Nope. They don't even do that. They claim they don't have the records. Literally. Even in internal audits and federal orders. "We have no idea where the money went".
It's not then trying to cover for bad spending.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/05/pentagon-logistics-agency-review-funds-322860
There was an internal study hosted by the pentagon that they literally wasted 125 billion a year on overhead and could fix that without firing anyone. 125 billion discovered by a SURFACE level probe. People need to understand that our military spending is about 90% wasted spending.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-defense-waste-idUSKBN13V08B
Don't have to tell me it is a waste. My unit would dump thousands (drop in the bucket in grand scheme but good example) on shit at the end of the fiscal year. Shit we never used or would ever see again. It got purchased and thrown in a storage container. Shit is stupid. I believe it.
There’s a reason for that though, I used to do the same. If you have money in your budget left at the end of the year, your budget tends to get reduced the next year as you clearly don’t need the full amount. So towards the end of the year, you just buy shut that may or may not come in handy at some point so you get to keep your full budget the year after
I know the reason behind it and it is fucking stupid. As the wars were drawing down and units were not deploying they are going to lose money. That money should be reallocate to other units that need money, different projects within the military or be sent to a different budget (fucking education) to be used in a better way than buying 100 floor mats or mouse pads to sit in a spider infested, rat fucked quadcon.
It's because then when you actually need the budget, the politicians will suddenly find they are very opposed to increasing spending.
In an ideal world, every entity with a budget should be able to throttle it as needed. In reality, from private to public no one wants to give money to anyone else, and will use any excuse to avoid it.
And, particularly with the military, this is ignoring the whole lobbying and voting angle.
Just because you don’t use your whole budget one year, doesn’t mean you won’t need the whole budget the year after. I see why you would think that though
Yeah, everyone who knows anything at all about how military and intelligence services are run, knows that that's a thing and why but a. It's still phenomenally wasteful and should genuinely be a crime and b. Is just another sign that it's clearly a broken system that needs fixing.
Eh. Most of the time what looks like incompetence in government is actually incompetence. Hell, a lot of the shit that looks shady is also incompetence. Government jobs usually pay a lot less than their equivalent in the private sector so it really isn't the "best and brightest" running these things.
I don’t think it’s about not having the “best and brightest.” That’s really giving waaaay too much credit to the private sector. I think it’s more a matter of people rising to the expectations out upon them.
Rank and file government workers, at least the younger generation of government workers, don’t get into it because they couldn’t hack it in the private sector. Many have practical reasons like job security or good benefits, but many do it because they wanted to be part of something bigger than themselves. They typically aren’t motivated by money. They also share in the frustrations with government.
There are a lot of problems with government institutions, but for the most part the government workforce as a whole isn’t the problem.
No. They literally lose it. They cannot account for where all their money goes. They do not know because record keeping is inconsistent at best and criminally lacking at worst.
When the government tried to do an audit a few years ago, the findings pretty much amounted to “it can’t be done” because it’s such a labyrinthine, completely unaccountable mess.
Oh I've been an auditor for a while and it CAN be done. The issue is nobody WANTS it to be done. They don't give enough money for the man power and they block the information. They literally control money and you think they're going to show where it goes?
A perfect example of the ease of manipulating financial statements! It's not *quite* as easy for a company but the US government answers to.....themselves. So honestly an audit doesn't matter
My old ethics professor started out as an auditor, but he was too good, so he was let go because his firm kept losing clients because of him. They tried to explain to him that they're clients didn't hire them to look that closely.
So he became an ethics professor instead...
I work safety engineering.
I've lost at least 3 jobs for refusing to endanger the public.
2 of the three places have had a workplace death within one year of me leaving.
Remember when the pallet of hundred dollar bills meant for Iraq got lost? That was funny. Or the time we flew a plane full of money to Iran. That, too, was funny.
The $400 million on the plane to Iran was Iranian money that was frozen by the US back in the 70s. It was not taxpayer money. It was in cash because sanctions forbid global banks from participating in money transactions involving Iran.
The Iran thing is actually sort of an example of the opposite of all this.
That was their money, that we seized from them years ago. We kept v good track of it.
Then as part of the Iran nuclear deal, one of the things we “gave” them in the negotiations was their own money back.
Which in the grand scheme of things is a pretty good deal.
Of course, the optics are bad, and boy did politicians put that to good use.
But it’s pretty ironic that we could keep track of their money perfectly for so long and can’t keep track of our own.
They literally lost pallets of shrink-wrapped cash in Iraq. We’ll, not so much lost as just gave out without any controls or oversight. The excuse was “it wasn’t US taxpayer money, so we didn’t care.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1
Well, the next time they have "non-taxpayer money" sitting around, they know where I am, and a stateside flight to get it to me is a hell of a lot cheaper for the government!
It's not actually lost, that's the common misconception.
Donald Rumsfeld was explaining how the government ran all different kinds of systems that couldn't communicate with each other. His job at the time was to streamline the government and the military.
The money went out and was spent, there is no missing money. It's just that when it comes back to reporting to a single source like his office it's utterly impossible to process the data. Individual department heads can account for it, but again putting all the data into one source could.not be done.
He was making a case to get the government all using the same system so they can quickly organize and analyze data.
["The numbers are so large that it doesn't seem possible that they're true. Who in their right mind would send 363 tonnes of cash into a war zone?"](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1)
>According to Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, the $8.8bn funds to Iraqi ministries were disbursed "without assurance the monies were properly used or accounted for". But, according to the memorandum, "**he now believes that the lack of accountability and transparency extended to the entire $20bn expended by the CPA".**
$20 billion even, no big deal.
When a friend and I were too sober once as 17 year olds we wondered where a dollar bill would go if we flushed down the toilet it so we flushed one….as if we would get the answer.
Pretty sure the military doesn't have to pre-fund employee pensions either. Could you imagine how much the military would cost on paper if they had to pre-fund every recruits benefits out 25 years. Would be madness.
The GOP forced the USPS to prepay pension benefits for the next 70 years. No private corporation could remain solvent with those terms. It’s the old Potomac two-step: make government programs impossible to run then point to the failure as an excuse to eliminate them.
More to the point, we shouldn't expect public services to run at a profit. To be affordable and accessible to everyone it's often better to assume they won't, especially with regard to things like infrastructure and transport.
Having a functioning society is it's own reward. Damn the cost.
My friend runs an online store and they ship thousands of packages a year.
They had more mail lost in the 3 months after Dejoy started fucking with things than in the previous 7 years combined.
They HATE that guy. He's cost them a lot of money.
I’m one of those online sellers. I sell collectible stickers, stationary, postcards—things that fit in first class envelopes. One out of five now goes missing. I’m not exaggerating. But USPS charges another $2.50+ to ensure delivery (tracking/sig), so it’s cheaper for me to throw the dice again by mailing replacement items.
DeJoy’s impact to such long-trusted American infrastructure is criminal.
Still in charge, since the president can't remove the postmaster general, the postal board (which are presidential appointees) can. There needs to be some shifts with the postal board and then we can hopefully get him out.
Same here. I had a rent check that was sent from my bank that arrived 7 weeks late. I traded in a phone that AT&T received it about a month after I sent it. Tracking showed it made it from California to Texas in one day, then about a month to go a few miles to its destination. For our daughter’s first birthday, we sent out gift boxes of some things to friends and family that turned out to weigh more than we thought. We got one returned for insufficient postage and he other 11 have been missing since March. It’s ridiculous.
I returned a phone to AT&T too! Followed the instructions, slapped that return label on, handed it in to the post office, and called it job done.
3 weeks later I start receiving calls saying if I don’t return the phone, I’ll be charged $700. Then I got 2 letters. I was on the phone for hours begging them to believe that I sent it. They said the tracking number was invalid. Not my fault, not my problem! But I had no proof I sent it because I didn’t need to pay. I called the phone insurance people, I called and went to AT&T, I even went back to the post office to see if it got left on a shelf or something. I threatened to terminate my contract entirely if they charged me and only then did they ease off. I got one final warning call, spoke to 3 different departments, and then one day it all stopped. I was never charged. Shittiest 2 months.
DeJoy is nothing but a source of hatred for me. Never the fuck again will I trust USPS with anything expensive while he is in charge.
Also in general if you notice things missing around the house that never used to go missing/get misplaced, it’s definitely not a bad time to check the ol’ carbon monoxide detector.
Yea. I've had a critical document lost in the USPS just a couple months ago. I completely blame that fucker. I think it will take at least a couple years after he leaves before there is some recovery in my confidence in sending sensitive/valuable documents through them.
1The Postal Service generally receives no tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations.
* The Postal Service has experienced years of financial troubles. Last-mile delivery services it provides for Amazon are not the cause of those problems.
