What is Digg?291 Comments
- JDenigma, on 10/11/2007, -23/+193They're not allowed to compete in first class mail though.
- satanatnmtedu, on 10/11/2007, -54/+129There are competitors: FedEx, UPS, and DHL.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -24/+88"What would happen if there was competition?"
Nothing much would change, because there already _is_ competition, as mentioned above. And if the only thing the others can't do is call something "first class mail," then who cares what it's called?
If I want to send a letter by FedEx, I can call it "first class mail" if I want. If FedEx wants to use stamps instead of account numbers, they can do that too. They're the ones that chose not to offer a cut-rate service at competitive prices.
Now, if the question is "what would happen if we got rid of the USPS?" then the answer is different. You would not see UPS stores crop up everywhere to replace post offices. There's just not enough money in it, and customer service is very expensive. And you wouldn't see UPS or FedEx offer to ship _anything_ for as low as 50 cents either. - JDenigma, on 10/11/2007, -10/+67That is a common myth and misnomer. What is claimed to be deregulation is not true free market deregulation and competition, but rather reregulation in just merely shuffling the deck chairs around, so to speak. It's the same thing that happened in California. They called it deregulation when in fact it wasn't and then they went and blamed deregulation and the free market for their problems. Central planning and government sweet heart deals with "natural monopolies" does not work.
http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?Id=1320
http://www.reason.com/news/show/27830.html
http://www.reason.com/news/show/30270.html
http://www.reason.org/ps270.html
http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-40.html
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv23n2/boren.pdf
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0308j.asp
http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/112303/op__088-2611.shtml - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -19/+68If I have *anything* to send, I go to Fed Ex or UPS. I get a tracking number and multiple ways to check where the package is located at any given time.
So, yes, they are direct competitors and do provide better services. - fober, on 10/11/2007, -3/+46I might be in the minority (though I would certainly hope not), but thanks to the internets and automatic debits/credits, I haven't used a postage stamp in months.
And I've never been one to use the Post Office for packages. - bratpack8, on 10/11/2007, -5/+47I lived in California and the 'deregulation' was a joke. How can something be a free-market when the rules that bind it make up a document more than 1,000 pages long?!?! I always used the analogy (simple I know) of a hot dog salesmen who the State put a price cap on hot dogs sold to consumers of 50-cents, but allowed a 'free-market' in ingredients. With any price cap, there will be shortages, but the State also forced that hot dog vendor to stay in business, even if the price of the mustard, buns, dogs, relish, celery salt, tomatoes, onions, chili and other ingredients (notice NOT ketchup!) added up to more. This is a rudimentary analogy of what the California 'deregulation' was. How foolish these leaders are who believe they can mess with the laws of economics. Too bad they don't try and mess with the laws of physics, such as gravity.
- cyberdork, on 10/11/2007, -13/+50Just look at other countries which privatized the standard mail service. The results were: same prices, but now you have to drive miles to find the nearest mailbox. Mail pickup in rural areas just doesn't pay off and therefore will be ignored by any company. Duh!
- YixilTesiphon, on 10/11/2007, -7/+43I also live in Texas, and the Texas deregulation was not deregulation.
- bratpack8, on 10/11/2007, -26/+61I'm wondering how many of you actually read the article vs. just pulling stuff out of your monkey behind. Does the fact that the Post Office is heavily subsidized (i.e. we pay for it whether we use it or not) mean anything to you?
There would be competition added if UPS and FED EX could deliver to a box that is on YOUR property. And FED EX and others are not allowed to compete directly, they have regulations preventing them from doing so, otherwise the USPS would have been history moons ago. - mikes1, on 10/11/2007, -3/+38A free market in mail delivery would result in geographically tiered pricing.
Competitors would initially just "skim the cream", so the Postal Service would quickly have to raise its rates to continue covering less profitable areas.
Mail in and between major metros would be cheap. Live on a rural route, a few $ per letter, assuming service is even available. - NICU, on 10/11/2007, -1/+35We need the goddamn DMV to have some competition. Maybe they'll learn its not good business to make people wait in 2 hour lines, have a worker mess up, blame the customer, fill out 3 more forms and realize in a week that they made more mistakes with your paperwork. Boy it would be a shame to lose that...
