurt the post office? They could still deliver Amazon packages, just pay what it actually costs to ship them.
Re:Off to MetaMod (Score:2)
Then they have to charge everyone else higher rates, even those on low incomes. It's the equivalent of net neutrality. The post office can charge different rates for parcels by their size, their weight, or the distance being shipped, but they can't charge by who is sending the parcel or who is receiving the item.