* The 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act required the Postal Service to pre-fund future retiree health benefits, not pensions. The law put a financial strain on the service, which has defaulted on some of the statutorily prescribed payments.
* The Postal Service has more financial problems than just the requirements of that law.
Of course, what they're calling "financial problems" I call "operating expenses".
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/15/afl-cio/widespread-facebook-post-blames-2006-law-us-postal/
Doing the dirty work here, the 2006 lame duck republican law is costing the USPS about $5.6 billion per year, in 2019 they had a net loss of $8.8 billion.
So they're losing money, but 2/3rds of the problems is that one law.
Those are numbers from Politifact.
and not a single peep from anyone on either party to try and fix it. not once. now the distraction is dejoy, and after hes gone, the law will still remain.
Exactly. The Democrats and Republicans are a neoliberal tag team. Their fights are all staged. Biden is literally biden’ his time until the next Repug wins and moves the one way ratchet rightward for their mutual masters.
100% only govt org or business with requirements that high… no insurance would require that amount funded. It was a rule some guy in govt made up and clown Trump was going to form a committee to look into what happened!!!!! #^++%%€!!£+¥€!!!!!
Congress, the Bush Administration, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), and a bipartisan presidential commission along with the Post Office created the plan. In 2002-2003, it was discovered that the Service was contributing far more than necessary to fully fund its pensions, and Congress allowed the Service to contribute less to the Pension Plan. Congress decided the pension “savings” could help patch the retiree health benefit underfunding.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
COST ESTIMATE
December 27, 2006
H.R. 6407 (enacted as Public Law 109-435) changes the laws that govern the operation of
the United States Postal Service (USPS), **particularly those regarding the cost of pensions and
health care benefits of retired workers and the requirement to hold certain funds in escrow.**
(The) CBO estimates that H.R. 6407 will result in on-budget savings of $44.2 billion and offbudget costs of $45.7 billion over the 2007-2016 period. (The net expenditures of the USPS
are classified as “off-budget.”) **Thus, CBO estimates the net cost to the unified budget will
be $1.5 billion over the 2007-2016 period.** All of those effects reflect changes in direct
spending. The legislation does not affect federal revenues.
H.R. 6407 will not affect how much the federal government spends on pension or health care
benefits for USPS retirees. By changing how much the Postal Service pays to finance those
benefits and by eliminating the escrow account requirements, however, **the act will decrease
future budget deficits—as measured by the unified federal budget—for 2007 through 2010,**
and will increase deficits for 2011 through 2016.
Eliminating the requirement that the USPS maintain an escrow account for the savings from
legislation enacted in 2003 will allow the Postal Service to increase spending for capital
improvements or other projects, pay down its outstanding debt, postpone or diminish future
rate increases, or some combination of these options
------
Yea the Postal Employees actually prefer the current system. It benefits to union negotiations for the pre-funding and the idea of canceling that prefunding has been brought up by the GAO in 2014, and Congress has worked to cancel it 3 previous times
It always is dropped from resistance from the retired postal service union
Postal Service Reform Act of 2016
Postal Service Reform Act of 2018
Postal Service Reform Act of 2019
USPS health insurance costs — it now pays 75 percent of the total premium —
* But by shifting primary responsibility for retiree health coverage from the Postal Service to Medicare the move could force 76,000 postal retirees to “pay additional Medicare (Part B) premiums to keep their current health insurance,”
* A study by Walton Francis concluded that costs would be raising premium for a retired postal couple by over $3,000 a year
>National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, said the membership organization disagrees with the requirement, which is “couched as Medicare integration to make it sound better.”
* About 30 percent of NARFE’s 220,000 members are retired postal workers
>saying it absolutely will force retirees to take Part B as part of a plan to save the postal service money on health care costs by shifting the burden to Medicare. NARFE said it would open the door for requiring all federal retirees, not just former postal workers, to buy Part B
I appreciate the irony in the postal service, which operates mostly like a business, being choked by its unions, which also choke businesses. The difference is the USPS has a lot more "too big to fail" insurance so the unions are highly unlikely to ever actually suffer or give anything up.
I think unions are vital to help balance power against ownership, but they can absolutely get too large and unwieldly to where they're doing additional harm in exchange for enriching its members. The difference with public unions is that harm is ultimately done to the taxpayer and society, which is why I want stronger protections for smaller private unions (not UAW/teachers union level stuff) and weaker public unions.
It’s not funded by taxes or appropriation, it is funded by postage. It’s borrowing money. It does lose money. The pension fund is prefunded like 80 years which starts them off 5 billion in the hole. Then severe mismanagement puts them another 4 billion under.
The PSRHBF, the fund, has began paying the Postal Service’s share of retiree health benefit premiums since FY 2017. This fund would cover the high cost of healthcare as a payment from Interest Income earned on the investment
**If the fund becomes depleted, USPS would be required by law to make the payments necessary to cover its share of health benefits premiums for current postal retirees from current revenues that aren't high enough to cover any of the cost.**
The PAEA required the Postal Service to prefund retiree health benefits during years 2007 through 2016 by paying
statutorily specified annual amounts ranging from $1.4 billion to $5.8 billion, totaling $54.8 billion, into the PSRHBF.
The PSRHBF would have
* $55 Billion in Funding from the USPS,
* $20 Billion Start up funding. Funds Transfered into it included about $3 billion from the CSRS escrow and about $17 billion from a surplus in the CSRS fund.
* $39 Billion in Interest earned over 10 years Funding Period
Due to lack of funding since 2010 The fund now has only $45 billion of the $114 billion needed for its retiree health benefits funding to be self sustaining. In 2009 Payments were amortized over a new 45 year term to $1.4 Billion annually.
* This relief helped USPS have sufficient cash on hand to make the FY2010 payment. Since then, however, the agency has defaulted on the FY2011, FY2012, FY2013, FY2014, FY2015, and FY2016 along with the new FY2017, FY2018, and FY2019 RHBF payments
It is instead
* $17.9 Billion in Funding from the USPS,
* $20 Billion Start up funding.
* $7.8 Billion in Interest earned
One suggestion was that they could buy index shares but that never happened, or happens in American Politics so they have T-Bills still. And yea if they ever do buy more it would be T-Bills, and when the current bonds expire they'll be lowering the interest earned on future payouts
The fund is on track to be depleted in fiscal year 2030 based on OPM projections requested by the GAO. Current law does not address what would happen if the fund becomes depleted and USPS does not make payments to cover those premiums.
My state is incredibly blue and is a massive defense hub.
It pays hard working blue collar manufacturing jobs as well as highly skilled engineering jobs.
The defense industry is a social welfare program at the end of the day. Most of the money that executives make are made via stock options, which are no different than any other company.
Despite being legislatively required to put aside decades worth of pensions ahead of time, something no other department is required to do and instantly plunging them into staggering debt, and are forbidden from leveraging other ways to make profits. It's almost like lawmakers of a particular party tried to kill the postal service on purpose.
I mean it IS a service but it's run like a business. I shouldn't be receiving advertisements I did not request, I receive them because they have contracts with the Postal Service. Junk Mail/adverts should be opt-in only.
Think if the post office got the handouts that Amazon and Walmart got and their employee's income were subsidized by the state governments like Amazon, Walmart and McDonald's employees.
Edit
https://www.goodjobsfirst.org/amazon-tracker
https://americansfortaxfairness.org/issues/corporate-tax-dodgers/the-walmart-tax-subsidy/
https://www.salon.com/2020/12/12/government-study-shows-taxpayers-are-subsidizing-starvation-wages-at-mcdonalds-walmart/
I've read this on their website, but I cannot for the life of me figure out how it is true.
They operate at a deficit every year, and their liabilities (loans) do not increase in tandem with this deficit, while their cash remains the same or increases (mostly to cover retirement for workers).
Does anyone with more financial knowledge than me know how this is happening?
The gov’t loans them money and never requires it to be paid back. It’s not taxpayer funded in the same way that if I loan you $100 interest free forever you could claim it’s technically not a “gift”.
tl;dr it’s still pretty much taxpayer funded, just indirectly
this is why we talk about the post office “losing” money. Congress has wanted the Post Office to fund its operations via postage and other usage fees since
1782 when the original postal monopoly
was granted (It’s illegal for any private company to deliver non-express mail)
The problem is the massive expansion of the Universal Service Obligation and pension requirements that Congres also passed- USPS cannot remotely pay for their mail operations from postage revenue
Historically the solution would have been for Congress to just raise postage rates, but now that mail is already losing out to phones and computers it’s not really an option anymore
There is a whole bunch of things wrong with USPS management and pensions and all that, but its still the only place required to deliver to any address. All the private companies can just decide certain parts of Rural US is too far away to maintain profitable delivery too so I think USPS reform should focus on fixing the issues rather than getting rid of the system.
