QuotePostal Service reports $5.2B loss in 3rd quarter
WASHINGTON — The nearly bankrupt U.S. Postal Service on Thursday reported losses of $57 million per day in the last quarter and warned it will miss another payment due to the U.S. Treasury, just one week after its first-ever default on a payment for future retiree health benefits.
From April to June, losses totaled $5.2 billion, up $2.1 billion from the same period last year.
The mail agency said it is being hurt significantly by mounting expenses for future retiree health benefits. Those expenses, mandated by Congress in 2006, made up $3.1 billion of the post office's quarterly loss, while workers compensation tacked on another $1.1 billion in expenses. The agency's operating loss was $1 billion, mostly due to declines in first-class mail.
"We have simply reached the point that we must conserve cash," Thurgood Marshall Jr., chairman of the Postal Service's board of governors, said in explaining the payment defaults. He cautioned that the mail agency may have to delay other payments if necessary.
The Postal Service for months has been urging Congress to pass legislation that would allow it to eliminate Saturday mail delivery and reduce the annual health payment of more than $5 billion. The post office defaulted on that payment last week when the House failed to take action before heading home for a five-week break.
The mail agency says it will miss the second $5.6 billion payment due on Sept. 30, also for future retiree benefits, as cash runs close to zero.
At a news briefing, Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe made clear that day-to-day mail delivery will not be disrupted in any way despite the cash crunch. But Donahoe expressed frustration with the repeated delays by Congress, which he said is contributing to a lot of "negative talk on finances" that could undermine confidence in the mail agency and its long-term growth.
"Congress needs to act responsibly and move on this legislation," he said. "This is no way to run any kind of business."
The Senate passed a postal bill in April that would have provided financial relief in part by reducing the annual health payments and providing an $11 billion cash infusion, basically a refund of overpayments the Postal Service made to a federal pension fund. The House, however, remains stalled over a separate bill that would allow for aggressive cuts, including an immediate end to Saturday delivery. Rural lawmakers in particular worry about the impact of closures in their communities.
The Postal Service originally sought to close low-revenue post offices in rural areas to save money, but after public opposition, it is now moving forward with a new plan to keep 13,000 open with shorter operating hours.
The Postal Service, an independent agency of government, does not receive tax dollars for its day-to-day operations but is subject to congressional control.
Overall, the post office had operating revenue of $15.6 billion from April through June, the third quarter of its 2012 fiscal year. That was down a fraction from the same period last year. But quarterly expenses this year climbed to $20.8 billion, up 10 percent, largely driven by the health prepayments. The Postal Service is the only government agency required to make such payments.
The Postal Service also has been hurt by declining mail volume as people and businesses continue switching to the Internet in place of letters and paper bills. The number of items mailed during the last quarter was 38.5 billion pieces, a 4 percent decrease, much of it in first-class mail.
On the positive side, the mail agency reported that it continued to lower costs by reducing work hours and boosting employee productivity. The Postal Service's fast-growing shipping services, which include express and priority mail, had a 9 percent increase in operating revenue to $3.3 billion.
That strong growth in shipping services, which the mail agency is promoting as a cheaper alternative to FedEx and UPS, helped offset roughly three-fourths of the declines in first-class and advertising mail, said Stephen Masse, the Postal Service's acting chief financial officer.
The numbers bring the Postal Service's year-to-date net loss to $11.6 billion, compared to $5.7 billion for the same period last year.
Art Sackler, co-coordinator of the Coalition for a 21st Century Postal Service, a group representing the private-sector mailing industry, cautioned that the worst of postal losses may be yet to come. He noted that the Postal Service's third-quarter numbers may reflect an unusually high volume of mail that typically occurs in an election year.
The Postal Service on Thursday said it believes it will stay afloat, despite perilously low cash levels anticipated in October, partly because of increased revenue from the higher amount of election mail.
"There are more than 8 million private sector workers whose jobs depend on the mail, and these jobs may be in jeopardy if Congress fails to reform the Postal Service," Sackler said. "As bad as things are getting for the Postal Service, it could be worse next year."
The agency has forecast a record $15 billion loss by the end of this fiscal year. Without legislative changes, it said, annual losses will exceed $21 billion by 2016.
Fredric Rolando, president of the National Association of Letter Carriers, said Congress is to blame for much of the postal red ink.
"The positive aspects to today's USPS report are the continuing sharp rises in revenue from package deliveries associated with Internet orders and also in productivity," he said. "If Congress would step up and fix the pre-funding mess it created, then the Postal Service could focus on developing a business plan for the future.... Degrading services and dismantling the universal network are not a business plan."
Kill it but only once I've finished using my forever stamps.
You still have post offices in America?
The HK Post office is a profitable business. HK is a lot smaller so the cost of serving truly remote areas is less. There is no health care cost, since HK has universal health care. But even so, their mail business operates at a loss.
What turns the business around is the sale of limited edition stamps. There is a pretty big speculation market out there for such assets. So they just keep printing stamps, in effect printing money :contract:
I've no clue how things work over there. Does the government subsidise the post office?
As it strikes me as one of those things that really shouldn't be making a profit, being a public service and all that.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 09, 2012, 10:50:08 PM
workers compensation tacked on another $1.1 billion in expenses.
