USPS still hermoragging money, $2.2B last quarter

[Gigantopithecus]

I'll simply add that the butchery of 'hemorrhage' in the thread title is especially egregious.

 

[woolfe9999]

That's just sick, and reminds me of when we looked at Communist Russia, and knew their days were lost.

Government, totally out of control.

-John

Way to draw extreme and far reaching conclusions from something as mundane as the postal service being short of revenue because people are using e-mail and because gas prices are on the rise. Yup, government totally out of control. Communist Russia all over again.

 

[Macamus Prime]

Wow - the hate on "TEH UNIONZ" is so strong, it's making most of you fucking stupid.

You do realize the USPS has capacity set up to maintain and service all of America. So, what happens when most of America switches to utilizing the internet to send messages & pay bills? Anyone? Anyone at all?

Come on you communist fear mongering diggleberries; its the internet.

It's also the crash of the housing marketing in 2008. Did you know that in the billion dollar a year mailing services business MANY providers tanked - because the big banks stopped issuing junk mail offers on credit cards and loans?? People who were paid to print, insert and prep junk mail no longer had any work. So, they went out of business.

The same thing is happening to the USPS. Everyone is switching to TEH INTERNETZ. Yet, there is still hardware (trucks, machines) and real estate dedicated to meeting the demand of mailing for the USA.

For fucks sake guys.

 

[CPA]

My company used to us USPS long ago but we stopped because the amount of lost packages we had for expensive items ended up costing us more. We save money by going FedEx and the service is better, quicker, and it can be tracked better easier.

But, but, but, according to DCal and the other socialists/communists in the nationalization thread, it would be much better for the government to run things.

 

[CPA]

Wow - the hate on "TEH UNIONZ" is so strong, it's making most of you fucking stupid.

You do realize the USPS has capacity set up to maintain and service all of America. So, what happens when most of America switches to utilizing the internet to send messages & pay bills? Anyone? Anyone at all?

Come on you communist fear mongering diggleberries; its the internet.

It's also the crash of the housing marketing in 2008. Did you know that in the billion dollar a year mailing services business MANY providers tanked - because the big banks stopped issuing junk mail offers on credit cards and loans?? People who were paid to print, insert and prep junk mail no longer had any work. So, they went out of business.

The same thing is happening to the USPS. Everyone is switching to TEH INTERNETZ. Yet, there is still hardware (trucks, machines) and real estate dedicated to meeting the demand of mailing for the USA.

For fucks sake guys.

Ban the Internet! I say.

 

[freegeeks]

Belgium has a socialized health care system though.

The 2 biggest cost for the USPS right now is gas/hauling mail 6 days a week over ALL of the US and Health care cost.
If the USPS did not have to haul mail to EVERYBODY in the US and no health care cost like Belgium it would also make a profit.

you are right, maybe the whole health care system needs an overhaul in the USA?

 

[Throckmorton]

Pensions are bankrupting everything. It's a socialist institution.

GM, Federal, city, and state governments, educational systems, police and firefighter programs (including the ones in my city) are all being brought down by pension plans.

Workers should be taught to take money out of their paycheck to save and invest and not to rely on some program that is not even certain to exist when they retire. A company or organization cannot predict it's revenue/profit 30-40 years from now.

"Workers should be taught..."
LOL


I didn't even think they got pensions, but OK, pay them the same salaries that FedEx and UPS drivers get if you want to take away their pensions.

 

[Throckmorton]

Trying to explain stuff like that to Republicans though it impossible. These are the same people that think that it's ok to change laws to not allow teachers to get what's guaranteed in their contracts, but that when the government had to bail out financial institutions that they shouldn't be allowed to set limits to the millions in executive compensation given out to the people who caused the collapse and received bailouts.

Thing is, I'm not joking, the EXACT same Fox News personalities said both thing about the execs and teachers that I stated.

Republicans only consider a contract legally binding if it screws the little guy.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

Republicans only consider a contract legally binding if it screws the little guy.

the little guy?
EVERY tax payer is getting screwed because we can't fund outrageous public worker pensions.

 

[Vette73]

the little guy?
EVERY tax payer is getting screwed because we can't fund outrageous public worker pensions.

Please show me where it says ANYTHING about pensions being the problem with USPS in your story.

 

[dainthomas]

This thread is epic. 90% of the posts in here are completely ignorant about what the article in the OP says (including the OP himself).

That has to be some kind of record.

 

[ShawnD1]

Belgium has a socialized health care system though.

The 2 biggest cost for the USPS right now is gas/hauling mail 6 days a week over ALL of the US and Health care cost.
If the USPS did not have to haul mail to EVERYBODY in the US and no health care cost like Belgium it would also make a profit.