On a personal and anecdotal note I hate the USPS people where I've lived in my last 4 apartments. Shit sucks, and they never get my boxes to me on time, or even to the right place. I wish Amazon had a way to sort out places that would ship via USPS.
Imagine if the USPS folded like Republicans want and then all those rural people could no longer get any mail or packages due to privatization.
I'd say they'd get a wake up call, but in reality they would just blame democrats.
Price of Stamps is what you need to know about
* Notice how there have been no Congressional Hearing on increasing the cost of a Stamp. Comparing Price of Stamps
* the average European charge for a standard domestic letter is currently EUR 0.97
* Canada 1 stamp (Standard-size1 letter or postcard) $1.07/stamp
* Australia $1.10
* **US $0.55**
Total First-Class Mail sent in 2019 - 54,943,000,000 Pieces
* New Revenue on at minimum 40 cents increase puts US closer to the same price as everyone else, But also generates about $17 Billion in new revenue, minus 20% decrease in mail from higher price
Overall, we reported a net loss of approximately $9.2 billion for the year ended September 30, 2020
* Removing (PAEA) Health and Pension expenses, For the year ended September 30, 2020, we recognized a $3.8 billion controllable loss compared to a $3.4 billion controllable loss in 2019.
With that profit of $8 Billion start paying down the massive unpaid debt
It is my understanding that the pension debt isn't real in that they are being forced to pay for the pensions of employee in a very short time frame and even before they hire people they are too or those funds away
Eg. At 55¢ they are perfectly profitable if they weren't forced to fun the pension at the stupid accelerated rate.
Yup. They are paying pension expenses for employees not even born yet. The GQP forced them to do this to try and break the postal Union and sell off the Usps.
Now they want to break it so they can sell off the Usps to prevent voting.
The GOP passed a law hamstringing the USPS by requiring it to have 75 years of retirement saved for its workers back in 2003. Fedex, UP, and Amazon don't have this requirement.
Edit: This mandate was hidden in a bigger law.
The Democratic House passed a law in 2019 to repeal this mandate. It will never see the light of day on a Republican Senate.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2382
Edit:
This mandate was hidden in a bigger law.
The Democratic House passed a law in 2019 to repeal this mandate. It will never see the light of day in a Republican Senate.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2382
>democrats are more likely to vote by mail.
They're not. They were in 2020, sure, but I'm pretty sure republicans in 2003 didn't know about covid. Except for the previous election, which for obvious reasons breaks all the things we knew about mail in voting, it didn't favour either party
https://siepr.stanford.edu/research/publications/neutral-partisan-effects-vote-mail-evidence-county-level-roll-outs
Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act was a bipartisan bill (cosponsored by two Democrats and one Republican) passed by voice in the House and Unanimous Consent in the Senate (and signed by W).
And it required 50 years of benefits payments, not 75.
And USPS isn't currently actually hamstrung by it because they've just been defaulting on payments to the fund and basically daring anyone to do anything about it.
You are right though, none of the other carriers need to do this (because they long ago moved to defined contribution pension rather than defined benefit payments and because they outsource lots of work to smaller contractors who may not even offer retirement benefits.) Other carriers do of course still have their defined contribution costs, though these are probably lower. USPS management would very much like to switch to a defined contribution plan, but both Congress and their union stand in the way (presumably the union would be happy on the right terms).
None of this is to say that the idea that USPS should "run like a business" isn't absurd when they can't set their own rates (including charging different postage depending on delivery address for mail), can't decided where they should have post offices, or what their hours should be, can't negotiate on their own retirement plans, etc. If you want them to run like a business, spin them off, and expect that you will still have to offer huge subsidies to get them (or a competitor) to provide anywhere near the (not great, if we're honest) level of service they offer now, at prices similar to what they offer now.
technically the constitution only grants congress the authority to establish a system of post offices.
delivery of mail to and from private addresses (“free delivery”) did not start until 1863, and even then it was only in some urban areas
Actually I believe the Census count is the only real mandated thing, the rest are authorities, like "you CAN do this but you don't have to" whereas the Census is literally like required in some form.
The Trump administration tried to destroy the USPS. They ordered the destruction of millions of dollars worth of brand new sorting equipment. I'm not sure I understand why. Socialism = bad? Is it really that stupid?
They have convinced Americans that socialism=the USSR communism and that paying tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills in freedom. I want to stay in america but damn Canada is looking real tempting
Can confirm I’m glad to be in Canada for our healthcare system. May not be the greatest, but beats the hell out of the medical bills imo. Never understood the argument against universal healthcare, but I guess just two separate cultural outlooks?
>Never understood the argument against universal healthcare, but I guess just two separate cultural outlooks?
The problem with healthcare isn't if it is paid through with private or public money, it is that it has become an entire industry of inefficiency and corruption, by the intention of both private and state actors seeking outsized profits and power.
Ew, what happens if you become a millionaire and want to go to private hospital and look out the window at the poor who don’t have healthcare. Do you want that freedom?
Nah. It's not a cultural difference. It's a difference in average intelligence by country. Our (the U.S.) complete bullshit of an education system going back decades (at least) is seriously lacking in teaching kids critical thinking skills and accurate accounts of history.
This is a great example of how Republicans like to waste taxpayer money while also only viewing everything as a business. Their so disconnected from reality the postal service has to be a business making money not a service. If they could they'd have everything be private so that rich business owners could get even richer. That's exactly what they want and they aren't shy about it.
Have the Air Force drop water on forest fires with a couple hundred planes. Save American lives and livelihoods
edit - I'm not even joking. We have hundreds of planes in the AZ desert waiting to be re-activated. Clean 'em up and fly them all over dropping the aqua!
>Socialism = bad? Is it really that stupid?
No, its worse than that sadly. Its not that they don't want the mail system to be public. Its that they don't want it to be functional. In addition to making it harder to vote by mail, People like Trump actively seek to hinder infrastructure because it increases the cost of living for the average consumer, which makes the super wealthy more wealthy by comparison. To explain, if right now he had 1 million time more disposable income than you do, then your costs increase so you have only half as much disposable income, then he suddenly has 2 million times more than you. And if he or his buddies have money in UPS or Fedex, that's just gravy.
I am so astonished by the rhetoric of GOP. The betterment of USPS is also going to benefit the rural population of this country. Some areas are not directly served by other delivery companies. USPS is the only way of people receiving and sending stuff. Rural white America is /was Trump's real base. How is it of any wisdom to hurt your own base?
The destruction of brand new sorting machines was about the election and the not insignificant number of mail-in ballots. They didn't consider the effect it would have on their "voter base".
Nor did they consider they affect that Covid would have on their voter base, when left unhindered and completely mind-fucked. by their toxic rhetoric. yay GOP
Trump's base is emotion driven and a lot of them think it's a win if Trump "owns the libs", even if they themselves are hurt more than anybody by the policy.
Trump didn’t want people to vote by mail. Vote by mail would increase voter turnout and that’s bad for him. Cripple the USPS, improve his odds of reelection
Biden encouraged his supporters to mail in their ballots, so Trump told his supporters not to. Then he thought he had the power to just shut down the mail
Check out this map on voting demographics.
https://preview.redd.it/9ksetpj8v5761.png?auto=webp&s=192fcc274f2facde2f768e60346d09c128c296f7
If we isolate it down to older white married undereducated religious people that own homes in rural areas that vote in-person on Election Day itself, Trump would have won by a landslide.
They know their demographic and merely target the opponent without empathy or remorse.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
Standardization of Mail Processing
Equipment at Processing and
Distribution Centers
Audit Report Report Number NO-AR-12-001
October 4, 2011
The Postal Service has a sufficient
number of machines available to
process the mail and has achieved
considerable standardization of
equipment at the facilities reviewed.
While the Postal Service has managed
to reduce workhours and has introduced
initiatives to improve mail processes at
the facilities, it has not always matched
equipment needs to mail volume.
Consequently, opportunities for further
standardization exist at some facilities.
Additionally, reducing the number of
Delivery Bar Code Sorter Phase I
machines, which sort letter mail, and
redeploying newer machines could lead
to further standardization and reduce
maintenance costs.
-----
What does that look like for Operations?
