USPS has lost $100 Billion since 2007
- Thread starter Phenomenally Frantastic
- Start date
hawkeyetraveler
HB Heisman
Well the current postmaster general was installed by Trump in his first term. I guess Trump didn’t really care about efficiency back then.
Losses? It's a service. Tell me this: how many trillions has the military lost since 2007?
This one is fairly simple and should be easy to get bipartisan agreement on with regards to cutting costs. Unless of course all you want to do is draw false equivalencies in an attempt to make this political…….
It's a service provided via the constitution and GW Dumb**** hurt it greatly with forcing it to fund pensions 30 years into the future in 2006. But you knew this, not
If you expect an organization to be profitable then you need to take off some of the handcuffs such as universal service at the same price point is not profitable. Taking years to make price increases while others can increase prices overnight and add surcharges to their prices.
I don't think they allow the USPS to offer discounts like the private companies can, I don't think they allow the USPS to own their own fleet of planes.
The National Parks Service doesn't make a profit, nor does the U.S. military or the local Fire Department.
IMO they should stop treating the USPS like some independent agency of the executive branch of the United States federal government. Although it operates like a business, it is mandated to be revenue-neutral whatever the hell that means.
Just make it a Federal Agency and have the PM General be a Cabinet member and forget about a balance sheet.
I don't think they allow the USPS to offer discounts like the private companies can, I don't think they allow the USPS to own their own fleet of planes.
The National Parks Service doesn't make a profit, nor does the U.S. military or the local Fire Department.
IMO they should stop treating the USPS like some independent agency of the executive branch of the United States federal government. Although it operates like a business, it is mandated to be revenue-neutral whatever the hell that means.
Just make it a Federal Agency and have the PM General be a Cabinet member and forget about a balance sheet.
whoa...what's going on?
a real "flowers for Algernon" situation* happening with this comment
*could also go with the simpsons episode where homer becomes super smart because they remove crayon he shoved up his nose as a kid
Just curious. Simple yes or no question.
Is it law that the USPS make money?
I'll hang up and listen...
Is it law that the USPS make money?
I'll hang up and listen...
Grok 3:
“No, it is not a law that the United States Postal Service (USPS) must be revenue neutral. However, the USPS is expected to operate as a self-sustaining entity, covering its operating costs primarily through its revenue from postage, products, and services, rather than relying on taxpayer funds.
This expectation stems from the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, which transformed the U.S. Post Office Department into the USPS, a government-owned corporation. The Act aimed to make the postal service financially self-sufficient, requiring it to break even over time rather than generate a profit or depend on congressional appropriations for operational expenses. While the USPS is not legally mandated to be "revenue neutral" in the strict sense of balancing revenue and expenses perfectly each year, it is designed to fund itself through its operations.
That said, the USPS has faced financial challenges, including deficits, due to factors like declining mail volume, pension funding obligations, and its universal service obligation (delivering mail to every address in the U.S.). Congress has occasionally provided funding, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, but this is not the norm for its day-to-day operations. So, while self-sufficiency is a guiding principle, it’s not an explicit legal requirement enforceable as "revenue neutrality."”
Revenue neutral > ($100,000,000,000)
A simple no would have sufficed.
But, you needed AI to add a totally unnecessary 500 or so words to your answer, thinking holy shit! This'll learn 'em.
So, no shit Sherlock, you want to get it to be as revenue neutral as possible. My thinking is that considering you are providing a national service that literally is set up to deliver mail to EVERY dwelling in a country the size of the US...that is going to have aspects to it that make it impossible to come close to "breaking even".
Me personally, I'd go looking into Pentagon spending overruns to find that $10B pound of flesh you're looking for here. Surely someone there is fattening themselves up at the trough a helluva lot more than the USPS.
the USPS is expected to operate as a self-sustaining entity
What does self sustaining mean where you come from?
The purpose of the USPS is not to make money.
Says you. Why do you want to pay 10 times more to mail things?
There needs to be efficiencies introduced. There is no need for mail delivery 6 days a week. Saturday delivery is unnecessary. Many small town post offices can be converted into mail drops and have no staff.
There absolutely is a need for mail delivery 6 days a week. Who are you to decide that? Tell that to the bill collectors who often only give 1 week turnaround to get payments. Not everyone has computer access and some people would prefer not to use online payments anyway. Why do you feel you get to make these decisions for them?
It’s been stated before a lot of the reasons why the post office has found it ever more difficult to break even, and many of those involve factors beyond their control. Not least of which is having to deliver to all Americans no matter where they live, as well as people simply not sending as much mail as they used to.
Louis Dejoy destroying/decommissioning key equipment
Louis Dejoy forcing them to buy outdated ICE vehicles (when everyone else - like Amazon, etc are all shifting to EVs for far lower costs)
The data are there; put some competent people in charge and fund them properly, and you'll see a dramatic shift in how efficient USPS can become.
I’m not even sure you’d save that much money closing small town post offices…you still have to send people to pick up that mail, bring it back to some central location, and then send it back out for delivery.
Look for efficiencies where possible, but frankly I think people have to accept that this is not going to be a profitable service, nor do I think it should be.
Because I’m subsidizing that service with my tax dollars. It needs to be as efficient as possible.
