Obama goes postal

[midlifebear]

But back to the organization called The US Post Office. I agree, they are not the best example of professional expediency. For several years I had the corporate responsibility dumped upon my department to develop, design, and layout and send all of a corporation's 2nd class mail (junk mail/direct mail marketing or whatever glossy name you want to cover up such wasteful evil).

I dutifully arranged for everyone in my department to attend the series of "How to do mass mailing" classes offered by the Post Office. We all left with large photocopied manuals with all of the rules. After the last class the "instructor" asked if we would like to take a tour of the facilities (it was the Salt Lake City central clearing operation, of the the larger Post Office clearing houses in the west). We innocently volunteered to follow a Post Office employee whose day is not chock full of anxiety and pressure. All he did was give classes, following a monthly schedule and drag the curious around on short tours.

We were led behind the scenes to see the saddest people in the world. Men and women sitting at sorting machines where they were required to process 40 pieces of mail per minute (minimum) by keying in the partial postal code (if it could be read) of an onslaught of envelopes from tiny Hallmark Valentine size to large flat paquettes. Once a piece was keyed in visually (supposedly, this is now scanned automatically) these rows upon rows of very sad people were expected to process up to 50 pieces of mail after doing this work 8 hours a day with two 10 minute breaks and a 30 minute lunch for six months. If they didn't, they were let go. Above everyone were enclosed catwalks with two-way mirrors where the postal inspectors walked above everyone, keeping any eye out for anything and everything.

Yes, the Postal Service is a very scary place behind the cranky front counter workers who sell you stamps that will go up in price in two weeks.

Just how poorly they are run? Only recently did the US Post Office come up with the idea of a generic 1st class stamp without a value in cents on it that can continue to be sold when postal rates go up. They are called "the Forever Stamps", because those Liberty Bell stamps never have to have additional postage added to them. After much deep group thought, the wise men at the post office who make the BIG decisions realized that there were so few stamps left in the hands of the public each time they raised the price, that it was more cost-effective to accept that they might lose a few cents on someone with a few old "Forever Stamps" they bought for 50 cents (or whatever a 1st class stamp now costs) rather than retool and make new stamps with the increased price printed on them. This took how long to figure out? Since the time of Benjamin Franklin?

Yeah, Obama needs to rethink the examples in his arguments. There are some things the US Government does very well. The Air Force, Army, and Navy seem to be doing pretty good, despite presidents with no military experience willing to send them off to the Middle East at the drop of a hat. And it appears (although this is only a recent advancement) the Veteran's Hospitals are run much more efficiently than at any time in the past thanks, in large part, to advancements in the field of medical informatics (vast computer networks with plug and play software that can seamlessly track patient care).

For any LPSG-ers out there who work for the US Post Office, you have my deepest sympathy.

 

[AllHazzardi]

Hmmm... you know, I don't think the PO would actually lose money if it just stuck to forever stamps;

A) A large amount of money can be saved by not needing to design, print, or supply new stamps, this alone would likely cover any potential losses per stamp.

B) Potential losses per stamp are hard to calculate due to certain details. For example, Person A buys a bunch of forever stamps(say, 50) and uses 10 per month. Person B buys a bunch of forever stamps a month after person A and does the same thing. Person C, D, E repeatedly iterate in the same way. For demonstration purposes only, we'll assume a steady rate of increase in cost per stamp per month of 10 cents. Month 1, person A buys 50 stamps at $0.50 each with a total cost of $25. Month 2, person B buys 50 at $0.60 ea, total cost $30. Person C, $35, etc. When Person B is paying for his stamps, Person A is sending 10 pieces of mail(bills, etc), given it is month 2, those 10 pieces of mail cost $6 to send and person A paid $5. This looks like a net loss for the Post Office, however.... When person A bought stamps, person A was effectively paying for previous iterations of the forever stamps bought at cheaper values. Likewise, when person B bought stamps, person B was actually paying for the mail sent by person A. So, while the system does not zero out at any given moment, on the average, it zeroes out with a delay. So while it seems like a net loss when the post office moves 10 pieces of mail for a person who paid $5 for the stamps with an actual cost of $6 for mailing, the carrying of that mail is actually being, effectively, paid for by the first 10 stamps person B is buying. So as you can see, very difficult to accurately predict gain/loss with a system like this.