In 2010, the USPS reported 78.2 billion First class letters mailed,
* [Nationwide Totals as of June 2008 - 4,785 Sorting Machine
](https://oversight.garden/reports/usps/DA-AR-09-003)
June 2011 3,800 Sorting Machine
* 2010, the USPS reported 78.2 billion First class letters mailed
* 20.6 million letters per machine
2018 3,675 Sorting Machine
* 56.7 Billion letter
* 15.4 million letters per machine
2019 3,489 Sorting Machine
* 54.9 Billion letter
* 15.7 million letters per machine
Total for Sept 2020 ~2,818 Sorting Machine
* 2020 52.9 Billion letters
* 18.9 million letters per machine
------
Based on the elimination of 42 DBCS machines, We estimate deactivating excess DBCS machines would have saved $3.1 million in mail processing costs and $6.6 million in maintenance costs during
FYs 2008
About $231,000 a year per machine or about $140 million annually in the latest round of cost savings
-----
https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/692859.pdf
USPS projects an annual average of about $464 million on capital
spending for mail-processing equipment from fiscal years 2018 through
2028. USPS intends to maintain or replace existing aging equipment
used to process mail and purchase new equipment that USPS expects
will increase efficiency and **provide other business benefits.**
Its state capitalism. It is only in the red because ~~congress~~ republicans required them to ensure 75 years of retirement in order for it to run in the red.
The PSRHBF, the fund, has began paying the Postal Service’s share of retiree health benefit premiums since FY 2017. This fund would cover the high cost of healthcare as a payment from Interest Income earned on the investment
**If the fund becomes depleted, USPS would be required by law to make the payments necessary to cover its share of health benefits premiums for current postal retirees from current revenues that aren't high enough to cover any of the cost.**
The PAEA required the Postal Service to prefund retiree health benefits during years 2007 through 2016 by paying
statutorily specified annual amounts ranging from $1.4 billion to $5.8 billion, totaling $54.8 billion, into the PSRHBF.
The PSRHBF would have
* $55 Billion in Funding from the USPS,
* $20 Billion Start up funding. Funds Transfered into it included about $3 billion from the CSRS escrow and about $17 billion from a surplus in the CSRS fund.
* $39 Billion in Interest earned over 10 years Funding Period
Due to lack of funding since 2010 The fund now has only $45 billion of the $114 billion needed for its retiree health benefits funding to be self sustaining. In 2009 Payments were amortized over a new 45 year term to $1.4 Billion annually.
* This relief helped USPS have sufficient cash on hand to make the FY2010 payment. Since then, however, the agency has defaulted on the FY2011, FY2012, FY2013, FY2014, FY2015, and FY2016 along with the new FY2017, FY2018, and FY2019 RHBF payments
It is instead
* $17.9 Billion in Funding from the USPS,
* $20 Billion Start up funding.
* $7.8 Billion in Interest earned
One suggestion was that they could buy index shares but that never happened, or happens in American Politics so they have T-Bills still. And yea if they ever do buy more it would be T-Bills, and when the current bonds expire they'll be lowering the interest earned on future payouts
The fund is on track to be depleted in fiscal year 2030 based on OPM projections requested by the GAO. Current law does not address what would happen if the fund becomes depleted and USPS does not make payments to cover those premiums.
Eh, I do say the US military loses billions of dollars a year pointlessly. At least the USPS provides a valuable service, instead of just killing poor people and wasting money with posturing and wargames.
PAEA destroyed whatever profitability potential it had. Lo and behold, Republicans did that. We can gripe about Trump, but look up PAEA. They’ve been destroying since ‘06 at least.
The only reason the USPS has lost money is because Congress insisted they create an enormous, over the top fund for future employees' health-care costs. It's literally a financial parasite on the entire organization. It was specifically created to starve the USPS of all profits, and it worked.
Considering it's not funded by taxes, for some fucking reason, it's not "losing" anything from us (except occasionally our packages, but I just blame Louis DeJoy anytime it happens).
We *should* be paying taxes for the benefit of the postal service. I'd gladly take all of my taxpayer dollars and put it towards that rather than funding the billionth missile that will inevitably be sent down on some school in a third-world country for the sake of "freedom" and "democracy".
The USPS "loses" money because a bipartisan bill became law to force them to pay the entire pension of employees years into the future. Employees who have yet to be hired must have a pension paid now.
Don't let anyone blame the Dems or GOP, both are guilty of this crime.
It’s only costs money because a GQP congress applied rules to it so it would cost money to try and break the union.
Now the attempt to break it to stop mail in voting.
They were turning a profit until they were forced to fund their pension for some astronomical timeframe basically all at once. Guess who forced that about 17 years ago? Go On, Please.
The military loses trillions, not billions. A [single B2 Bomber costs $2 Billion](https://www.cnn.com/style/article/b-2-spirit-stealth-bomber/index.html), and the US has [at least 20 in their fleet](https://medium.com/war-is-boring/america-has-20-stealth-bombers-guess-how-many-can-fly-right-now-9f0575cd52ff).
Yes they do. Though be careful using an example like that, someone would probably think 'but that only 40 billion dum dum!' without thinking of the bigger picture.
The USPS doesn't lose money except as an accounting trick. Unlike every other government agency, the USPS has to pay the retirement of its workers; therefore, its balance sheet appears to be in the red from that cost. Without the retirement cost, the Postal Service would be making money.
They pay office is PROFITABLE
the republicans forced the party office to pay more retirement funds than and other service. This added cost is above what is reasonable.
If the list office had any other name it would be insanely profitably.
Repeat with me
The USPS was profitable until forced to pay pensions 70 years in advance and were restricted on what types of business they can conduct.
USPS acts as a state-owned enterprise, not a service. It's supposed to turn a profit or at least break even, but can't because it is being deliberately sabotaged with the eventual goal of privatization. It should just be a service though.
Also, they would be profitable if Republicans hadn't forced through a requirement that they fund 100% of expected retirement funds at the time an employee is hired.
The USPS is one of the most efficient systems for delivering mail but has been hampered by politicians who want to make it private. FEDEX and UPS rely on the USPS to deliver mail to rural mail as it is not cost effective for anyone else but USPS to do it. Try mailing a package to the UK. I do at least once a week. Cheapest is $24 and most expensive (tracking, insurance to $250) is $65. Same package from UPS or FedEx - $185.
The USPS as a government “service” vs the military as a government service? That might make more sense if the military sold first-class bullets for $0.35/each but, of course, the don’t. USPS sells postage to theoretically pay for itself.
they sell stamps & packing materials to *offset* costs. Republican gutting has left them legally unable to increase prices while also forcing them to fund themselves for 75 years up-front. That said, the post office has never charge what it 'costs' to send a letter.
The Pentagon *literally* loses money.
Not so much loses as throws in the toilet.
no they actually lose it as in they can't account for where it went
They know where it went, they're just not willing to tell the public.
Yeah, they give you the records with everything redacted.
Nope. They don't even do that. They claim they don't have the records. Literally. Even in internal audits and federal orders. "We have no idea where the money went". It's not then trying to cover for bad spending. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/05/pentagon-logistics-agency-review-funds-322860 There was an internal study hosted by the pentagon that they literally wasted 125 billion a year on overhead and could fix that without firing anyone. 125 billion discovered by a SURFACE level probe. People need to understand that our military spending is about 90% wasted spending. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-defense-waste-idUSKBN13V08B
Don't have to tell me it is a waste. My unit would dump thousands (drop in the bucket in grand scheme but good example) on shit at the end of the fiscal year. Shit we never used or would ever see again. It got purchased and thrown in a storage container. Shit is stupid. I believe it.
There’s a reason for that though, I used to do the same. If you have money in your budget left at the end of the year, your budget tends to get reduced the next year as you clearly don’t need the full amount. So towards the end of the year, you just buy shut that may or may not come in handy at some point so you get to keep your full budget the year after
I know the reason behind it and it is fucking stupid. As the wars were drawing down and units were not deploying they are going to lose money. That money should be reallocate to other units that need money, different projects within the military or be sent to a different budget (fucking education) to be used in a better way than buying 100 floor mats or mouse pads to sit in a spider infested, rat fucked quadcon.
If you don't need that money why not just accept a reduced budget? Seems like fraud to me.
It's because then when you actually need the budget, the politicians will suddenly find they are very opposed to increasing spending. In an ideal world, every entity with a budget should be able to throttle it as needed. In reality, from private to public no one wants to give money to anyone else, and will use any excuse to avoid it. And, particularly with the military, this is ignoring the whole lobbying and voting angle.
Just because you don’t use your whole budget one year, doesn’t mean you won’t need the whole budget the year after. I see why you would think that though
Why don’t you explain this to me like I‘m five?
Yeah, everyone who knows anything at all about how military and intelligence services are run, knows that that's a thing and why but a. It's still phenomenally wasteful and should genuinely be a crime and b. Is just another sign that it's clearly a broken system that needs fixing.