RIght, a 50 year problem started with Trump
Do you think Louis Dejoy saddling USPS with inefficient gas-powered vehicles (vs getting hybrids or EVs) helped or hurt USPS's bottom line here?
Amazon has gone full to EV delivery vehicles, because there is an upfront investment, but the far lower operational and maintenance costs clearly give them an edge over any delivery service that does not have EVs.
That "choice" by Louis Dejoy is an "investment" cost that will now result in HIGHER inefficiency for the next 30-40 years, because that's how long those new trucks are intended to operate. What rationale would someone like Dejoy have to make USPS LESS EFFICIENT for the next several decades?
The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 was co-sponsored by two Democratic representatives - Danny K. Davis of Illinois and Henry Waxman of California. It breezed through both chambers of Congress in less than two weeks with unanimous bipartisan support.
But you know this, not
there are a million ways to make it more efficient but yet here we are talking about it once again
boomers love their mail too much to let it go
boomers love their mail too much to let it go
hawkeyetraveler
HB Heisman
No it didn’t. But like virtually all our problems he solved none of it in his first term. The big difference is he promised he would solve it. Just like he promised to lower prices (not stop inflation…he promised deflation). Just like he promised to end Ukraine on day 1. Just like he promised trillions in savings from our budget.
Trump promises. And promises. And promises. But he does not deliver.
And I'm saying there isn't an entity in the world (public or private) that could achieve this while continuing the level of service it has had ohh...since its inception. Your boy Moron Musk couldn't even do it.
You're just going to have to accept that what we have here in the US government. And to run the government, it costs money. Some things cost more than others. Some things are goddam impossible to run as efficiently from a cost perspective as everybody would like.
"Of the people, by the people, and for the people". Words to live by. You should try it some time.
And this service, "The People" choose to have it, even though it costs us all a shitload of money. If you can't accept that, well, sucks to be you I guess.
It's hard to be profitable when you have to deliver low margin crap (mostly junk mail) to every address in the US every day except Sunday. Cut delivery to 3 days a week for the normal mail and focus on packages/express mail every day.
A bombshell study by the Tow Center for Digital Journalism has exposed a major flaw in AI-powered search engines: they’re terrible at citing news accurately. After analyzing eight AI search platforms, researchers found that over sixty percent of responses contained incorrect or misleading citations. Some AI chatbots performed better than others—Perplexity had a 37% error rate—but Elon Musk’s Grok 3 was the worst offender, generating incorrect citations a staggering 94% of the time.
You're insane, the USPS vehicle fleet is 2nd in size only to the U.S. Military, do you also propose the military go to EV's?
The Presidentially appointed Postal Rate Board of Governors submits postage rates to the Presidentially appointed Postal Regulatory Rate Commision (formerly Postal Rate Commission).. This is lethargic, bureaucratic molasses-laced path of resistance has produced compounding debt since 1970. The postage rates are perpetually in arrears and insufficient to cover costs. Obviously, the concept of pre-financing to anticipate costs increases and inflation is out of the question.
Add this to the pre-retirement expenditures and give me an example of any organization that can be financially successful.
Please include the one(s) you expect to take the place of the USPS.
What does your reply have to do with my post? Chis blamed GWB for forcing the USPS to pre-fund retirement healthcare for their workers and I simply pointed out that it was quickly and unanimously approved by both parties in both house of Congress.
$5B a year to get pieces of paper sent around the country and world for a half a buck seems like a pretty good deal tbh.
USPS turns a profit during busy season as DeJoy says his reforms are taking hold
The Postal Service will next look to reduce its headcount, continue consolidations and launch new products.
he U.S. Postal Service turned a profit of $144 million during its busiest season of the year, operating in the black for the first time since the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy celebrated the achievement and attributed the success to changes he has implemented to cut costs, bring in new business and make the postal network more efficient. The profitable first quarter of fiscal 2025—from Oct.1 through Dec. 31—marks a stark departure from the same period in fiscal 2024, when USPS lost $2 billion.
“Our future is bright,” DeJoy said on Thursday. “We are on the right path. We can compete with the best. We can achieve financial solvency. And we can create a network that is integrated, modern, and performance based.”
USPS turned a net profit of nearly $1 billion in the most recent fiscal quarter when excluding expenses postal management deems outside of its control, compared to $472 million in the same period last year. Revenue jumped by 4% to $22.5 billion while the agency slashed $326 million in transportation expenses. Much of the turnaround—$1.8 billion worth—came from changes in the calculations of USPS’ workers’ compensation obligations.
USPS turns a profit during busy season as DeJoy says his reforms are taking hold
The Postal Service will next look to reduce its headcount, continue consolidations and launch new products, though it still expects to lose money this year.
www.govexec.com
Do you use the US mail? Do you get mail delivered? If so you are not subsidizing it. You are paying for a service.
Proof that stupid doesn’t just reside in the White House.
Idk what the idea was when they decided to pre-fund stuff in that bill, but boy did that bite them in the butt.
Video by John Oliver from a few years back if anyone’s curious.
It was a part of the Bush administration's privatization project that got binned after they blew the surplus and the housing crisis occured.
OK. So, I used your unanimity post for a platform to raise a second issue. I didn't mean to offend you.