:lol:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 10, 2012, 06:58:34 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 09, 2012, 10:50:08 PM
workers compensation tacked on another $1.1 billion in expenses.
:lol:
That's a lot of diabetic black people with bad shoulders, but it wouldn't be a problem if the USPS wasn't being forced to pay 75 years' of future benefits in a 10 year period.
And if they were allowed to take back the $75 billion last year they've already overpaid into retirement funds for future employees that aren't even born yet, it wouldn't even show on the radar.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 10, 2012, 08:32:15 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 10, 2012, 06:58:34 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 09, 2012, 10:50:08 PM
workers compensation tacked on another $1.1 billion in expenses.
:lol:
That's a lot of diabetic black people with bad shoulders, but it wouldn't be a problem if the USPS wasn't being forced to pay 75 years' of future benefits in a 10 year period.
And if they were allowed to take back the $75 billion last year they've already overpaid into retirement funds for future employees that aren't even born yet, it wouldn't even show on the radar.
I need to re-read this, but it on first glance it looks like you somehow managed not to blame the GOP or Mitt Romney. Way to be!!
Quote from: derspiess on August 10, 2012, 09:06:26 AM
I need to re-read this, but it on first glance it looks like you somehow managed not to blame the GOP or Mitt Romney. Way to be!!
No, Mittens wasn't around in 2006 when Congress figured out a way to break the USPS in order to privatize it.
But I'm sure his stock in UPS and FedEx aren't going to be hurt by it.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 10, 2012, 09:07:54 AM
Quote from: derspiess on August 10, 2012, 09:06:26 AM
I need to re-read this, but it on first glance it looks like you somehow managed not to blame the GOP or Mitt Romney. Way to be!!
No, Mittens wasn't around in 2006 when Congress figured out a way to break the USPS in order to privatize it.
But I'm sure his stock in UPS and FedEx aren't going to be hurt by it.
That's the Seedy I know.
Quote from: derspiess on August 10, 2012, 09:09:45 AM
That's the Seedy I know.
Can't wait till they do the same thing to the Department of Defense or NASA.
Oh, but they won't.
Anyone understand the rationale for pre-paying the pension?
So...basically they would be doing fine without having to pay massive pensions and benefits? :hmm:
Blackwater made it pretty clear that private military doesn't work so great.
Sadly for the USPS, UPS and Fedex made it clear that private mail and package delivery works just fine.
Honestly, I am just stunned that a federal program run by the government employing tens of thousands of union workers might be having trouble meeting their sweetheart labor deals.
QuoteThe Postal Service originally sought to close low-revenue post offices in rural areas to save money, but after public opposition, massive union opposition it is now moving forward with a new plan to keep 13,000 open
Fixed their post.
Quote from: Valmy on August 10, 2012, 09:27:49 AM
So...basically they would be doing fine without having to pay massive pensions and benefits? :hmm:
Pretty much, yes. Or at least manageable. When you have to pay 75 years' worth of retirement costs into a 10 year period to the tune of $5+ billion a year--and you're the only organization forced to do so--you're going to get crunched. But that's the point of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 To destroy it.
They overpaid it by several billions last year, and our good friend Dan Issa wouldn't return it; said it would be the equivalent of a tax-payer bailout. :lol:
Quote from: Berkut on August 10, 2012, 09:30:16 AM
Blackwater made it pretty clear that private military doesn't work so great.
Sadly for the USPS, UPS and Fedex made it clear that private mail and package delivery works just fine.
Honestly, I am just stunned that a federal program run by the government employing tens of thousands of union workers might be having trouble meeting their sweetheart labor deals.
QuoteThe Postal Service originally sought to close low-revenue post offices in rural areas to save money, but after public opposition, massive union opposition it is now moving forward with a new plan to keep 13,000 open
Fixed their post.
In small rural area, that's the same people.
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 10, 2012, 09:37:23 AM
In small rural area, that's the same people.
Yeah, the public couldn't possibly get upset about losing their post offices or loss of services. It just MUST be the Jimmy Hoffa types.
DELIVERING THE MAIL IS MERELY AN OVERTIME SCHEME
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 10, 2012, 09:41:32 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 10, 2012, 09:37:23 AM
In small rural area, that's the same people.
Yeah, the public couldn't possibly get upset about losing their post offices or loss of services. It just MUST be the Jimmy Hoffa types.
DELIVERING THE MAIL IS MERELY AN OVERTIME SCHEME
My understanding is that a lot of those small, rural post offices aren't run by actual USPS employees, but are run by people who are contracted to do the job. A lot of them are located within little mom-and-pop type general stores, and are run by the same people who run the stores. So they're definately not unionized, and I would assume that as contracters, they don't get benefits or pensions, but I'm not 100% sure of that.
And for the most part, those real little post offices offer very few services--mostly it's just a wall of P.O. boxes inside the store. Local people might not want to lose their post office, but it's more a matter of local pride than worrying about services.
Why should the public being upset influence decisions to close post offices that do not do enough business to justify their cost?
Obviously not so many people are using them, hence there cannot be that many people being upset.
Surely the people in the union who would be laid off if they closed 13,000 post offices that are no longer needed don't mind at all, and surely their giant unions have no influence whatsoever.
