Post Office, the only business authorized by the Constitution, is bleeding billions of dollars but ironically, 80% of the deficit is due to a GOP-passed law requiring that they pay 5.5 billions a year into an account for retirement, 75 years ahead. That's paying for those who aren't EVEN yet born! No other businesses do that. And it's not econmically sound. Not only that, the Post Office is prevented from raising the cost of stamps until they ask for it.
"This death hug was part of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, which was passed on a voice vote by a lame duck Republican Congress in 2006. As I’ve reported, the mandate required the Postal Service, over 10 years, to pre-fund healthcare benefits for the next 75. This unique burden costs USPS $5.5 billion a year. The new law also restricted the Postal Service’s ability to raise postage rates, or to provide “nonpostal services” that, in an e-diversion era, could be key to its future."
"But even so, in the first quarter of this fiscal year, the post office would have made an operational profit, if not for a 75-year healthcare “pre-funding” mandate that applies to no other public or private institution in the United States."
The liberals and liberal media have gone into attack mode over the Post Office because they know its a clear example of how Obamacare is going to end up.
The post office is horrible at managing their business and wont cut a penny from their budget so they instead cut services.
Just remember that when Obamacare gets into full swing they are going to do what every socialized medicine countries does....cut services.
The Postal Services problems are not GOP caused but dont let that get in the way of a good propoganda campaign by the White House, liberals and their proxy the media.
Luke Ryan Photography wrote: The liberals and liberal media have gone into attack mode over the Post Office because they know its a clear example of how Obamacare is going to end up.
The post office is horrible at managing their business and wont cut a penny from their budget so they instead cut services.
Just remember that when Obamacare gets into full swing they are going to do what every socialized medicine countries does....cut services.
The Postal Services problems are not GOP caused but dont let that get in the way of a good propoganda campaign by the White House, liberals and their proxy the media.
Nice try. Come up with more data instead of making assumptions.
Why would a company be required to pay for a retirement, 75 years ahead?
And why can't post office decide to put a price on stamps without Congress's approval?
Hell, why CAN'T we just let it run like a private business without Congress being involved? But no, The GOP wants to control it so it can destroy it.
1. The USPS error rate used to be better than FedEx's (i.e.: FedEx misdelivered or lost a higher percentage of their products than did USPS). No idea if that's still true.
2. The USPS has indeed made budget cuts. But the result of that is to cut service. You can't say "we're going to cut staff by 30k but keep all of the same post offices open for the same hours."
3. The USPS fell victim to the argument that we should run government like a business (and if you can't make a profit, why should you be around?). The problem with that philosophy is best exemplified by the role of the postal service. There are places in the US that FedEx or UPS don't deliver. Or they charge significantly higher fees to deliver there. Why? B/c you can't profitably deliver mail or packages to some locations (like very rural areas, especially in inclement weather). A "business" would say "we're just not going to deliver mail to the Navajo reservation" or "I guess people in Northern Alaska will get mail once a month." Government attempts to serve ALL of the people. Which means there are post offices in places that just aren't profitable.
Now the OP is correct, the single biggest issue for USPS is their pension system. And there may be a time when b/c of widespread wifi, mail will become obsolete. But the primary arguments I hear for why we should let USPS go under aren't very convincing to me.
Jay Edwards
Posts: 16,732
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, US
I have no problem with letting the USPS fund their pension plan as they see fit -- if the taxpayers are never held responsible for it. Ever. In any way.
Jay Edwards wrote: I have no problem with letting the USPS fund their pension plan as they see fit -- if the taxpayers are never held responsible for it. Ever. In any way.
Once again, taxpayers has contributed ZERO to USPS... it's run by their stamps.
It seems we have conflicting reports/interpretations/spin.
netmodel wrote: Post Office, the only business authorized by the Constitution, is bleeding billions of dollars but ironically, 80% of the deficit is due to a GOP-passed law requiring that they pay 5.5 billions a year into an account for retirement, 75 years ahead. That's paying for those who aren't EVEN yet born! No other businesses do that. And it's not econmically sound. Not only that, the Post Office is prevented from raising the cost of stamps until they ask for it.
Congressional Research Service wrote: "The confusion over 75 years may be due to an "accounting" and not an "actuarial or funding" issue. They only have to fund the future liability of their current or former workforce. This would include some actuarial estimate about the mortality rates of their current workers (I.e. how long they live). So a 25 year old worker would have an average life expectancy (from birth) of 78.7 years. Thus, they would have to project future retiree health benefits for this individual up to about 54 years in the future.