My personal stance is still the same though; the Post-Office is truly a thing of the past at the current point in technological availability, and we can probably do without it. All we need to do is set up the new system to handle the same necessary purpose which causes us to cling to the old and decaying version.

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

Pssst midlifebear, junk mail is now called Standard mail and it's 3rd class not second. Second class would be your magazines.
It isn't just bad bosses that make the post office tough. The general public can be a nightmare. They scream, curse, are rude, and verbally abusive. They threaten your life, grab your body parts, sexually harass you, and turn their dogs on you. It can be a good day or a day that sucks beyond your imagination.


You should do more research on the post office before you slam it. For starters Congress is constantly demanding money from the post office. Congress is sitting on $32.5 Billion dollars of the post offices money. They demanded the post office pay $55 billion in current and future retiree benefits in a short period of time. They require the postal service to use airlines. They will not let the postal service have it's own planes. It's apples and oranges. Also, lest you forget, in 2001 UPS and FEDEX were going belly up. The taxpayer funded both of them to the tune of over $1 billion dollars a piece. UPS even got some of the money intended for the airlines.
UPS and FEDEX do not have brick and mortar facilities in almost every city in the USA. Privately run business can jack up prices any time they want. The post office can only ask for increases after they have spent the money. Every cent gasoline goes up costs the postal service $14 million dollars a year. There is a lot more to the story than you report but that is very typical of the public, and people on this site.
Before you brag too much about ups and fedex, they ship through the postal service, and they've done it for years.
Also, the post office cannot even combine facilities and close small post offices without an act of Congress. You can't expect a government controlled entity to run like a private one.

surprised nobody here has mentioned this yet...i swear, when this guy does not have his teleprompter, he makes gaffes that would make Bush proud.

for someone as intelligent as he is, who on earth would hold up the US Postal Service as an example for the public health option

“UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems.”

President Barack Obama - August 11th, 2009

i think when trying to get your health care proposal some good press and attention, the last thing you would want to do is compare the future government run-health plan to the United States Postal Service, LOL.

considering that the post office is considered "High Risk" by the Government Accounting Office, that is not really a big positive to show the public as an example of an efficiently run government program

as of this year, the Postal Service is estimating an annual loss of 7 billion, it has a debt of 10 billion as well and is only able to stay in business by shell shifting its prices and with government subsidy.

frightening how bad it is, when it has the monopoly on first class mail. It still cannot run efficiently. It loses money on all its "efficient" services like overnight and next day air, so it *LOWERS* its prices on those, and RAISES the price of stamps.

you cannot find a better program for demonstrating government inefficiency than the USPS...

way to go Mr. President.

next he'll compare the government health option to the Department of Motor Vehicles.

i swear, for someone as intelligent as he is, he is remarkably dumb when speaking off the cuff on important issues.

i think the guy must be deliberately trying to kill his plan if he is trying to reassure people by bringing up the US Postal Service.

 

[transformer_99]

for someone as intelligent as he is, who on earth would hold up the US Postal Service as an example for the public health option

“UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems.”

President Barack Obama - August 11th, 2009

It was a sarcastic joke ? To be honest the US Postal Service does a fine job at delivering packages. Does it take forever to be served ? That happens over at FedEx or even UPS. Recently had a package delivered by DHL here in South Florida. DHL shut down Miami-Dade operations and deliveries, so the package goes to Hallandale, FL and from there it was delivered US Postal Service.

As for UPS, I can't count the number of packages that were delivered that the box looks like an accordion at the corners. FedEx has always delivered without issue. So yes, if Obama's healthcare is like the US Post Office, I would prefer it to the healthcare that is similar to whoever = UPS.