I really liked that the unions opposed the amendment to the post office bail out act that demanded that the arbitrator for the postal workers contract consider the actual financial reality of the post office when considering their contract.
What? Actually consider whether the post office can afford to pay for their salaries? Sacrilege! That goes against everything unions stand for!
Quote from: Berkut on August 10, 2012, 10:19:45 AM
Why should the public being upset influence decisions to close post offices that do not do enough business to justify their cost?
Obviously not so many people are using them, hence there cannot be that many people being upset.
You obviously don't live in a small town. People of small towns will usually oppose anything that will threaten the existence of their city, like school closing & post office reduction.
That's also the mistake, National Post offices shouldn't be run like private enterprises.
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 10, 2012, 10:45:06 AM
That's also the mistake, National Post offices shouldn't be run like private enterprises.
Once upon a time, it used to be a cabinet position.
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 10, 2012, 10:45:06 AM
That's also the mistake, National Post offices shouldn't be run like private enterprises.
Well, at least we've avoided that "mistake" by a wide margin.
Quote from: derspiess on August 10, 2012, 10:46:59 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 10, 2012, 10:45:06 AM
That's also the mistake, National Post offices shouldn't be run like private enterprises.
Well, at least we've avoided that "mistake" by a wide margin.
So far, it seems that it's coming fast.
Actually, it's going to be way worse. You'll depend on UPS. :lol: :pinch:
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 10, 2012, 10:49:00 AM
Actually, it's going to be way worse. You'll depend on UPS. :lol: :pinch:
What's your beef with UPS? :huh:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 10, 2012, 10:53:21 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 10, 2012, 10:49:00 AM
Actually, it's going to be way worse. You'll depend on UPS. :lol: :pinch:
What's your beef with UPS? :huh:
Unreliable at delivering to Domestic addresses. No one is home at 1pm, stop trying!
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 10, 2012, 10:45:06 AM
Quote from: Berkut on August 10, 2012, 10:19:45 AM
Why should the public being upset influence decisions to close post offices that do not do enough business to justify their cost?
Obviously not so many people are using them, hence there cannot be that many people being upset.
You obviously don't live in a small town. People of small towns will usually oppose anything that will threaten the existence of their city, like school closing & post office reduction.
That's also the mistake, National Post offices shouldn't be run like private enterprises.
Yeah, I imagine it'd be a bitch to drive 30 miles every day to get the mail.
Quote from: Berkut on August 10, 2012, 10:19:45 AM
Why should the public being upset influence decisions to close post offices that do not do enough business to justify their cost?
Obviously not so many people are using them, hence there cannot be that many people being upset.
The theory is that the country needs to be well connected through communications. No one is going to open a business in a place they can't communicate with, even if there are resources there that are worth exploiting. A low cost postal service covering rural areas is an investment in the development of the country.
This was probably a lot more relevant 100 years ago. Seems it might be better to expand internet access to achieve the same aims.
Quote from: alfred russel on August 10, 2012, 11:10:26 AM
Quote from: Berkut on August 10, 2012, 10:19:45 AM
Why should the public being upset influence decisions to close post offices that do not do enough business to justify their cost?
Obviously not so many people are using them, hence there cannot be that many people being upset.
The theory is that the country needs to be well connected through communications. No one is going to open a business in a place they can't communicate with, even if there are resources there that are worth exploiting. A low cost postal service covering rural areas is an investment in the development of the country.
This was probably a lot more relevant 100 years ago. Seems it might be better to expand internet access to achieve the same aims.
Indeed. The post office as a public service was a very valid idea for a long time.
Not so much anymore.
And I don't think there has been ANY suggestion so far by anyone to end postal delivery service to anyone in any case. Closing post offices does not mean the mail is no longer going to be delivered.
Can you force UPS to deliver? If they decide that a geographical area just isn't economical to service?
Quote from: Berkut on August 10, 2012, 11:13:00 AMAnd I don't think there has been ANY suggestion so far by anyone to end postal delivery service to anyone in any case. Closing post offices does not mean the mail is no longer going to be delivered.
I could imagine this to be a vicious circle though: less post offices might mean less mail, which may then not be enough to cover the operating cost.
That said, I think the days of paper-based communication are over and we need to rethink the concept of a postal service for mail.
In a somewhat related note, Argentina, which is flirting with going the way of Venezuela, nationalized its major airline a few years ago. I was recently on a flight where there was an insert with the president of the country explaining the move. She commented that profits should not be a primary focus of the airline, or the rural parts of the country would have to get around on donkeys. Apparently your transport options in argentina are modern passenger jets, or donkeys. Buses, cars, and even horses must not suited for travel.
Quote from: Zanza on August 10, 2012, 11:18:17 AM
Quote from: Berkut on August 10, 2012, 11:13:00 AMAnd I don't think there has been ANY suggestion so far by anyone to end postal delivery service to anyone in any case. Closing post offices does not mean the mail is no longer going to be delivered.
I could imagine this to be a vicious circle though: less post offices might mean less mail, which may then not be enough to cover the operating cost.
That said, I think the days of paper-based communication are over and we need to rethink the concept of a postal service for mail.
