US Postal Service To Make Sunday Deliveries For Amazon 258
guttentag writes "The New York Times is reporting The USPS has struck a deal to deliver Amazon's packages on Sundays — a first for both. The Postal Service, which lost nearly $16 billion last year, often loses money on first-class mail delivery, but package delivery is profitable. The Postal Service said it expected to make more such deals with other merchants, seeking a larger role in the $186 billion e-commerce market. For this holiday shopping season, Sunday delivery of Amazon products will be limited to the Los Angeles and New York metropolitan areas. In 2014 it is expected to expand to other cities including Dallas, Houston, New Orleans and Phoenix."
Obligatory note: the USPS is intentionally broken (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2012/08/us-postal-services-forced-financial-crisis
In 2006 – Republicans in Congress passed a poison pill piece of legislation forcing the Post Office to pre-fund retiree health benefits 75 years out into the future – basically funding benefits for future employees who aren’t even born yet. The Postal Service has to do this by giving the Treasury $5.5 billion every single year. That’s a requirement that no business, or any government agency has ever had to comply with. And it’s the reason why the Post Office is going bankrupt today and looking into closing down post offices, laying off workers, and cutting down delivery service.
Re:Obligatory note: the USPS is intentionally brok (Score:5, Informative)
Well, while it was signed by a republican president and sponsored by a republican, it was cosponsored by 2 dems and a republican. It also passed house with a voice vote, and the senate with a unanimous vote.
This was a completely bipartisan bill that our whole government went in on.
Even the postal unions were for this (Why I have no idea).
Re:Obligatory note: the USPS is intentionally brok (Score:5, Informative)
The Democrats strongly supported it. He is pretending that didn't happen. They also never tried to repeal it when they had the chance.
He is attempting to deceive you and hopes you won't go around asking questions.
Re:Obligatory note: the USPS is intentionally brok (Score:4, Informative)
Congress want to protect the taxpayer from having to take over the duties that the USPS said they would do,back in the 70s, the postmaster general and the postal unions want to make the taxpayers pay for their poor management and keep things as they are.
The postal accountability law,2006, requires the USPS to actually do some proper financial management and dropping it would not make them competitive again; even ignore the money they owe for this they would of lost money for the last couple of years. Without the money set aside they would not be able the meet the obligations they agreed to back in the 1970s and the people who retiring now would not have the monies that they are suppose to get. Privatization would solve nothing of this since the obligations would follow the person who purchased the company.
BTW the 75 years is number of years that is for ACCOUNTING purposes they have to figure future liabilities. It is NOT how long they have to fund benefits. That 75 years of accounting is followed by the DoD, social security, department of Housing, etc.
Re:So Saturday Bad, Sunday Good? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Obligatory note: the USPS is intentionally brok (Score:5, Informative)
Because it actually forces the pensions to be funded - it's obvious why the union would like it.
Look at the cities going bankrupt in California, as an example. It's unfunded pension liabilities that are dragging them down. The USPS is being forced to actually make good on their promises, otherwise we'll have to bail out their pension fund in the future. The gripe (somewhat legit) is that they're being singled out for this treatment while every other government agency with promises that are going to be broken aren't given this treatment.
Re:what? (Score:4, Informative)
The last mile is cut in many instances with the USPS. I have lived in many rural places where if i wanted to recieve mail, i had to purchase a p.o. box. They wouldn't even deliver packages to the door and you had to show up to sign for them durring bankers hours. And yes, fed ex would come right to the door too.
This isn't unusual in the least. There are areas more rural then the suburbs. Cost cutting at the post office has taken the last mile from many places. Perhaps this would be different if big businesses didn't get steep discounts for first class mail. But the facts are, we as citizens pay more than double what large companies pay and i doubt a private postal service would be able to do that if they were losing money on it.
Re:So Saturday Bad, Sunday Good? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what? (Score:3, Informative)
Damn, who let the Freepers in?
I just wish you would have the balls to tell that to me to my face.
Says the brave little Anonymous Coward. Log in with a real account, debate rationally, and the next time you're in Seattle we can meet and argue over a cup of coffee. Until then you're pissing away MY ELECTRONS.
Re:what? (Score:5, Informative)
Um, no. There is no other corporate or government entity in this country that is required to meet the standards applied to the USPS under that law, and the 75 years is indeed a hard funding benefit - they've got a $5b/year over 10 years requirement.
I believe if you look at the accounting, absent the pre-payment plan the USPS actually made money last year.
Re:what? (Score:1, Informative)
Oh dear. Try taking economics 101 again, and listen this time.
The price of an item is what the market will bear. That means if I can make you pay no more than $100 for it that is how much is costs regardless of MY costs.
Now, what the market will bear can be altered by competition, of course, but the whole "pass the tax on to the consumer" thought is complete gibberish. The price of Windows (for example) wouldn't change if you doubled the tax Microsoft pays, or totally removed it - the price point is determined by what amount of money they can get you to pay before it would be worth your while switching to Linux/Apple or pirating it. That's why a brand new copy of Windows 8 Pro is less than fifty bucks in China, seventy for US students and two hundred for normal US users. OEMs and upgrades get a discount. Why? Because that's /what they will pay/.
TL:DR - your argument is naive and ignores the very basics of economics.
Re:what? (Score:4, Informative)
The USPS doesn't pay property tax, sales tax, or federal income tax. They also get special loans directly from the Treasury. That's all taxpayer funding.
Then there are the special laws the protect the USPS, like the monopoly on letter carrying and the their immunity from parking tickets. If you don't count those laws as "funding" they at least qualify as government support.