- reddevil3, on 10/11/2007, -5/+31I don't know about you, but ever since I moved to the US back in '04 I have been VERY impressed by the USPS. I think it's brilliant...not perfect of course, but works very well.
- bratpack8, on 10/11/2007, -1/+27And the companies wouldn't want to send out 20 trucks to every area either! At some point, if there was a true market for 1st class mail, their would be plenty of partnerships to save them that inefficiency.
- PhoenixAvatar2, on 10/11/2007, -2/+24I worked for a company that had a large part in the deregulation of the East Coast and not only did prices go down, reliability went up because a third part, non-profit company was in charge of directing power and planning future infrastructure construction. Deregulation works if it's actual deregulation.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -26/+47@bratpack: The USPS is apparently not subsidized, and hasn't been since the 1970s: http://www.nalc.org/postal/perform/selfsufficient.html#subsidize
So what were your other arguments? Oh, the box on my property. Okay. Let's allow USPS and FedEx to put packages in a locked box on my property instead of leaving them outside my door.
Do you think that means they'll start delivering letters for 50c? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+27They might stop delivering my neighbor's mail to me, and vice versa.
- fistofblood, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22The post office once did have competition. It was very popular, but the US gov't became very upset and filed a lawsuit. This was a long time ago though.
Look up Lysander Spooner and his American Letter Mail Company.
So basically, the US Post Office won't allow competition. - Dewhead, on 10/11/2007, -18/+36Its a great question. I live in Texas and everyone thought that de-regulating energy and allowing for competition would drive down enery costs and it had the exact opposite effect..
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/business/070422/energy.shtml - Ottawa, on 10/11/2007, -4/+22The POINT of a federally operated post office is to give everyone, even poor people and even people in remote locations, access to postal delivery. At some point we decided that it was important to provide RFD - Rural Free Delivery -- because it wasn't cost effective for commercial carriers and so some people were outside the major means of communication. We decided that wasn't good for a nation.
Public services aren't supposed to make money - they are supposed to provide essential services for running a representative democracy in which sharing is sometimes (not always) more important that money or, even, fairness of payment.
But what is TRULY galling is the way public employee unions (including the PO unions) have developed an attitude reminiscent of soviet russia and a work ethic like something out of max headroom. Workers are less and less skilled and less and less motivated-it's almost as though we are interrupting public servants' private lives by showing up in their places of business.
I'm the grandchild of union organizers, and what they wanted was fair pay for good work -- now we provide secure solid pay for tempermental marginal service. We need to reexamine the reasons for the labor movement, for the 40 hour workweek, and for democracy being a great invention changing the role of government to the governed. Public services are a high calling, whether it's the diplomatic corps or janitorial in a public building. People unwilling to work in those systems ought not to take money to do the work, management, supervision, and accountability. - whataboutdave, on 10/11/2007, -13/+29What's wrong with geographically tiered pricing?
I don't feel I should be asked to subsidize someone's decision to live in a cabin in Montana.
true competition = efficiency - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -7/+23@joybran, the article may, in fact, be wrong. Rather than relying on something from LewRockwell, I clicked through to the actual financial statement the author selective quoted. I might have missed something, but in a cursory check, I see that $3B from the US government is listed -- under liabilities, not assets.
Sounds like that's money that has to be paid back to the government, which means it's more like start-up capital, i.e., a loan. I don't see anything wrong with that, as long as it's paid back. A private company would also need investment capital or a loan, so I don't see how this is unfair competition. - standalonematt, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20It is illegal for any other carrier in the US to handle "non-urgent" letters. So comparing 41c first class letter postage with overnight flat with a letter inside) is not a fair comparison. Everything being equal, if other carriers could handle letters and they had access to mailboxes - USPS would have to compete on pricing as well as service. They would be unable to unilaterally make changes (i.e. forced automation, shape based mail, etc) without a risk of losing business. I don't think anyone could honestly argue that having UPS, DHL, FedEx, etc in the parcel game competing with USPS hasn't been a good thing for consumers. It gives the consumer choice (don't like UPS, then use an alternative - its hard to do that with regular first class mail), plus it also means they have to compete and adapt to what the competition is doing, making it better for all of us.