But USPS workers are unionized. THIS CANNOT HAPPEN.
From an investment standpoint, it seems to me that front-loading those retirement costs now could have a compounding effect in future years that would make it much easier for the USPS to be profitable, say, ten years out. Right?
That seems worth running a loss for a little while.
Quote from: alfred russel on August 10, 2012, 11:21:29 AM
In a somewhat related note, Argentina, which is flirting with going the way of Venezuela, nationalized its major airline a few years ago. I was recently on a flight where there was an insert with the president of the country explaining the move. She commented that profits should not be a primary focus of the airline, or the rural parts of the country would have to get around on donkeys. Apparently your transport options in argentina are modern passenger jets, or donkeys. Buses, cars, and even horses must not suited for travel.
On a general note, I can't wait until the Royal Marines assrape the Argies again.
Quote from: Ed Anger on August 10, 2012, 11:58:03 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on August 10, 2012, 11:21:29 AM
In a somewhat related note, Argentina, which is flirting with going the way of Venezuela, nationalized its major airline a few years ago. I was recently on a flight where there was an insert with the president of the country explaining the move. She commented that profits should not be a primary focus of the airline, or the rural parts of the country would have to get around on donkeys. Apparently your transport options in argentina are modern passenger jets, or donkeys. Buses, cars, and even horses must not suited for travel.
On a general note, I can't wait until the Royal Marines assrape the Argies again.
Those days are gone. Tyr is Britain's future now. Contemplate that and weep.
Quote from: HVC on August 10, 2012, 12:13:26 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on August 10, 2012, 11:58:03 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on August 10, 2012, 11:21:29 AM
In a somewhat related note, Argentina, which is flirting with going the way of Venezuela, nationalized its major airline a few years ago. I was recently on a flight where there was an insert with the president of the country explaining the move. She commented that profits should not be a primary focus of the airline, or the rural parts of the country would have to get around on donkeys. Apparently your transport options in argentina are modern passenger jets, or donkeys. Buses, cars, and even horses must not suited for travel.
On a general note, I can't wait until the Royal Marines assrape the Argies again.
Those days are gone. Tyr is Britain's future now. Contemplate that and weep.
:cry:
Quote from: HVC on August 10, 2012, 12:13:26 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on August 10, 2012, 11:58:03 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on August 10, 2012, 11:21:29 AM
In a somewhat related note, Argentina, which is flirting with going the way of Venezuela, nationalized its major airline a few years ago. I was recently on a flight where there was an insert with the president of the country explaining the move. She commented that profits should not be a primary focus of the airline, or the rural parts of the country would have to get around on donkeys. Apparently your transport options in argentina are modern passenger jets, or donkeys. Buses, cars, and even horses must not suited for travel.
On a general note, I can't wait until the Royal Marines assrape the Argies again.
Those days are gone. Tyr is Britain's future now. Contemplate that and weep.
I don't believe that for one minute.
Quote from: garbon on August 10, 2012, 12:25:07 PM
Quote from: HVC on August 10, 2012, 12:13:26 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on August 10, 2012, 11:58:03 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on August 10, 2012, 11:21:29 AM
In a somewhat related note, Argentina, which is flirting with going the way of Venezuela, nationalized its major airline a few years ago. I was recently on a flight where there was an insert with the president of the country explaining the move. She commented that profits should not be a primary focus of the airline, or the rural parts of the country would have to get around on donkeys. Apparently your transport options in argentina are modern passenger jets, or donkeys. Buses, cars, and even horses must not suited for travel.
On a general note, I can't wait until the Royal Marines assrape the Argies again.
Those days are gone. Tyr is Britain’s future now. Contemplate that and weep.
I don't believe that for one minute.
There are chavs everywhere! Plus, you know, aren't they getting rid of all their boats? Ships! Manly men call them ships. I must remember.
Sure there will be sheilbh like conclaves here and there (and they'll be
fabulous)
I wasn't meaning the marine bit - just that Britain was full-up of Tyrs.
Forgotten Realms aside, I always thought Tyr was more Norse than limey.
I see Andy Capp.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 10, 2012, 09:26:23 AM
Anyone understand the rationale for pre-paying the pension?
Pensions should be pre-paid, or rather fully funded. Only the governments can get away with pay-as-you-go plans. Is the USPS thing different from mere funding of pension plans?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 10, 2012, 09:11:59 AM
Quote from: derspiess on August 10, 2012, 09:09:45 AM
That's the Seedy I know.
Can't wait till they do the same thing to the Department of Defense or NASA.
Oh, but they won't.
Wait, why would they kill NASA?
Quote from: garbon on August 10, 2012, 12:36:49 PM
I wasn't meaning the marine bit - just that Britain was full-up of Tyrs.
Japan, OTOH...
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 01:08:03 PM
Pensions should be pre-paid, or rather fully funded. Only the governments can get away with pay-as-you-go plans. Is the USPS thing different from mere funding of pension plans?
The USPS thing is different from mere funding of pension plans.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 10, 2012, 01:56:28 PM
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 01:08:03 PM
Pensions should be pre-paid, or rather fully funded. Only the governments can get away with pay-as-you-go plans. Is the USPS thing different from mere funding of pension plans?
The USPS thing is different from mere funding of pension plans.