But for accounting purposes they must estimate the future liability over a 75 year period (according to OPM financial accounting guidelines). In this case, they would make some assumptions about new entrants into the workforce and addresses your second question.
Theoretically, these new entrants could include someone who is not born yet. While they have to account for these future liabilities on their financial statements they do not have to fund them if they are not related to their current or former workforce."
.
netmodel wrote: Once again, taxpayers has contributed ZERO to USPS... it's run by their stamps.
Chairman Issa wrote: Postal employees are federal employees. All federal pension and retirement benefits are paid from the U.S. Treasury. Since the Postal Service’s operating costs are collected from ratepayers, the Postal Service pays the U.S. Treasury for the costs of federal pension benefits postal workers are legally entitled to receive. Even if the Postal Service cannot or does not make these payments, postal workers are still entitled to pension benefits from the Federal government. So it’s ultimately taxpayers who get stuck with the bill if the Postal Service can’t pay the Treasury for the costs of pensions.
45 fucking minute wait at 3pm on a wednesday - I have to pick up packages 3 days a week cause they don't deliver packages to my apartment complex. 30+ minutes every goddamn time cause only 2 people are working the counter.
Waiting for the OP to start a thread of "Democrats destroying the economy" pleading for a repeal of SOX, mark to market, Obamacare, the EPA, Obama tax rates, currency devaluation, trillion dollar deficits, etc, etc, etc.
So why in the hell are you blaming the GOP? If the USPS makes money on their own...who's at fault? Hmmmm??
You're not understanding what the article is saying, do you? The post office is NOT allowed to raise prices on stamps without the Congress approval (thanks to the Act passed by the GOP and signed by Bush) and is forced to pay into retirement fund... 75 years ahead!
No other business runs like that. In fact, it's the ONLY entity that operates like that and it's bleeding billions of dollars a year.
-JAY- wrote: 45 fucking minute wait at 3pm on a wednesday - I have to pick up packages 3 days a week cause they don't deliver packages to my apartment complex. 30+ minutes every goddamn time cause only 2 people are working the counter.
That sounds like your apartment complex's fault for not having "package boxes" where the mailman can put the package in a package box, put the key in your mailbox and the package box keeps the key when you get your package out.
"The Congress shall have Power...
...
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;"
A national post office, like highways and armed forces and police forces and fire departments, aren't good models for profit-making. They're foreseen and intended to be subsidized.
"The Congress shall have Power...
...
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;"
A national post office, like highways and armed forces and police forces and fire departments, aren't good models for profit-making. They're foreseen and intended to be subsidized.
Thus no need for public sector unions. So glad you agree with that point.
Tonic Dog Studios wrote: Thus no need for public sector unions. So glad you agree with that point.
I made no such statement. I don't know why you would put those words in my mouth. There's no mention of such a need, or no need, that I'm aware of in the Constitution. I'm no great pro-unionist, but I can speak for myself. Thanks.
Some of you claim to love America but hate everything that is America.
I wonder sometimes if some of you are really Chinese operatives sent to social networks like this to sow dissension and to foster mistrust and hatred for our government, and by extension, the people of the United States.
I mean, it is too easy for some of you to come in here with your anti-American bs on a daily basis, no matter what the issue is.
I refuse to believe most of you are real Americans and have America's best interests at heart.
Now, we have a situation wherein the USPS is threatened with dissolution and it has nothing to do with it's service nor does it have anything to do with Unions, which by the way, cannot strike, by law.
Any rational or fair minded American would look at this objectively and try to at least seek the root cause of this problem before making broad statements, but NO, some of you Chinese hackers take the hateful side of EVERY ISSUE!
It is nauseating, to tell the truth.
I mean, I bet there is less hate for America on Chinese websites than found in the SB every day.
csjacksonphotography wrote: Some of you are really fucking amazing.
Some of you claim to love America but hate everything that is America.
I wonder sometimes if some of you are really Chinese operatives sent to social networks like this to sow dissension and to foster mistrust and hatred for our government, and by extension, the people of the United States.
I mean, it is too easy for some of you to come in here with your anti-American bs on a daily basis, no matter what the issue is.
Thus no need for public sector unions. So glad you agree with that point.
They certainly can't compete against private sector outfits like FedEx, DHL, UPS, etc. Inventions like the fax machine, the Internet, etc. aren't helping matters either. It's a pretty impossible situation really.