The USPS having a monopoly on letter delivery is wrong and should be changed. If the USPS is really cheaper and more efficient - then the other companies won't be able to compete and will drop out of the business - if they succeed that means people are choosing them and people feel they are getting a better/cheaper service. The only loser would be the USPS - and them being in favor of a government enforced monopoly so they don't have to work harder and compete really doesn't move me at all. - fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17Of course. I think it's wrong that companies aren't allowed to compete, even if they wanted to.
- tekmonkey, on 10/11/2007, -9/+24It is nowhere close to being a perfectly competitive market.
The law prevents anybody except USPS from placing mail in private mailboxes. It gives USPS the exclusive right to non-urgent domestic letters and to outbound international letters.
The only exemption is "extremely urgent" letters. And even those are required to cost at least $3 or twice the USPS postage, whichever is greater.
"The U.S. Postal Inspection Service raided Equifax offices to ascertain if the mail they were sending through FedEx was truly "extremely urgent." It was found that the mail was not, and Equifax was fined $30,000 to compensate the Postal Service for the postage that was lost to FedEx."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USPS#Statutory_monopoly
The cost of stamps has increased dramatically greater than the general inflation rate. If this were a competitive market, the real cost would have decreased rather than increased. - PongGod, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16But, they should be free to make that decision themselves rather than be legally prevented from doing so if they choose.
- leaftoilet, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15I used to work for UPS. USPS actually uses UPS to ship priority mail in many cases, it also uses DHL for some things. DHL and Fedex both use UPS at times too. pay attention to the labels the next time you have a package delivered. there might be a UPS label under your DHL label. etc etc
- austin356, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15^
You are mistaking a "free-market" for a "fascist-market" in both the Healthcare Industry and Power Industry. Practically all the regulation in both sets of deregulation and in most segments of our economy is not to protect the consumer, but rather the corporation. The politicians tell you it is a free-market when really it is a fascist market (corporatist market), so that they get their cake (special interest) and keep their voters at the same time, something that would not happen if the truth was told or widely known. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16weird, i was thinking about this today whether or not i could send a letter via ups
- bratpack8, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12in addition to allowing competition, the USPS would have to go without subsidies otherwise the playing field would be unfair.
It reminds me of govt on the local level. Recently where I live, the city was trying to send flyers and do talks about the vital need of a 2nd recreation center in town. At one meeting, I asked if it was profitable and the guy admitted that it wasn't, except for the hockey rink. Apparently there is a huge demand for hockey here in CO and little supply of rinks, making some leagues actually play their games at midnight! Anyway, back to the point. I was thinking what would prevent me to get some investors and open a rink? The biggest thing is the fear that the government could open one, using taxpayer's money and easily beat our price. So even this 'fear' of future govt intervention causes less supply of what may be in demand. - Ghazi, on 10/11/2007, -6/+18Just because Newman delivers your mail, doesn't make the whole USPS incompetent. I've had way worse experiences with UPS and FedEx (overcharging,breaking packages,denying "insurance" claims) than I ever did with USPS.
The same piece of first class mail that you could send through USPS for $0.41 will cost more than $3 using the other carriers. So the choice is yours! - cosmicv, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14Exactly, why should I pay to have some guys mail delivered to some remote cabin in the middle of the woods? Why cant he come to town and pick his mail up?
- Typhoon2009, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12@jcm267
If only that actually happened. - kettlehead, on 10/11/2007, -5/+16Ron Paul actually mentioned this on his Daily Show appearance; he would legalize postal competition. Just throwing that out there.
- whataboutdave, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Competition for packages is _not_ competition for first class mail. The USPS is a quasi-governmental body with a monopoly on first class mail and postage rates.
There are certain things you just can't do at DHL, FedEx or UPS that you can at US Postal. That is not the mark of direct competition, even if a few services may overlap. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -11/+21Can you send a letter via FedEx or UPS for 41 cents?