In what way?
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 01:57:38 PM
In what way?
My understanding is they have to pre-pay pension contributions for a signficant period into the future.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 10, 2012, 03:15:45 PM
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 01:57:38 PM
In what way?
My understanding is they have to pre-pay pension contributions for a signficant period into the future.
That doesn't make sense. Unless you need to catch up because your pension fund is underfunded, the yearly contributions should be tied to the yearly increase in pension liabilities. Then again, I'm not a pension actuary.
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 03:33:06 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 10, 2012, 03:15:45 PM
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 01:57:38 PM
In what way?
My understanding is they have to pre-pay pension contributions for a signficant period into the future.
That doesn't make sense. Unless you need to catch up because your pension fund is underfunded, the yearly contributions should be tied to the yearly increase in pension liabilities. Then again, I'm not a pension actuary.
There are several kinds? :bleeding:
Quote from: HVC on August 10, 2012, 12:13:26 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on August 10, 2012, 11:58:03 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on August 10, 2012, 11:21:29 AM
In a somewhat related note, Argentina, which is flirting with going the way of Venezuela, nationalized its major airline a few years ago. I was recently on a flight where there was an insert with the president of the country explaining the move. She commented that profits should not be a primary focus of the airline, or the rural parts of the country would have to get around on donkeys. Apparently your transport options in argentina are modern passenger jets, or donkeys. Buses, cars, and even horses must not suited for travel.
On a general note, I can't wait until the Royal Marines assrape the Argies again.
Those days are gone. Tyr is Britain's future now. Contemplate that and weep.
The Royal Marines will do just fine, they're well provided with equipment and the Royal Navy's amphibious lift/assault ships are up the job.
The main SBS base is just down the road from here and they seem to have plenty of nifty equipment. :ph34r:
However the lack of air cover, aircraft carriers along with the dearth of surface AA and surface combat ships would probably be an insurmountable problem. <_<
Quote from: Neil on August 10, 2012, 01:39:57 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 10, 2012, 09:11:59 AM
Quote from: derspiess on August 10, 2012, 09:09:45 AM
That's the Seedy I know.
Can't wait till they do the same thing to the Department of Defense or NASA.
Oh, but they won't.
Wait, why would they kill NASA?
They keep talking about antediluvian dates.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 10, 2012, 05:28:37 PM
Quote from: Neil on August 10, 2012, 01:39:57 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 10, 2012, 09:11:59 AM
Quote from: derspiess on August 10, 2012, 09:09:45 AM
That's the Seedy I know.
Can't wait till they do the same thing to the Department of Defense or NASA.
Oh, but they won't.
Wait, why would they kill NASA?
They keep talking about antediluvian dates.
They keep very well when dried actually.
Quote from: The Brain on August 10, 2012, 05:31:43 PM
They keep very well when dried actually.
It's all the sugar.
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 03:33:06 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 10, 2012, 03:15:45 PM
My understanding is they have to pre-pay pension contributions for a signficant period into the future.
That doesn't make sense. Unless you need to catch up because your pension fund is underfunded, the yearly contributions should be tied to the yearly increase in pension liabilities. Then again, I'm not a pension actuary.
They removed the USPS from paying into the federal civilian pension fund--where everybody had 7% of their paycheck deducted and set aside--and forced it to build up a fund that it can start drawing from in 2017.
Pre-paying pension funds isn't necessarily a bad idea--except when the next 75 years' worth of projected costs are required to be paid inside of 10 years.
QuotePOSTAL SERVICE RETIREMENT AND HEALTH BENEFITS FUNDING
The United States Postal Service shall pay into such Fund–
$5,400,000,000, not later than September 30, 2007;
$5,400,000,000, not later than September 30, 2008;
$5,400,000,000, not later than September 30, 2009;
$5,500,000,000, not later than September 30, 2010;
$5,500,000,000, not later than September 30, 2011;
$5,600,000,000, not later than September 30, 2012;
$5,600,000,000, not later than September 30, 2013;
$5,700,000,000, not later than September 30, 2014;
$5,700,000,000, not later than September 30, 2015; and
$5,800,000,000, not later than September 30, 2016.
The Postal Service Retiree Health Benefit Fund already has more than $42 billion in it right now: equivalent to the projected costs of the next 20 years' of retiree health premiums. And, they've already overpaid $6.9 billion into another federal pension plan, FERS last year alone; and yet, when they ask for the money they've overpaid back in order balance their operational losses, they're told no.
They have been forced to overpay into the retirement fund at an astronomical rate, far beyond what is needed. Because that's what you do when you want to break government, and privatize its services.
Fun fact: if it were not for the pre-payment requirements, the USPS would've turned a $110 million operational surplus in 2011.
So honestly--if the USPS has posted a net $20 billion loss from 2007 to 2010, but has paid over $21 billion into the pension fund over the same amount of time, is it really as broken as it looks?
But no, it's obviously a union's fault somewhere. Even the one that agreed to jettison 110,000 jobs since the 2008 meltdown, 1/5th of the USPS workforce.
Seems like pre-paying all of the funds required to cover just the current obligations of the fund plus those projected for the current employees would be sufficient.
Or maybe that does equal about the 75 year limit, I dunno.