Fuzzy accounting at its finest. Having socialized healthcare doesn't mean healthcare is suddenly free, it would just move the cost from the USPS category to the healthcare category. Suddenly we're running at a profit even though literally nothing has changed in terms of cost

 

[Axon]

AGAIN since you missed it, Look up CSRS and FERS. CSRS ended about 30 years ago. CSRS = Big pension

The days of living off a good pension ended about 30 years ago for Fed employees. The biggest benifit I and other current FERS employees can get is our TSP (Fed 401k version) and take our health care into retirment.

Okay....we're talking about two different things here. Are you saying USPS employees no longer get pensions, or are you saying those pensions are significantly reduced?

Secondly, I'm saying that the pension problem is deep seated and virtually unsolvable - the only solution is to choose a date and telling the new hires that the concept of a pension is eliminated. The document I posted indicates that the USPS' retirement budget doubled over a period of ten years, and that it seems likely the post office cannot break even simply because of that budgetary shortfall, not to mention the drastic change in the landscape. I get the sense you think my argument is "retired feddies are living like fat cats off teh pensions wtfffff!!!1!" which is not my argument at all. No one is being unappreciative - if I had a pension that was promised me, you're damn right, you'd have to pry it from my cold dead hands. But the reality is the concept of a pension can't be sustained any longer.

This is why I feel like we need IBM Watson as president. He'll just cut, cut, cut. (joke, everyone relax. )

And since you're an inside guy, what's this all about? http://www.uniglobalunion.org/Apps/UNINews.nsf/0/71AF88859F75AC3BC125781F006273FC?Opendocument

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Fuzzy accounting at its finest. Having socialized healthcare doesn't mean healthcare is suddenly free, it would just move the cost from the USPS category to the healthcare category. Suddenly we're running at a profit even though literally nothing has changed in terms of cost

As opposed to private companies who just don't have any healthcare for their lower end workers who just end up not having any health insurance/healthcare since they simply can't afford it. Essentially just hiding the fact that we have a huge issue crushing every sector of our country but the health insurance company part.

 

[CPA]

As opposed to private companies who just don't have any healthcare for their lower end workers who just end up not having any health insurance/healthcare since they simply can't afford it. Essentially just hiding the fact that we have a huge issue crushing every sector of our country but the health insurance company part.

Really? Do you actually believe that? Do you actually believe that most of the companies traded on the DOW, NASDAQ and their ilk don't provide healthcare coverage for their lower end employees? Really?

 

[fleshconsumed]

Trying to explain stuff like that to Republicans though it impossible. These are the same people that think that it's ok to change laws to not allow teachers to get what's guaranteed in their contracts, but that when the government had to bail out financial institutions that they shouldn't be allowed to set limits to the millions in executive compensation given out to the people who caused the collapse and received bailouts.

Thing is, I'm not joking, the EXACT same Fox News personalities said both thing about the execs and teachers that I stated.

Colbert did a show on this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/04/jon-stewart-teachers-walls-street-fox_n_831243.html

It's a good one, too bad right wing residents will dismiss it because it's Colbert on huffingtonpost.

 

[Vette73]

Okay....we're talking about two different things here. Are you saying USPS employees no longer get pensions, or are you saying those pensions are significantly reduced?

Secondly, I'm saying that the pension problem is deep seated and virtually unsolvable - the only solution is to choose a date and telling the new hires that the concept of a pension is eliminated. The document I posted indicates that the USPS' retirement budget doubled over a period of ten years, and that it seems likely the post office cannot break even simply because of that budgetary shortfall, not to mention the drastic change in the landscape. I get the sense you think my argument is "retired feddies are living like fat cats off teh pensions wtfffff!!!1!" which is not my argument at all. No one is being unappreciative - if I had a pension that was promised me, you're damn right, you'd have to pry it from my cold dead hands. But the reality is the concept of a pension can't be sustained any longer.

This is why I feel like we need IBM Watson as president. He'll just cut, cut, cut. (joke, everyone relax. )

And since you're an inside guy, what's this all about? http://www.uniglobalunion.org/Apps/UNINews.nsf/0/71AF88859F75AC3BC125781F006273FC?Opendocument

CSRS, which ended about 30 years ago, was the retiremnet plan that gave GREAT pensions based on service. No SS, all CSRS pension. I wish I could get into that.

FERS, which is what the majority of Fed employees fall under, primary retirement plan is based on the TSP 5% match, TSP being 401k for fed. We pay into a retirement plan as well and get an annuity from that if we work long enough and are old enough. If I retired with my current salary and waitied till I was 57 I would get less than $900 a month BEFORE I pay my share of health insurance and other options.

And not sure about your link as its written very awful. They say pension in the headline YET the funding is for "retiree health care obligations", not pensions.

As said employees are not getting some fat pension. USPS is hurting as they have to PRE-fund retiree health care obligations.