You're not understanding what the article is saying, do you? The post office is NOT allowed to raise prices on stamps without the Congress approval (thanks to the Act passed by the GOP and signed by Bush) and is forced to pay into retirement fund... 75 years ahead!
No other business runs like that. In fact, it's the ONLY entity that operates like that and it's bleeding billions of dollars a year.
You're right...another prime example of the Feds getting their dirty fingers involved and then doing nothing about it.
netmodel wrote: Not only that, the Post Office is prevented from raising the cost of stamps until they ask for it.
netmodel wrote: The post office is NOT allowed to raise prices on stamps without the Congress approval (thanks to the Act passed by the GOP and signed by Bush)
I did a little googling and it looks like the Postal Regulatory Commission, not Congress, sets postage rates.
Under the law, the Postal Service operates essentially two business lines, one for “market dominant” products and one for “competitive” products. Each line has its own regulations and pricing rules that are administered by the Commission.
Market-Dominant Products
Market-dominant products comprise 99 percent of mail volume. Specifically, this includes First-Class Mail letters and sealed parcels; First-Class Mail cards; Periodicals; Standard Mail; Single-piece Parcel Post; Media Mail; Bound Printed Matter; Library Mail; Special Services; and Single-piece International Mail. The Postal Service dominates the market for these products because of its letter-mail monopoly and its position as the national mail service provider. Consequently, the law established an inflation- based price cap (Consumer Price Index for Urban consumers, CPI-U) on price increases for these product. For example, in 2008, the CPI-U cap was 2.9% and in 2009 it was 3.8%.
The Postal Service can change market-dominant prices following a 45-day public notice and review by the Commission. Under the Commission’s rules, the public is provided a 20-day comment period on the Postal Service’s proposal and the Commission will issue its decision within 14 days thereafter. Generally, public comments should address whether the Postal Service proposals meet the requirements of the law.
I read the article linked to in the OP. I thought this was interesting... "Last month, USPS management unveiled a “Path to Profitability” that would eliminate over a hundred thousand jobs,"
If 100,000 postal employees are a hindrance when it comes to profitability, then the handwriting is on the wall and 100,000 postal workers are about to join the ranks of the unemployed.
Beyond Vanilla wrote: I read the article linked to in the OP. I thought this was interesting... "Last month, USPS management unveiled a “Path to Profitability” that would eliminate over a hundred thousand jobs,"
If 100,000 postal employees are a hindrance when it comes to profitability, then the handwriting is on the wall and 100,000 postal workers are about to join the ranks of the unemployed.
They can't, unless the union agrees to remove the no layoff clause.
netmodel wrote: Post Office, the only business authorized by the Constitution, is bleeding billions of dollars but ironically, 80% of the deficit is due to a GOP-passed law requiring that they pay 5.5 billions a year into an account for retirement, 75 years ahead. That's paying for those who aren't EVEN yet born! No other businesses do that. And it's not econmically sound. Not only that, the Post Office is prevented from raising the cost of stamps until they ask for it.
"This death hug was part of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, which was passed on a voice vote by a lame duck Republican Congress in 2006. As I’ve reported, the mandate required the Postal Service, over 10 years, to pre-fund healthcare benefits for the next 75. This unique burden costs USPS $5.5 billion a year. The new law also restricted the Postal Service’s ability to raise postage rates, or to provide “nonpostal services” that, in an e-diversion era, could be key to its future."
"But even so, in the first quarter of this fiscal year, the post office would have made an operational profit, if not for a 75-year healthcare “pre-funding” mandate that applies to no other public or private institution in the United States."
So much for "pro Business" GOP that clearly has no clue on how to run a post office.
I think it's time for that Post Office to become the main issue for 2014 Congress election.
You really should try checking your facts before posting but then that's not your style.
On the eighth day of December in 2006, at 10:33 at night, the 2009th Congress passed H.R. 6407, The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, by a voice vote.
The bill was introduced by Republican Congressman Tom Davis of the 11th CD of Virginia. Co-sponsors were one other Republican, John McHugh, 23rd CD of New York, and Democrats Danny Davis, 7th CD of Illinois and Henry Waxman, 30th CD of California.
It's rather ironic that you're attacking the GOP over this bill considering the goal of the annual payment was to ensure the USPS pension system would be fully funded.
I mean how DARE the GOP worry about employees' pensions!!!
The reason it passed by voice vote was because it had such strong bi-partisan support.
| 
| 
| edu