Keep the USPS, and jettison the TSA.
Heck, jettison the entire Dept of Homeland Security, and put the Coast Guard back under the Navy where it belongs.
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 12:09:45 AM
Keep the USPS, and jettison the TSA.
Heck, jettison the entire Dept of Homeland Security, and put the Coast Guard back under the Navy where it belongs.
Amen on both counts.
Every time I hear "homeland", I want to choke someone.
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 01:09:57 AM
Every time I hear "homeland", I want to choke someone.
It's just so...well...British. Ya know?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 11, 2012, 12:14:15 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 12:09:45 AM
Keep the USPS, and jettison the TSA.
Heck, jettison the entire Dept of Homeland Security, and put the Coast Guard back under the Navy where it belongs.
Amen on both counts.
Fucking Puddle Pirates.
Quote from: 11B4V on August 11, 2012, 01:50:20 AM
Fucking Puddle Pirates.
:lol:
That's awesome, never heard that one before.
:mad: But you forget: the United States Coast Guard fights what you fear: Haitians. And Cubans on floating Edsels.
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 12:09:45 AM
Keep the USPS, and jettison the TSA.
Heck, jettison the entire Dept of Homeland Security, and put the Coast Guard back under the Navy where it belongs.
The Coast Guard was never under the Navy, except in time of war. It was part of the Treasury Department until the 1960's, when it was moved to the Department of Transportation, and then moved to Homeland Security a decade ago.
True, dps...and as the USN and the USCG really have different missions, it wouldn't make real sense to put them under the Dept of the Navy.
Quote from: dps on August 11, 2012, 01:59:55 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 12:09:45 AM
Keep the USPS, and jettison the TSA.
Heck, jettison the entire Dept of Homeland Security, and put the Coast Guard back under the Navy where it belongs.
The Coast Guard was never under the Navy, except in time of war. It was part of the Treasury Department until the 1960's, when it was moved to the Department of Transportation, and then moved to Homeland Security a decade ago.
Yes. The Departments;
Army
Air Farce
Navy
are the only real ones.
Marine Corps: just Naval Infantry really.
Quote from: dps on August 11, 2012, 01:59:55 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 12:09:45 AM
Keep the USPS, and jettison the TSA.
Heck, jettison the entire Dept of Homeland Security, and put the Coast Guard back under the Navy where it belongs.
The Coast Guard was never under the Navy, except in time of war. It was part of the Treasury Department until the 1960's, when it was moved to the Department of Transportation, and then moved to Homeland Security a decade ago.
It is a time of war. :P
Also, everything in DoHS should really belong in Justice/Interior. Hell, even if were to accept that TSA should exist, it should be in Transportation.
And we should chuck the ATF and DEA too...should be, at best, sub-departments of the FBI. It's not like every freakin' Department needs their own cops.
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 02:21:29 AM
And we should chuck the ATF and DEA too...should be, at best, sub-departments of the FBI. It's not like every freakin' Department needs their own cops.
What, and make the ATF and DEA even dumber? If anybody needs to be swung under FBI and Justice Department, its the Securities and Exchange Commission. Now THAT should be an arm of the FBI.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 11, 2012, 02:32:41 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 02:21:29 AM
And we should chuck the ATF and DEA too...should be, at best, sub-departments of the FBI. It's not like every freakin' Department needs their own cops.
What, and make the ATF and DEA even dumber? If anybody needs to be swung under FBI and Justice Department, its the Securities and Exchange Commission. Now THAT should be an arm of the FBI.
I'd put the SEC under the army. Sure they aren't the best investigators, but the trials are cheaper and quicker.
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 02:21:29 AM
It's not like every freakin' Department needs their own cops.
That's one of those things I never got about the USA. Where I lived in the US, the university had some kind of armed police force, the subway had its own police force, the highway had its own police force, the airport had its own police force, then there was the general police force, but that changed to another one when you just drove a mile or so to the next place. Seems hugely inefficient to have so many different agencies for what is pretty much the same general task.
That's to keep our cops from being totalitarian tools of a police state. They'd never be able to properly coordinate our oppression. ^_^
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 03:33:06 PM
That doesn't make sense. Unless you need to catch up because your pension fund is underfunded, the yearly contributions should be tied to the yearly increase in pension liabilities. Then again, I'm not a pension actuary.
Which is why I asked if anyone knew the rationale.
Seedy has proposed the theory that it's an excercise in union-busting, but that theory runs into the difficulty of explaining how an excercise in union busting passed a Democratic controlled Senate.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 11, 2012, 01:16:26 PM
Quote from: DGuller on August 10, 2012, 03:33:06 PM
That doesn't make sense. Unless you need to catch up because your pension fund is underfunded, the yearly contributions should be tied to the yearly increase in pension liabilities. Then again, I'm not a pension actuary.
Which is why I asked if anyone knew the rationale.
Seedy has proposed the theory that it's an excercise in union-busting, but that theory runs into the difficulty of explaining how an excercise in union busting passed a Democratic controlled Senate.
So the problem is that it is contrary to preconceived assumptions?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 11, 2012, 01:16:26 PM
Seedy has proposed the theory that it's an excercise in union-busting, but that theory runs into the difficulty of explaining how an excercise in union busting passed a Democratic controlled Senate.