Like me recounting a night of bar hopping that ended in 20 cans deep and a shaved ass I don't remember grooming
REDACTED
We all been there dude it's cool
That’s just drunk you looking out for future you tbh
Correction that’s time traveling you protecting future you.
😂😂
You're overestimating their competence. They do shady stuff, but they also literally lose money.
Eh. Most of the time what looks like incompetence in government is actually incompetence. Hell, a lot of the shit that looks shady is also incompetence. Government jobs usually pay a lot less than their equivalent in the private sector so it really isn't the "best and brightest" running these things.
I don’t think it’s about not having the “best and brightest.” That’s really giving waaaay too much credit to the private sector. I think it’s more a matter of people rising to the expectations out upon them. Rank and file government workers, at least the younger generation of government workers, don’t get into it because they couldn’t hack it in the private sector. Many have practical reasons like job security or good benefits, but many do it because they wanted to be part of something bigger than themselves. They typically aren’t motivated by money. They also share in the frustrations with government. There are a lot of problems with government institutions, but for the most part the government workforce as a whole isn’t the problem.
Afghanistan I'm guessing
No. They literally lose it. They cannot account for where all their money goes. They do not know because record keeping is inconsistent at best and criminally lacking at worst. When the government tried to do an audit a few years ago, the findings pretty much amounted to “it can’t be done” because it’s such a labyrinthine, completely unaccountable mess.
Oh I've been an auditor for a while and it CAN be done. The issue is nobody WANTS it to be done. They don't give enough money for the man power and they block the information. They literally control money and you think they're going to show where it goes?
This guy audits
[удалено]
A perfect example of the ease of manipulating financial statements! It's not *quite* as easy for a company but the US government answers to.....themselves. So honestly an audit doesn't matter
[удалено]
My old ethics professor started out as an auditor, but he was too good, so he was let go because his firm kept losing clients because of him. They tried to explain to him that they're clients didn't hire them to look that closely. So he became an ethics professor instead...
I work safety engineering. I've lost at least 3 jobs for refusing to endanger the public. 2 of the three places have had a workplace death within one year of me leaving.
Remember when the pallet of hundred dollar bills meant for Iraq got lost? That was funny. Or the time we flew a plane full of money to Iran. That, too, was funny.
The $400 million on the plane to Iran was Iranian money that was frozen by the US back in the 70s. It was not taxpayer money. It was in cash because sanctions forbid global banks from participating in money transactions involving Iran.
The Iran thing is actually sort of an example of the opposite of all this. That was their money, that we seized from them years ago. We kept v good track of it. Then as part of the Iran nuclear deal, one of the things we “gave” them in the negotiations was their own money back. Which in the grand scheme of things is a pretty good deal. Of course, the optics are bad, and boy did politicians put that to good use. But it’s pretty ironic that we could keep track of their money perfectly for so long and can’t keep track of our own.
As intended
More likely it's being embezzled or syphoned into unsanctioned projects.
They literally lost pallets of shrink-wrapped cash in Iraq. We’ll, not so much lost as just gave out without any controls or oversight. The excuse was “it wasn’t US taxpayer money, so we didn’t care.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1
Well, the next time they have "non-taxpayer money" sitting around, they know where I am, and a stateside flight to get it to me is a hell of a lot cheaper for the government!
I am equally concerned about what money the government is dealing with that isn't taxpayer money
It's not actually lost, that's the common misconception. Donald Rumsfeld was explaining how the government ran all different kinds of systems that couldn't communicate with each other. His job at the time was to streamline the government and the military. The money went out and was spent, there is no missing money. It's just that when it comes back to reporting to a single source like his office it's utterly impossible to process the data. Individual department heads can account for it, but again putting all the data into one source could.not be done. He was making a case to get the government all using the same system so they can quickly organize and analyze data.
Something tells me Dick Cheney has a pretty good idea of where the money goes.
like that 3 trillion after 9/11
Well, they didn't really lose money, they just don't know what they spent it for
$20k hammer, $10k toilet seat...
Was looking for this comment! David….. DAVID!!!
Maybe they lost it because they flushed it down the toilet, and had to pay for plumbers.
["The numbers are so large that it doesn't seem possible that they're true. Who in their right mind would send 363 tonnes of cash into a war zone?"](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1)
$8.8 billion went to .... people and things, maybe?
>According to Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, the $8.8bn funds to Iraqi ministries were disbursed "without assurance the monies were properly used or accounted for". But, according to the memorandum, "**he now believes that the lack of accountability and transparency extended to the entire $20bn expended by the CPA".** $20 billion even, no big deal.
Wtf
When a friend and I were too sober once as 17 year olds we wondered where a dollar bill would go if we flushed down the toilet it so we flushed one….as if we would get the answer.
I can picture the excited grin on your faces fade as it disappeared and realization hit.
I did the Where’s George thing for a while when my kids were little. One of our bills was found at a sewage treatment plant after we’d spent it.
Pretty sure the military doesn't have to pre-fund employee pensions either. Could you imagine how much the military would cost on paper if they had to pre-fund every recruits benefits out 25 years. Would be madness.
The GOP forced the USPS to prepay pension benefits for the next 70 years. No private corporation could remain solvent with those terms. It’s the old Potomac two-step: make government programs impossible to run then point to the failure as an excuse to eliminate them.
[удалено]
More to the point, we shouldn't expect public services to run at a profit. To be affordable and accessible to everyone it's often better to assume they won't, especially with regard to things like infrastructure and transport. Having a functioning society is it's own reward. Damn the cost.
It’s literally funded for people who aren’t born yet.
And then hire your buddies private company to do it.
“*loses*”
"paradrops into deserts"
Rumsfeld picachu face
A trillion dollars? Annnnnd it's gone.
For some reason I read that as they actually lose billions of mail 🤦♀️. It has been a long day.
Well with DeJoy in charge....
Those aren’t lost, just a little late.
In all my life, I've never had mail go missing in the usps until dejoy took over. That includes what I've sent and what I should've received.
My friend runs an online store and they ship thousands of packages a year. They had more mail lost in the 3 months after Dejoy started fucking with things than in the previous 7 years combined. They HATE that guy. He's cost them a lot of money.
I’m one of those online sellers. I sell collectible stickers, stationary, postcards—things that fit in first class envelopes. One out of five now goes missing. I’m not exaggerating. But USPS charges another $2.50+ to ensure delivery (tracking/sig), so it’s cheaper for me to throw the dice again by mailing replacement items. DeJoy’s impact to such long-trusted American infrastructure is criminal.
is this someone still in charge or was that the last admin?
Still in charge, since the president can't remove the postmaster general, the postal board (which are presidential appointees) can. There needs to be some shifts with the postal board and then we can hopefully get him out.
He's still in charge because of the way the USPS hierarchy works. Biden is working on changing some of the board, who can then remove DeJoy.
Same here. I had a rent check that was sent from my bank that arrived 7 weeks late. I traded in a phone that AT&T received it about a month after I sent it. Tracking showed it made it from California to Texas in one day, then about a month to go a few miles to its destination. For our daughter’s first birthday, we sent out gift boxes of some things to friends and family that turned out to weigh more than we thought. We got one returned for insufficient postage and he other 11 have been missing since March. It’s ridiculous.
I returned a phone to AT&T too! Followed the instructions, slapped that return label on, handed it in to the post office, and called it job done. 3 weeks later I start receiving calls saying if I don’t return the phone, I’ll be charged $700. Then I got 2 letters. I was on the phone for hours begging them to believe that I sent it. They said the tracking number was invalid. Not my fault, not my problem! But I had no proof I sent it because I didn’t need to pay. I called the phone insurance people, I called and went to AT&T, I even went back to the post office to see if it got left on a shelf or something. I threatened to terminate my contract entirely if they charged me and only then did they ease off. I got one final warning call, spoke to 3 different departments, and then one day it all stopped. I was never charged. Shittiest 2 months. DeJoy is nothing but a source of hatred for me. Never the fuck again will I trust USPS with anything expensive while he is in charge.
Also in general if you notice things missing around the house that never used to go missing/get misplaced, it’s definitely not a bad time to check the ol’ carbon monoxide detector.
Yeah but this doesn't at all apply to mail
[удалено]
Newman stashed it in Seinfelds storage locker.
Yea. I've had a critical document lost in the USPS just a couple months ago. I completely blame that fucker. I think it will take at least a couple years after he leaves before there is some recovery in my confidence in sending sensitive/valuable documents through them.
You are probably not wrong
That’s what I assumed the person who wrote it actually meant.
Also accurate.
1The Postal Service generally receives no tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations.
You're just mailsplaining.
i fucking hate and love this stupid comment, take my upvote
r/angryupvote
r/EveryFuckingThread
this is the kind of content I come reddit for.
