• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The USPS is more than a service. It's a symbol of a functioning society



Most people are all for conserving natural resources. They understand that the natural resources one doesn’t consume will be available for use by somebody else. Sadly, many don’t understand that the same principle applies to labor and capital. The less labor and capital employed to produce any good or service, the more labor and capital is available to produce something else. It can suddenly become intuitively obvious when discussing a road trip from NYC to Miami, FL. Given a choice between taking I95 and driving west to I75 and then going south from there, most would pick I95. The reasoning is obvious, taking I75 would consume more time and more gas.

The USPS is not completely dissimilar, they are producing a service, but bottom line, they're using too much scarce time, labor and capital to produce that service. The people making these decisions don't care because its not their money.
 
Last edited:
If you reduce the subsidy for corn, there will be less corn grown.

Suppose the subsidy costs $20bn (the amount of the proposed bailout), and sure the subsidy brings money into the USPS to sustain its trade.
This is self-evident, I acknowledge it. The postal service does its thing, the mail truck comes, puts the circular in the mailbox, keeps an eye out for mean dogs, gives treats to the nice ones and he finishes the route and goes home.

All this is that which is seen.

However, this is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen.

It is not seen that the taxpayers have spent the subsidy on one thing, the taxpayers cannot spend the subsidy on another.

It is not seen that if they had not had an inefficient postal service to subsidize, they would, perhaps, have done any number of things.

i think that you might have gotten your quote wrong. i said :

Helix said:
But the post office will help people vote against the orange precious without contracting a serious disease during a super spreading event. Some people consider that to be bad somehow.
 
I did, I did not actually mean to attribute that to you. I assure you I did so inadvertently.

no worries; it happens. i'm still trying to figure out the new software.
 
Okay. So? Plenty of people get important info, documents, even checks through the mail.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
They are bloated because very few letters are sent anymore. Who needs them except for the scraggler bills? FedEx is far more efficient. This isn’t 1948.
 
They are bloated because very few letters are sent anymore. Who needs them except for the scraggler bills? FedEx is far more efficient. This isn’t 1948.
No FedEx isn't and wouldn't be if FedEx had to handle the same important documentation the USPS handles. FedEx can and does refuse delivery for its own profit reasons.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
They are the best at it and doing it without denying service for their own interests or profit margins.

Then why don't you support nationalizing food and housing production? Why not have the government take care of everybody's lawn, and handle all pool maintenance? Why don't you support public hair stylists, public auto mechanics, and government-run clothing stores?

I tell you why - because government sucks. The more government control and production in the economy, the worse off everyone gets. Abolishing the post office would, without a doubt, make America richer and better off.

The incompetent, profligate post office has a government-granted monopoly over putting letters in my personal mailbox on my property - and it still loses billions of dollars every year.
 
If rates need to be raised, it should be steadily done. But affordable service is a necessity. It should not just be the rich or well off who get to utilize the service. Most taxpayers do not mind helping to fund the USPS.

Especially given the laws we have in place to protect mail.




Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

An astounding number of people do not seem to understand that USPS is a public service, just not a completely free one given what it would cost.
 
No FedEx isn't and wouldn't be if FedEx had to handle the same important documentation the USPS handles. FedEx can and does refuse delivery for its own profit reasons.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

You do realize they are prohibited by law from doing so.

Get rid of the first class mail monopoly and maybe somebody else will fill that niche as well.
 
You do realize they are prohibited by law from doing so.

Get rid of the first class mail monopoly and maybe somebody else will fill that niche as well.
FedEx refuses certain delivery routes due to failure if app updates. That is not allowed by the postal service.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Wait, "a functioning society" is all about the delivery of super market flyers and fake-official looking extended warranty scams?

I would not have guessed.
 
Back
Top Bottom