The houses of the 109th Congress were both controlled by the Republican Party. The election winners didn't assume office until February, 2007 or whenever they fuck they're sworn in. January?
The Postal Accountability and Fuck Over The USPS Because It Has Union Employees Act was passed on the last day of session in December, 2006.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 11, 2012, 01:26:39 PM
So the problem is that it is contrary to preconceived assumptions?
Assumption, singular.
And honestly, I don't think it's as much union busting as much as it is an attempt to privatize it 100%.
And besides, what better way to force privatization and shrink gubmint than to legislate an organization into bankruptcy?
The myth that somehow it's a dysfunctional organization because it has union employees is just an extra bonus illusion for Teabagger whackoff fantasies.
Hopefully, when mail is privatized, all that junk mail will stop, with the rates being 10x what they are now.
Quote from: DGuller on August 11, 2012, 02:34:04 PM
Hopefully, when mail is privatized, all that junk mail will stop, with the rates being 10x what they are now.
Means more minimum wage jobs for people to go around hand delivering flyers.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on August 11, 2012, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: DGuller on August 11, 2012, 02:34:04 PM
Hopefully, when mail is privatized, all that junk mail will stop, with the rates being 10x what they are now.
Means more minimum wage jobs for people to go around hand delivering flyers.
I can avoid people with fliers. I can't avoid having tons of shit clogging up my mailbox.
Quote from: DGuller on August 11, 2012, 02:34:04 PM
Hopefully, when mail is privatized, all that junk mail will stop, with the rates being 10x what they are now.
Junk mail will still be economical in urban areas.
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 11, 2012, 12:09:45 AM
Keep the USPS, and jettison the TSA.
Heck, jettison the entire Dept of Homeland Security, and put the Coast Guard back under the Navy where it belongs.
This.
And I say that as a foreigner. :bowler:
Quote from: mongers on August 11, 2012, 04:54:14 PM
And I say that as a foreigner. :bowler:
Well duh. For most foreigners Homeland Security imposes costs and no benefits. :huh:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 11, 2012, 05:54:49 PM
Quote from: mongers on August 11, 2012, 04:54:14 PM
And I say that as a foreigner. :bowler:
Well duh. For most foreigners Homeland Security imposes costs and no benefits. :huh:
:huh: What about the gentle caressing of genitals?
Quote from: DGuller on August 11, 2012, 07:03:34 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 11, 2012, 05:54:49 PM
Quote from: mongers on August 11, 2012, 04:54:14 PM
And I say that as a foreigner. :bowler:
Well duh. For most foreigners Homeland Security imposes costs and no benefits. :huh:
:huh: What about the gentle caressing of genitals?
Remind me never to go to Russia. I seriously don't want airport security to caress me with their genitals.
Quote from: DGuller on August 11, 2012, 02:37:24 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on August 11, 2012, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: DGuller on August 11, 2012, 02:34:04 PM
Hopefully, when mail is privatized, all that junk mail will stop, with the rates being 10x what they are now.
Means more minimum wage jobs for people to go around hand delivering flyers.
I can avoid people with fliers. I can't avoid having tons of shit clogging up my mailbox.
Over here you can put stickers on your mailbox that you don't want unsolicited junk mail that companies/mailmen have to follow. It's 90-95% effective.
Quote from: Syt on August 11, 2012, 10:41:50 PM
Over here you can put stickers on your mailbox that you don't want unsolicited junk mail that companies/mailmen have to follow. It's 90-95% effective.
How can mailmen possibly follow that? It's not their job to pre-sort the mail, their job is to just drop it off in the right box. Does mail delivery work differently in Austria?
Quote from: DGuller on August 11, 2012, 10:50:00 PM
Quote from: Syt on August 11, 2012, 10:41:50 PM
Over here you can put stickers on your mailbox that you don't want unsolicited junk mail that companies/mailmen have to follow. It's 90-95% effective.
How can mailmen possibly follow that? It's not their job to pre-sort the mail, their job is to just drop it off in the right box. Does mail delivery work differently in Austria?
I should clarify: this only goes for non-adressed flyers, or ad-funded "newspapers". If junk mail carries your name, you're out of luck. However, personalized junk is very uncommon, whereas supermarket fliers delivered to a typical Vienna household can reach 100+ kg per year.
Same in Sweden.
But back to what DGul said - does the postman pre-sort your mail then when he sees a sticker on your mailbox?
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:26:54 AM
But back to what DGul said - does the postman pre-sort your mail then when he sees a sticker on your mailbox?
Why would the postman deliver stuff that isn't addressed to you?
Quote from: The Brain on August 12, 2012, 09:30:23 AM
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:26:54 AM
But back to what DGul said - does the postman pre-sort your mail then when he sees a sticker on your mailbox?
Why would the postman deliver stuff that isn't addressed to you?
Because it is addressed to my address and says current resident? :huh:
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:31:19 AM
Quote from: The Brain on August 12, 2012, 09:30:23 AM
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:26:54 AM
But back to what DGul said - does the postman pre-sort your mail then when he sees a sticker on your mailbox?
Why would the postman deliver stuff that isn't addressed to you?