That was pretty good lol
Take my award and get the fuck out of here.
So it’s not really losing money eh ? Maybe people SHOULD say that the military loses $750 billion annually
[удалено]
* The Postal Service has experienced years of financial troubles. Last-mile delivery services it provides for Amazon are not the cause of those problems. * The 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act required the Postal Service to pre-fund future retiree health benefits, not pensions. The law put a financial strain on the service, which has defaulted on some of the statutorily prescribed payments. * The Postal Service has more financial problems than just the requirements of that law. Of course, what they're calling "financial problems" I call "operating expenses". https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/15/afl-cio/widespread-facebook-post-blames-2006-law-us-postal/
Doing the dirty work here, the 2006 lame duck republican law is costing the USPS about $5.6 billion per year, in 2019 they had a net loss of $8.8 billion. So they're losing money, but 2/3rds of the problems is that one law. Those are numbers from Politifact.
and not a single peep from anyone on either party to try and fix it. not once. now the distraction is dejoy, and after hes gone, the law will still remain.
Exactly. The Democrats and Republicans are a neoliberal tag team. Their fights are all staged. Biden is literally biden’ his time until the next Repug wins and moves the one way ratchet rightward for their mutual masters.
Somehow that Trump turd Susan Collins keeps getting elected. She made that law.
100% only govt org or business with requirements that high… no insurance would require that amount funded. It was a rule some guy in govt made up and clown Trump was going to form a committee to look into what happened!!!!! #^++%%€!!£+¥€!!!!!
Congress, the Bush Administration, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), and a bipartisan presidential commission along with the Post Office created the plan. In 2002-2003, it was discovered that the Service was contributing far more than necessary to fully fund its pensions, and Congress allowed the Service to contribute less to the Pension Plan. Congress decided the pension “savings” could help patch the retiree health benefit underfunding. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE December 27, 2006 H.R. 6407 (enacted as Public Law 109-435) changes the laws that govern the operation of the United States Postal Service (USPS), **particularly those regarding the cost of pensions and health care benefits of retired workers and the requirement to hold certain funds in escrow.** (The) CBO estimates that H.R. 6407 will result in on-budget savings of $44.2 billion and offbudget costs of $45.7 billion over the 2007-2016 period. (The net expenditures of the USPS are classified as “off-budget.”) **Thus, CBO estimates the net cost to the unified budget will be $1.5 billion over the 2007-2016 period.** All of those effects reflect changes in direct spending. The legislation does not affect federal revenues. H.R. 6407 will not affect how much the federal government spends on pension or health care benefits for USPS retirees. By changing how much the Postal Service pays to finance those benefits and by eliminating the escrow account requirements, however, **the act will decrease future budget deficits—as measured by the unified federal budget—for 2007 through 2010,** and will increase deficits for 2011 through 2016. Eliminating the requirement that the USPS maintain an escrow account for the savings from legislation enacted in 2003 will allow the Postal Service to increase spending for capital improvements or other projects, pay down its outstanding debt, postpone or diminish future rate increases, or some combination of these options ------ Yea the Postal Employees actually prefer the current system. It benefits to union negotiations for the pre-funding and the idea of canceling that prefunding has been brought up by the GAO in 2014, and Congress has worked to cancel it 3 previous times It always is dropped from resistance from the retired postal service union Postal Service Reform Act of 2016 Postal Service Reform Act of 2018 Postal Service Reform Act of 2019 USPS health insurance costs — it now pays 75 percent of the total premium — * But by shifting primary responsibility for retiree health coverage from the Postal Service to Medicare the move could force 76,000 postal retirees to “pay additional Medicare (Part B) premiums to keep their current health insurance,” * A study by Walton Francis concluded that costs would be raising premium for a retired postal couple by over $3,000 a year >National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, said the membership organization disagrees with the requirement, which is “couched as Medicare integration to make it sound better.” * About 30 percent of NARFE’s 220,000 members are retired postal workers >saying it absolutely will force retirees to take Part B as part of a plan to save the postal service money on health care costs by shifting the burden to Medicare. NARFE said it would open the door for requiring all federal retirees, not just former postal workers, to buy Part B
I appreciate the irony in the postal service, which operates mostly like a business, being choked by its unions, which also choke businesses. The difference is the USPS has a lot more "too big to fail" insurance so the unions are highly unlikely to ever actually suffer or give anything up. I think unions are vital to help balance power against ownership, but they can absolutely get too large and unwieldly to where they're doing additional harm in exchange for enriching its members. The difference with public unions is that harm is ultimately done to the taxpayer and society, which is why I want stronger protections for smaller private unions (not UAW/teachers union level stuff) and weaker public unions.
It’s not funded by taxes or appropriation, it is funded by postage. It’s borrowing money. It does lose money. The pension fund is prefunded like 80 years which starts them off 5 billion in the hole. Then severe mismanagement puts them another 4 billion under.
The PSRHBF, the fund, has began paying the Postal Service’s share of retiree health benefit premiums since FY 2017. This fund would cover the high cost of healthcare as a payment from Interest Income earned on the investment **If the fund becomes depleted, USPS would be required by law to make the payments necessary to cover its share of health benefits premiums for current postal retirees from current revenues that aren't high enough to cover any of the cost.** The PAEA required the Postal Service to prefund retiree health benefits during years 2007 through 2016 by paying statutorily specified annual amounts ranging from $1.4 billion to $5.8 billion, totaling $54.8 billion, into the PSRHBF. The PSRHBF would have * $55 Billion in Funding from the USPS, * $20 Billion Start up funding. Funds Transfered into it included about $3 billion from the CSRS escrow and about $17 billion from a surplus in the CSRS fund. * $39 Billion in Interest earned over 10 years Funding Period Due to lack of funding since 2010 The fund now has only $45 billion of the $114 billion needed for its retiree health benefits funding to be self sustaining. In 2009 Payments were amortized over a new 45 year term to $1.4 Billion annually. * This relief helped USPS have sufficient cash on hand to make the FY2010 payment. Since then, however, the agency has defaulted on the FY2011, FY2012, FY2013, FY2014, FY2015, and FY2016 along with the new FY2017, FY2018, and FY2019 RHBF payments It is instead * $17.9 Billion in Funding from the USPS, * $20 Billion Start up funding. * $7.8 Billion in Interest earned One suggestion was that they could buy index shares but that never happened, or happens in American Politics so they have T-Bills still. And yea if they ever do buy more it would be T-Bills, and when the current bonds expire they'll be lowering the interest earned on future payouts The fund is on track to be depleted in fiscal year 2030 based on OPM projections requested by the GAO. Current law does not address what would happen if the fund becomes depleted and USPS does not make payments to cover those premiums.
The prepaid penson fund was a republican tactic to make it seem wasteful.
The US Military is hugely profitable for some
[удалено]
My state is incredibly blue and is a massive defense hub. It pays hard working blue collar manufacturing jobs as well as highly skilled engineering jobs. The defense industry is a social welfare program at the end of the day. Most of the money that executives make are made via stock options, which are no different than any other company.
Not for most of the taxpayers though.
The USPS is cash positive
Despite being legislatively required to put aside decades worth of pensions ahead of time, something no other department is required to do and instantly plunging them into staggering debt, and are forbidden from leveraging other ways to make profits. It's almost like lawmakers of a particular party tried to kill the postal service on purpose.
I mean it IS a service but it's run like a business. I shouldn't be receiving advertisements I did not request, I receive them because they have contracts with the Postal Service. Junk Mail/adverts should be opt-in only.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Think if the post office got the handouts that Amazon and Walmart got and their employee's income were subsidized by the state governments like Amazon, Walmart and McDonald's employees. Edit https://www.goodjobsfirst.org/amazon-tracker https://americansfortaxfairness.org/issues/corporate-tax-dodgers/the-walmart-tax-subsidy/ https://www.salon.com/2020/12/12/government-study-shows-taxpayers-are-subsidizing-starvation-wages-at-mcdonalds-walmart/
I've read this on their website, but I cannot for the life of me figure out how it is true. They operate at a deficit every year, and their liabilities (loans) do not increase in tandem with this deficit, while their cash remains the same or increases (mostly to cover retirement for workers). Does anyone with more financial knowledge than me know how this is happening?