- joybran, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12It's been a lot better since FedEx and UPS and the others were allowed to compete with part of its business. It would have to get even better if other companies were allowed to compete for its core business of first class mail.
- standalonematt, on 10/11/2007, -7/+17Competition is a good thing!
(Preparing to be Dugg down for stating basic economic fact, although not popular with Digg users) - Misesean, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15Competition? Why does it need to exist at all?
- JeffDaiell, on 10/11/2007, -5/+14 If the Postal Monopoly were really good ... it wouldn't be afraid of competition. -- Jeff Daiell
- joybran, on 10/11/2007, -20/+29@ EntropyMan
Read the article. It provides proof that the USPS is still receiving money from the government in spite of the claim that it is no longer subsidized.
@ cyberdork
There is a big difference between "privatizing" and allowing competition. There is a possibility nobody would want to try to deliver first class mail since they would be competing with a government subsidized entity, but if somebody did think they could do it better and cheaper, we would have more choices. Why wouldn't we want to repeal the law that prevents anybody from even trying to compete with the USPS for first class mail? - Misesean, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11"Too bad they don't try and mess with the laws of physics, such as gravity."
I think that's a very good idea! Before anyone can become a "leader", he ought to be required to prove his ability by being thrown from a plane at 10k feet or so without a parachute, over a hard surface - if he successfully alters the law of gravity and survives, he's in :) - tekmonkey, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10@PeppermintPig: He's not asking why competition has to exist... he's asking why the DMV has to exist.
- SweetMercury, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8@Ghazi :
"The same piece of first class mail that you could send through USPS for $0.41 will cost more than $3 using the other carriers. So the choice is yours!"
No.
*****.
*****.
Maybe because the Post Office got laws passed that forbid FedEx or UPS from sending packages for under a dollar. It would appear the choice is NOT yours. - blitzman, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11A lot of people said that the latest postal rate increase from $.39 to $.41 is only 2 cents, so it's reasonable. They should have looked at other rates. The rate to mail a CD went from $.63 to $1.30. It was so unbelievable that I went to the Post Office to confirm it. Yup.
"Now, if the question is "what would happen if we got rid of the USPS?" then the answer is different. You would not see UPS stores crop up everywhere to replace post offices. There's just not enough money in it, and customer service is very expensive."
There are *several* UPS or Mailbox Etc or Pony Express stores closer to my home than any USPS office. - True359, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11In Ron Pauls interview with John Stewart on the Daily Show on 6-4, He talked just about this. He said he would legalize competition in 1st class mail.
here's the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qrwy3mR3Mo
he says it around 4:40 - Fritzed, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11Yes, the successful carriers would form partnerships so that they could deliver the mail more cheaply then any one company could alone. Obviously, this would lower the price that they were paying so that they could deliver the mail more cheaply and they would have more incentive to expand the partnership so that they could raise their profits. The power of free market competition!
Of course, companies not in the partnership would really have no chance to compete, a single company couldn't' compete on cost. In fact, if they tried, they might just be forced out of business or bought out if they start to be successful. Then with such an overwhelming dominance, this partnership could start charging whatever they want. Even if a company came along with better service, it would be crushed pretty easily. Hooray for free market competition! - alexdeeley, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7I get the feeling that about 90 percent of the people reading/commenting on this do not understand the fundamentals of the mail service or the basics of how UPS / FedEx / DHL work.
There are so many fallacies in the posts above. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -9/+15@bmwboy, if FedEx, UPS, and DHL wanted to get into the cheap-low-priority mail business, I'd have no problem with it as long as they agreed to the same requirements the USPS has -- serve markets that are lucrative and well as those that aren't -- i.e., serve everyone equally, don't just pick and choose.
If they can serve only the lucrative markets (which is what they would want to do), then that ensures that the not-so-lucrative markets are eventually not served by anyone, including the USPS, which would be forced out of business. The People have a constitutional interest in seeing that mail is delivered everywhere. That's the whole point.
If you have a better suggestion for how to allow more competition in low-priority mail, but that meets the mandate to serve everyone, then I'd love to hear it. - Capta1nA, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6almost all of my bills can be paid electronically already.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 289 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our upcoming 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is