Because it is addressed to my address and says current resident? :huh:
Then it is unlikely to be a flyer or similar with no address on it. Do you disagree?
I don't understand why a completely non-addressed flier would be put in a mailbox (/why one would need a sticker to prevent that)/ I don't think that's what DGuller was thinking when he was talking about junk mail.
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:35:32 AM
I don't understand why a completely non-addressed flier would be put in a mailbox (/why one would need a sticker to prevent that)/ I don't think that's what DGuller was thinking when he was talking about junk mail.
You conveniently disregarded Syt's clarification?
Well his clarification actually states that if it carries your name you are out of luck...so I'd say his post is a bit opaque. I don't understand how unaddressed mail would get in your mailbox. How would they know to deliver it to you?
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:45:52 AM
Well his clarification actually states that if it carries your name you are out of luck...so I'd say his post is a bit opaque. I don't understand how unaddressed mail would get in your mailbox. How would they know to deliver it to you?
Company pays kid to drop flyers in the mailboxes in an area. Kid ignores the ones with "no ads plz" signs.
Quote from: The Brain on August 12, 2012, 09:30:23 AM
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:26:54 AM
But back to what DGul said - does the postman pre-sort your mail then when he sees a sticker on your mailbox?
Why would the postman deliver stuff that isn't addressed to you?
They do it all the time. At my last address my weekly ritual when getting th mail out of the apartment complex' mail box was to go through it and put all the mail that should have gone to other apartments or other buildings back in the drop. They were pretty bad.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on August 12, 2012, 09:58:58 AM
Quote from: The Brain on August 12, 2012, 09:30:23 AM
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:26:54 AM
But back to what DGul said - does the postman pre-sort your mail then when he sees a sticker on your mailbox?
Why would the postman deliver stuff that isn't addressed to you?
They do it all the time. At my last address my weekly ritual when getting th mail out of the apartment complex' mail box was to go through it and put all the mail that should have gone to other apartments or other buildings back in the drop. They were pretty bad.
That's a mistake.
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:45:52 AM
Well his clarification actually states that if it carries your name you are out of luck...so I'd say his post is a bit opaque. I don't understand how unaddressed mail would get in your mailbox. How would they know to deliver it to you?
Companies pay postal service to deliver flyers/ad magazines along with the mail. In fact, the postal service has its own weekly flyer with non-news in which they put additional flyers from ad customers. In Vienna you'll also get small plastic bags with flyers on your door knob (distributed by kids/youths/poor people) unless you have a sticker on your door that you don't want that shit.
In Austria it used to be that in most places, esp. apartment buildings, the mailboxes were locked, with no slit. The mailmen had keys to those boxes. Since the EU considered that an unfair advantage for the public postal service we now got ones with your usual mail slit, so despite having a sticker for "no unaddressed flyers, please" I now get flyers and shit from food delivery services and other shit.
Personally, those ocmpanies go on my "I'll never buy from you" list. If they can't pay attention to my not wanting their unsolicited crap, I don't have much faith in their paying much attention to customers' wishes in general.
Quote from: The Brain on August 12, 2012, 09:48:31 AM
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:45:52 AM
Well his clarification actually states that if it carries your name you are out of luck...so I'd say his post is a bit opaque. I don't understand how unaddressed mail would get in your mailbox. How would they know to deliver it to you?
Company pays kid to drop flyers in the mailboxes in an area. Kid ignores the ones with "no ads plz" signs.
I think that's illegal here / here in the city the best they can do is stick it somewhat under my door as it isn't possible to each inside the mailboxes.
Quote from: Syt on August 12, 2012, 10:03:16 AM
Companies pay postal service to deliver flyers/ad magazines along with the mail. In fact, the postal service has its own weekly flyer with non-news in which they put additional flyers from ad customers. In Vienna you'll also get small plastic bags with flyers on your door knob (distributed by kids/youths/poor people) unless you have a sticker on your door that you don't want that shit.
Gotcha. I get those same sort of flyers ("Valpak coupons!") but they at the very minimum always have my address listed.
Quote from: Syt on August 12, 2012, 10:03:16 AM
In Austria it used to be that in most places, esp. apartment buildings, the mailboxes were locked, with no slit. The mailmen had keys to those boxes. Since the EU considered that an unfair advantage for the public postal service we now got ones with your usual mail slit, so despite having a sticker for "no unaddressed flyers, please" I now get flyers and shit from food delivery services and other shit.
The US answer was to make it illegal for anyone but the (semi-)public postal service to deliver anything to mailboxes.
So we end up with Chinese and pizza delivery menus on the doorknob instead.
Quote from: The Brain on August 12, 2012, 09:48:31 AM
Quote from: garbon on August 12, 2012, 09:45:52 AM
Well his clarification actually states that if it carries your name you are out of luck...so I'd say his post is a bit opaque. I don't understand how unaddressed mail would get in your mailbox. How would they know to deliver it to you?
Company pays kid to drop flyers in the mailboxes in an area. Kid ignores the ones with "no ads plz" signs.
In the US, it's not legal for anybody to put anything except mail delivered by the USPS in your mailbox, so some kid with flyers can't do that here.
EDIT: Well, heck I skipped ahead. I see this was already pointed out.