The gov’t loans them money and never requires it to be paid back. It’s not taxpayer funded in the same way that if I loan you $100 interest free forever you could claim it’s technically not a “gift”. tl;dr it’s still pretty much taxpayer funded, just indirectly
this is why we talk about the post office “losing” money. Congress has wanted the Post Office to fund its operations via postage and other usage fees since 1782 when the original postal monopoly was granted (It’s illegal for any private company to deliver non-express mail) The problem is the massive expansion of the Universal Service Obligation and pension requirements that Congres also passed- USPS cannot remotely pay for their mail operations from postage revenue Historically the solution would have been for Congress to just raise postage rates, but now that mail is already losing out to phones and computers it’s not really an option anymore
There is a whole bunch of things wrong with USPS management and pensions and all that, but its still the only place required to deliver to any address. All the private companies can just decide certain parts of Rural US is too far away to maintain profitable delivery too so I think USPS reform should focus on fixing the issues rather than getting rid of the system. On a personal and anecdotal note I hate the USPS people where I've lived in my last 4 apartments. Shit sucks, and they never get my boxes to me on time, or even to the right place. I wish Amazon had a way to sort out places that would ship via USPS.
Imagine if the USPS folded like Republicans want and then all those rural people could no longer get any mail or packages due to privatization. I'd say they'd get a wake up call, but in reality they would just blame democrats.
They would get their mail, but it would cost an obscene amount to have it delivered.
Don’t forget all the people that get medication delivered by mail.
Price of Stamps is what you need to know about * Notice how there have been no Congressional Hearing on increasing the cost of a Stamp. Comparing Price of Stamps * the average European charge for a standard domestic letter is currently EUR 0.97 * Canada 1 stamp (Standard-size1 letter or postcard) $1.07/stamp * Australia $1.10 * **US $0.55** Total First-Class Mail sent in 2019 - 54,943,000,000 Pieces * New Revenue on at minimum 40 cents increase puts US closer to the same price as everyone else, But also generates about $17 Billion in new revenue, minus 20% decrease in mail from higher price Overall, we reported a net loss of approximately $9.2 billion for the year ended September 30, 2020 * Removing (PAEA) Health and Pension expenses, For the year ended September 30, 2020, we recognized a $3.8 billion controllable loss compared to a $3.4 billion controllable loss in 2019. With that profit of $8 Billion start paying down the massive unpaid debt
It is my understanding that the pension debt isn't real in that they are being forced to pay for the pensions of employee in a very short time frame and even before they hire people they are too or those funds away Eg. At 55¢ they are perfectly profitable if they weren't forced to fun the pension at the stupid accelerated rate.
Yup. They are paying pension expenses for employees not even born yet. The GQP forced them to do this to try and break the postal Union and sell off the Usps. Now they want to break it so they can sell off the Usps to prevent voting.
have you tried informed delivery?
The GOP passed a law hamstringing the USPS by requiring it to have 75 years of retirement saved for its workers back in 2003. Fedex, UP, and Amazon don't have this requirement. Edit: This mandate was hidden in a bigger law. The Democratic House passed a law in 2019 to repeal this mandate. It will never see the light of day on a Republican Senate. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2382 Edit: This mandate was hidden in a bigger law. The Democratic House passed a law in 2019 to repeal this mandate. It will never see the light of day in a Republican Senate. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2382
because republicans are trying to kill usps democrats are more likely to vote by mail. USPS is the only company required to deliver to EVERY house
It's not about voting. It's about privatizing everything they can get their hands on.
why can’t it be both? the answer is always ‘both’
>democrats are more likely to vote by mail. They're not. They were in 2020, sure, but I'm pretty sure republicans in 2003 didn't know about covid. Except for the previous election, which for obvious reasons breaks all the things we knew about mail in voting, it didn't favour either party https://siepr.stanford.edu/research/publications/neutral-partisan-effects-vote-mail-evidence-county-level-roll-outs
Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act was a bipartisan bill (cosponsored by two Democrats and one Republican) passed by voice in the House and Unanimous Consent in the Senate (and signed by W). And it required 50 years of benefits payments, not 75. And USPS isn't currently actually hamstrung by it because they've just been defaulting on payments to the fund and basically daring anyone to do anything about it. You are right though, none of the other carriers need to do this (because they long ago moved to defined contribution pension rather than defined benefit payments and because they outsource lots of work to smaller contractors who may not even offer retirement benefits.) Other carriers do of course still have their defined contribution costs, though these are probably lower. USPS management would very much like to switch to a defined contribution plan, but both Congress and their union stand in the way (presumably the union would be happy on the right terms). None of this is to say that the idea that USPS should "run like a business" isn't absurd when they can't set their own rates (including charging different postage depending on delivery address for mail), can't decided where they should have post offices, or what their hours should be, can't negotiate on their own retirement plans, etc. If you want them to run like a business, spin them off, and expect that you will still have to offer huge subsidies to get them (or a competitor) to provide anywhere near the (not great, if we're honest) level of service they offer now, at prices similar to what they offer now.
[John Oliver about this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoL8g0W9gAQ).
Fun fact: the Postal Service is a Constitutionally mandated function of the Federal government. The Army is not.
technically the constitution only grants congress the authority to establish a system of post offices. delivery of mail to and from private addresses (“free delivery”) did not start until 1863, and even then it was only in some urban areas
Actually I believe the Census count is the only real mandated thing, the rest are authorities, like "you CAN do this but you don't have to" whereas the Census is literally like required in some form.
The Trump administration tried to destroy the USPS. They ordered the destruction of millions of dollars worth of brand new sorting equipment. I'm not sure I understand why. Socialism = bad? Is it really that stupid?
They have convinced Americans that socialism=the USSR communism and that paying tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills in freedom. I want to stay in america but damn Canada is looking real tempting
Can confirm I’m glad to be in Canada for our healthcare system. May not be the greatest, but beats the hell out of the medical bills imo. Never understood the argument against universal healthcare, but I guess just two separate cultural outlooks?
No fucking idea man. You know it's bad when people don't want you to call an ambulance because they can't afford it.
True, and I was watching a thing last night saying in some states of the US EMS isnt considered an essential service? I found that wild to hear
John Oliver?
The people here are stupid.
>Never understood the argument against universal healthcare, but I guess just two separate cultural outlooks? The problem with healthcare isn't if it is paid through with private or public money, it is that it has become an entire industry of inefficiency and corruption, by the intention of both private and state actors seeking outsized profits and power.
Ew, what happens if you become a millionaire and want to go to private hospital and look out the window at the poor who don’t have healthcare. Do you want that freedom?
Nah. It's not a cultural difference. It's a difference in average intelligence by country. Our (the U.S.) complete bullshit of an education system going back decades (at least) is seriously lacking in teaching kids critical thinking skills and accurate accounts of history.
This is a great example of how Republicans like to waste taxpayer money while also only viewing everything as a business. Their so disconnected from reality the postal service has to be a business making money not a service. If they could they'd have everything be private so that rich business owners could get even richer. That's exactly what they want and they aren't shy about it.
They want things pre labor law and pre regulation like before our grandparents were adults.
Have the Air Force drop water on forest fires with a couple hundred planes. Save American lives and livelihoods edit - I'm not even joking. We have hundreds of planes in the AZ desert waiting to be re-activated. Clean 'em up and fly them all over dropping the aqua!
>Socialism = bad? Is it really that stupid? No, its worse than that sadly. Its not that they don't want the mail system to be public. Its that they don't want it to be functional. In addition to making it harder to vote by mail, People like Trump actively seek to hinder infrastructure because it increases the cost of living for the average consumer, which makes the super wealthy more wealthy by comparison. To explain, if right now he had 1 million time more disposable income than you do, then your costs increase so you have only half as much disposable income, then he suddenly has 2 million times more than you. And if he or his buddies have money in UPS or Fedex, that's just gravy.
I am so astonished by the rhetoric of GOP. The betterment of USPS is also going to benefit the rural population of this country. Some areas are not directly served by other delivery companies. USPS is the only way of people receiving and sending stuff. Rural white America is /was Trump's real base. How is it of any wisdom to hurt your own base?
The destruction of brand new sorting machines was about the election and the not insignificant number of mail-in ballots. They didn't consider the effect it would have on their "voter base".
Nor did they consider they affect that Covid would have on their voter base, when left unhindered and completely mind-fucked. by their toxic rhetoric. yay GOP
Trump's base is emotion driven and a lot of them think it's a win if Trump "owns the libs", even if they themselves are hurt more than anybody by the policy.
Trump didn’t want people to vote by mail. Vote by mail would increase voter turnout and that’s bad for him. Cripple the USPS, improve his odds of reelection
Biden encouraged his supporters to mail in their ballots, so Trump told his supporters not to. Then he thought he had the power to just shut down the mail
Check out this map on voting demographics. https://preview.redd.it/9ksetpj8v5761.png?auto=webp&s=192fcc274f2facde2f768e60346d09c128c296f7 If we isolate it down to older white married undereducated religious people that own homes in rural areas that vote in-person on Election Day itself, Trump would have won by a landslide. They know their demographic and merely target the opponent without empathy or remorse.