 

[Vette73]

Fuzzy accounting at its finest. Having socialized healthcare doesn't mean healthcare is suddenly free, it would just move the cost from the USPS category to the healthcare category. Suddenly we're running at a profit even though literally nothing has changed in terms of cost

Yet they, like most countries, spend less than the US does on health care but cover more people.
That and the USPS has to PRE-fund its health care based on future cost that many believe are to high.

Instead of fixing health care we keep getting all this mess. USPS should have made a profit the last 4 years if not for the Pre-funding they have to do.

 

[ShawnD1]

As opposed to private companies who just don't have any healthcare for their lower end workers who just end up not having any health insurance/healthcare since they simply can't afford it. Essentially just hiding the fact that we have a huge issue crushing every sector of our country but the health insurance company part.

What's interesting is that it only creates an advantage/disadvantage system because there's a way to opt out, which is what obamacare tried to fix (but did a shitty job of fixing).
If a company wants the best employees, it must offer health benefits, but then it costs a ton of money, blarrrggg!!
In the socialized countries, none of that applies because the healthcare burden is covered by insurance that everyone pays and has no way of escaping. The insurance is paid according to income in those countries whereas insurance is paid according to risk in the US.

Do you actually believe that most of the companies traded on the DOW, NASDAQ and their ilk don't provide healthcare coverage for their lower end employees? Really?

???
Um, yes??
Walmart (largest employer in USA) = no healthcare
McDonalds (second largest employer in USA) = no healthcare
UPS (third largest employer in USA) = little to no healthcare
(more companies)

The places that have health benefits can weasel out of paying health benefits to low end employees by contracting work to other companies. Example: the people who clean my office are not employees of my company. They are contract cleaning services. Up here they use minimum wage employees at those places, but around California and Texas they probably use illegal immigrants who get below minimum wage.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

The places that have health benefits can weasel out of paying health benefits to low end employees by contracting work to other companies. Example: the people who clean my office are not employees of my company. They are contract cleaning services. Up here they use minimum wage employees at those places, but around California and Texas they probably use illegal immigrants who get below minimum wage.

I don't know about now, but 4 years ago AT&T contracted a company to do company support to achieve this. Who contracted out another company to have an even lower tier. (Synchronos and Manpower). I was hired by Manpower to work for Synchronos to support AT&T. I could have opted into a health insurance plan... but it basicly covered nothing and what it did cover was only partially. If anything did happen to me I'd still be bankrupt even with the insurance.

 

[ShawnD1]

I don't know about now, but 4 years ago AT&T contracted a company to do company support to achieve this. Who contracted out another company to have an even lower tier. (Synchronos and Manpower). I was hired by Manpower to work for Synchronos to support AT&T. I could have opted into a health insurance plan... but it basicly covered nothing and what it did cover was only partially. If anything did happen to me I'd still be bankrupt even with the insurance.

Sounds fairly standard. Several of my past employers were non-union companies that did work for union companies.

The local telephone company is hardcore unionized. Lately they've been hiring contractors to do installations and repairs. The guys who come to your house to hook up your phone are independent contractors and are not subject to any of the union stuff like pension, benefits, being impossible to fire, etc

 

[Thump553]

Marlin1975: You are violating the unwritten rules of this forum by stating actual facts rather than blindly projecting a one size fits all political dogma to all situations.

You will note however, that your opponents are self-conditioned to ignore actual facts and treat them as spurious noise. In other words they are sticking their fingers in their ears and saying "nah nah I can't hear you."

 

[Throckmorton]

the little guy?
EVERY tax payer is getting screwed because we can't fund outrageous public worker pensions.

Right, so because I make $35k instead of the $60k I can make in the private sector and can get a pension if I work here for 30 years, the taxpayer is getting screwed?


Fine. I'll be happy to sign a new contract at market salary and no pension. I might even be able to afford standard things expected to be affordable by American workers like a house!

 

[Throckmorton]

What's interesting is that it only creates an advantage/disadvantage system because there's a way to opt out, which is what obamacare tried to fix (but did a shitty job of fixing).
If a company wants the best employees, it must offer health benefits, but then it costs a ton of money, blarrrggg!!
In the socialized countries, none of that applies because the healthcare burden is covered by insurance that everyone pays and has no way of escaping. The insurance is paid according to income in those countries whereas insurance is paid according to risk in the US.




???
Um, yes??
Walmart (largest employer in USA) = no healthcare
McDonalds (second largest employer in USA) = no healthcare
UPS (third largest employer in USA) = little to no healthcare
(more companies)

The places that have health benefits can weasel out of paying health benefits to low end employees by contracting work to other companies. Example: the people who clean my office are not employees of my company. They are contract cleaning services. Up here they use minimum wage employees at those places, but around California and Texas they probably use illegal immigrants who get below minimum wage.

But I thought UPS workers were union fatcats?

 

[ShawnD1]

But I thought UPS workers were union fatcats?

A google search says they have pretty reasonable health coverage. My mistake.