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.
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.
Because FedEX and UPS don't deliver to most of the rural US. Typical city dweller...most rural areas are only served by USPS which is why it runs at a loss. Also because leaders 100 years ago knew it was a good thing to promote a global mail/package delivery system.
They are subsidizing Amazon, also every rural address is subsidized as well as every other business that involves package delivery. This isn't political but somehow you (and Trump) are turning a very successful government service (over 100 years, can move a letter from one end of the country to the other in 3 days for less than 50 cents) into a political stunt. If you support reducing the USPS, then you are the type of person who politicizes everything to the detriment of everyone...and even worse without even trying to understand the situation which in this case is actually quite easy to understand.
In Europe it's usual for any company offering a private postal service to have to accept the universal mandate, i.e. deliver everywhere for the same price.
I guess it raises prices slightly but it's like universal telephone/broadband/water/electric service.
Seeing one group - recipients of federal subsidies - against another - taxpayers - is what politics is all about. Farm subsidies are another way that rural residents are benefiting against ordinary tax payers...
The UPS trucks rolls down the two lane rural road then up the 1/4 mile dirt road to my parent's farmhouse and drops off packages all the time. They do have surcharges for many zip codes to reflect the higher cost of delivery but it is false to state that they "don't deliver to most of the rural US"
Because FedEX and UPS don't deliver to most of the rural US. Typical city dweller...
I lived for a long time in a very rural area (foothills of mountains, not even a suburb) and we got delivery from UPS, possibly also FedEx.
I think *YOU* are probably more than a bit out of touch without how widespread those services are.
But again, I'm not even saying Amazon should not use the USPS, just that they should at least pay for cost of services. Not sure how that ends up being controversial.
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.
"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house."
-- George Carlin
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:Off to MetaMod (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:5, Insightful)
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.
Because FedEX and UPS don't deliver to most of the rural US. Typical city dweller...most rural areas are only served by USPS which is why it runs at a loss. Also because leaders 100 years ago knew it was a good thing to promote a global mail/package delivery system.
They are subsidizing Amazon, also every rural address is subsidized as well as every other business that involves package delivery. This isn't political but somehow you (and Trump) are turning a very successful government service (over 100 years, can move a letter from one end of the country to the other in 3 days for less than 50 cents) into a political stunt. If you support reducing the USPS, then you are the type of person who politicizes everything to the detriment of everyone...and even worse without even trying to understand the situation which in this case is actually quite easy to understand.
Re: (Score:2)
In Europe it's usual for any company offering a private postal service to have to accept the universal mandate, i.e. deliver everywhere for the same price.
I guess it raises prices slightly but it's like universal telephone/broadband/water/electric service.
Re: (Score:2)
That would work, but it's not on offer here.
It's LEGITIMATE politics (Score:2)
Seeing one group - recipients of federal subsidies - against another - taxpayers - is what politics is all about. Farm subsidies are another way that rural residents are benefiting against ordinary tax payers...
Re: (Score:2)
The UPS trucks rolls down the two lane rural road then up the 1/4 mile dirt road to my parent's farmhouse and drops off packages all the time. They do have surcharges for many zip codes to reflect the higher cost of delivery but it is false to state that they "don't deliver to most of the rural US"
Re: (Score:1)
Because FedEX and UPS don't deliver to most of the rural US. Typical city dweller...
I lived for a long time in a very rural area (foothills of mountains, not even a suburb) and we got delivery from UPS, possibly also FedEx.
I think *YOU* are probably more than a bit out of touch without how widespread those services are.
But again, I'm not even saying Amazon should not use the USPS, just that they should at least pay for cost of services. Not sure how that ends up being controversial.
This isn't political but
Re: (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.