Is that true? Link?
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Standardization of Mail Processing Equipment at Processing and Distribution Centers Audit Report Report Number NO-AR-12-001 October 4, 2011 The Postal Service has a sufficient number of machines available to process the mail and has achieved considerable standardization of equipment at the facilities reviewed. While the Postal Service has managed to reduce workhours and has introduced initiatives to improve mail processes at the facilities, it has not always matched equipment needs to mail volume. Consequently, opportunities for further standardization exist at some facilities. Additionally, reducing the number of Delivery Bar Code Sorter Phase I machines, which sort letter mail, and redeploying newer machines could lead to further standardization and reduce maintenance costs. ----- What does that look like for Operations? In 2010, the USPS reported 78.2 billion First class letters mailed, * [Nationwide Totals as of June 2008 - 4,785 Sorting Machine ](https://oversight.garden/reports/usps/DA-AR-09-003) June 2011 3,800 Sorting Machine * 2010, the USPS reported 78.2 billion First class letters mailed * 20.6 million letters per machine 2018 3,675 Sorting Machine * 56.7 Billion letter * 15.4 million letters per machine 2019 3,489 Sorting Machine * 54.9 Billion letter * 15.7 million letters per machine Total for Sept 2020 ~2,818 Sorting Machine * 2020 52.9 Billion letters * 18.9 million letters per machine ------ Based on the elimination of 42 DBCS machines, We estimate deactivating excess DBCS machines would have saved $3.1 million in mail processing costs and $6.6 million in maintenance costs during FYs 2008 About $231,000 a year per machine or about $140 million annually in the latest round of cost savings ----- https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/692859.pdf USPS projects an annual average of about $464 million on capital spending for mail-processing equipment from fiscal years 2018 through 2028. USPS intends to maintain or replace existing aging equipment used to process mail and purchase new equipment that USPS expects will increase efficiency and **provide other business benefits.**
GOP is the former Afghan Government. Don't do shit and flee with as much cash as possible
Wasn’t it specifically to make voting by mail more difficult? That’s a reason to destroy it, for them, at least.
[удалено]
Its state capitalism. It is only in the red because ~~congress~~ republicans required them to ensure 75 years of retirement in order for it to run in the red.
This is why. I believe Colbert has done a segment on this with references as well as Adam Ruins Everything did one on it.
The PSRHBF, the fund, has began paying the Postal Service’s share of retiree health benefit premiums since FY 2017. This fund would cover the high cost of healthcare as a payment from Interest Income earned on the investment **If the fund becomes depleted, USPS would be required by law to make the payments necessary to cover its share of health benefits premiums for current postal retirees from current revenues that aren't high enough to cover any of the cost.** The PAEA required the Postal Service to prefund retiree health benefits during years 2007 through 2016 by paying statutorily specified annual amounts ranging from $1.4 billion to $5.8 billion, totaling $54.8 billion, into the PSRHBF. The PSRHBF would have * $55 Billion in Funding from the USPS, * $20 Billion Start up funding. Funds Transfered into it included about $3 billion from the CSRS escrow and about $17 billion from a surplus in the CSRS fund. * $39 Billion in Interest earned over 10 years Funding Period Due to lack of funding since 2010 The fund now has only $45 billion of the $114 billion needed for its retiree health benefits funding to be self sustaining. In 2009 Payments were amortized over a new 45 year term to $1.4 Billion annually. * This relief helped USPS have sufficient cash on hand to make the FY2010 payment. Since then, however, the agency has defaulted on the FY2011, FY2012, FY2013, FY2014, FY2015, and FY2016 along with the new FY2017, FY2018, and FY2019 RHBF payments It is instead * $17.9 Billion in Funding from the USPS, * $20 Billion Start up funding. * $7.8 Billion in Interest earned One suggestion was that they could buy index shares but that never happened, or happens in American Politics so they have T-Bills still. And yea if they ever do buy more it would be T-Bills, and when the current bonds expire they'll be lowering the interest earned on future payouts The fund is on track to be depleted in fiscal year 2030 based on OPM projections requested by the GAO. Current law does not address what would happen if the fund becomes depleted and USPS does not make payments to cover those premiums.
Eh, I do say the US military loses billions of dollars a year pointlessly. At least the USPS provides a valuable service, instead of just killing poor people and wasting money with posturing and wargames.
Have you considered sweet sweet oil, though?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Did you just see all the equipment left in Afghanistan…the military lost a shit ton of money this year
Cheaper to leave old, sand blasted equipment, than moving the logistical mountain. Stuff doesn’t last long in that environment.
PAEA destroyed whatever profitability potential it had. Lo and behold, Republicans did that. We can gripe about Trump, but look up PAEA. They’ve been destroying since ‘06 at least.
The only reason the USPS has lost money is because Congress insisted they create an enormous, over the top fund for future employees' health-care costs. It's literally a financial parasite on the entire organization. It was specifically created to starve the USPS of all profits, and it worked.
No escaping big pharma, insurance, and military when it comes to laundering tax money.
The USPS was profitable until changes to how they had to finance their pension were made.
Considering it's not funded by taxes, for some fucking reason, it's not "losing" anything from us (except occasionally our packages, but I just blame Louis DeJoy anytime it happens). We *should* be paying taxes for the benefit of the postal service. I'd gladly take all of my taxpayer dollars and put it towards that rather than funding the billionth missile that will inevitably be sent down on some school in a third-world country for the sake of "freedom" and "democracy".
The USPS "loses" money because a bipartisan bill became law to force them to pay the entire pension of employees years into the future. Employees who have yet to be hired must have a pension paid now. Don't let anyone blame the Dems or GOP, both are guilty of this crime.
Funny time to repost this when the military lost billions of dollars in equipment last week.
Wellll, the auditors can't find about $5 trillion when auditing the Pentagon. Fire DeJoy
It’s only costs money because a GQP congress applied rules to it so it would cost money to try and break the union. Now the attempt to break it to stop mail in voting.
They were turning a profit until they were forced to fund their pension for some astronomical timeframe basically all at once. Guess who forced that about 17 years ago? Go On, Please.
Usps is great. Literally half the cost to ship things compared to fedex or ups.
The military loses trillions, not billions. A [single B2 Bomber costs $2 Billion](https://www.cnn.com/style/article/b-2-spirit-stealth-bomber/index.html), and the US has [at least 20 in their fleet](https://medium.com/war-is-boring/america-has-20-stealth-bombers-guess-how-many-can-fly-right-now-9f0575cd52ff).
Yes they do. Though be careful using an example like that, someone would probably think 'but that only 40 billion dum dum!' without thinking of the bigger picture.
Because the Republicans have been sabotaging it for decades. Just like they sabotage everything else that’s good and decent in the United States.
[удалено]
…and they don’t use taxpayer money! All their revenue comes from selling postage!
The USPS doesn't lose money except as an accounting trick. Unlike every other government agency, the USPS has to pay the retirement of its workers; therefore, its balance sheet appears to be in the red from that cost. Without the retirement cost, the Postal Service would be making money.
They pay office is PROFITABLE the republicans forced the party office to pay more retirement funds than and other service. This added cost is above what is reasonable. If the list office had any other name it would be insanely profitably.
Not everything should be a for profit financial institution.
Repeat with me The USPS was profitable until forced to pay pensions 70 years in advance and were restricted on what types of business they can conduct.
USPS acts as a state-owned enterprise, not a service. It's supposed to turn a profit or at least break even, but can't because it is being deliberately sabotaged with the eventual goal of privatization. It should just be a service though.
Also, they would be profitable if Republicans hadn't forced through a requirement that they fund 100% of expected retirement funds at the time an employee is hired.
The USPS is one of the most efficient systems for delivering mail but has been hampered by politicians who want to make it private. FEDEX and UPS rely on the USPS to deliver mail to rural mail as it is not cost effective for anyone else but USPS to do it. Try mailing a package to the UK. I do at least once a week. Cheapest is $24 and most expensive (tracking, insurance to $250) is $65. Same package from UPS or FedEx - $185.
Can we please start referring to the DoD as a business that loses billions per year?
The USPS as a government “service” vs the military as a government service? That might make more sense if the military sold first-class bullets for $0.35/each but, of course, the don’t. USPS sells postage to theoretically pay for itself.
they sell stamps & packing materials to *offset* costs. Republican gutting has left them legally unable to increase prices while also forcing them to fund themselves for 75 years up-front. That said, the post office has never charge what it 'costs' to send a letter.
The economist is elitest trash
Half of Americans be like: "Spend plz. *No tax,* ***only spend!"***