Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

alp227

(31,943 posts)
Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:50 PM Jan 2013

Think tank to study privatizing most Postal Service operations

Source: washington post

As members of Congress pledged Thursday to revive legislation to save the financially ailing U.S. Postal Service, a Washington think tank announced it will conduct an independent study of how the quasi-government agency could cede much of its operation to private companies.

The review by the nonprofit National Academy of Public Administration will analyze the benefits of restoring the agency’s financial health by using a “hybrid” model, which would farm out to the private sector postal operations other than the last delivery mile. A letter carrier would still drive or walk that last part, dropping letters and packages in mailboxes.

“Just as private companies innovate and share supply chains in high-tech, automobile, and other industries today, the market will drive efficiencies in the postal network,” a group of privatization advocates wrote in a short paper previewing the deeper review.

The study is likely to bring more attention to a public-private model as a viable — and controversial— substitute for the Postal Service’s existing structure, which relies on a unionized workforce of more than 650,000 employees to sort, package, transport and deliver the mail. With first-class mail volume plummeting as Americans conduct more business and communications through the Internet, the Postal Service lost $16 billion in fiscal 2012.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/think-tank-to-study-privatizing-most-postal-service-operations/2013/01/03/2adc0b08-55ed-11e2-8b9e-dd8773594efc_story.html

65 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Think tank to study privatizing most Postal Service operations (Original Post) alp227 Jan 2013 OP
Fuck them neo-lib bastards! Jesus I hate these people! Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #1
+1000 southern_belle Jan 2013 #9
You mean neo-CON bastards, trying to bust unions. Festivito Jan 2013 #15
Actually I did mean neo-lib. Most repukes are neoliberals as far as I can tell. Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #19
That's from the 1930s. It changed in 30 years. Now, it's another 30+ years. Festivito Jan 2013 #22
I don't think it's appropriate to conflate Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #36
I see. Them economically-neo-lib bastards, lacks the same flair. Festivito Jan 2013 #43
Actually neo-liberalism's definition has not changed, Chomsky is using it correctly. iemitsu Jan 2013 #59
But I whole-heartedly agree with your analysis of the media and the idiotic funding requirements Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #20
I know! It makes me so angry! nt Mojorabbit Jan 2013 #18
yep yurbud Jan 2013 #41
First target: that giant pension fund. Atman Jan 2013 #51
Yep..that has been the idea behind all this P.O. 'scare" dixiegrrrrl Jan 2013 #62
Ditto pmorlan1 Jan 2013 #55
Just say no! bl968 Jan 2013 #2
+ 1000 MBS Jan 2013 #45
You are right! Dyedinthewoolliberal Jan 2013 #58
The reason the USPS is suffering is by Congress's own doing: making them fund CurtEastPoint Jan 2013 #3
Exactly! nt snacker Jan 2013 #4
Plus a thousand. amandabeech Jan 2013 #16
Yup mac56 Jan 2013 #25
Small towns really depend on the PO. amandabeech Jan 2013 #34
Among other reasons mac56 Jan 2013 #35
Yes, it does help. amandabeech Jan 2013 #49
exactly right. thanks. n/t MBS Jan 2013 #46
Absolutely. n/t TDale313 Jan 2013 #28
+1000 Important context the corporate media is loathe to provide. cprise Jan 2013 #29
Watch millions lose mail service. And watch prices soar. McCamy Taylor Jan 2013 #5
It's already efficient and inexpensive. It has to compete with private services already. Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #7
It doesn't have to compete with the private services Lordquinton Jan 2013 #27
Competition is a two way street, buy yay for your enthusiasm. I like the spirit of your post. n/t Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #30
yup Skittles Jan 2013 #33
They really seem to long for a third world status for the US. It's so sad. n/t Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #39
Noooooo! frazzled Jan 2013 #6
You mean how to rip off the public, here come 5 dollar letters.... Historic NY Jan 2013 #8
haven't they learned yet that privatization is costly - decades of failure 2Design Jan 2013 #10
Privitization never FAILS to make rich those who demanded the privitization. amandabeech Jan 2013 #17
It doesn't take a think tank to figure out how to get them in financial shape Gman Jan 2013 #11
They better leave the postal retirees' pensions alone!!!!!!!!!!! glinda Jan 2013 #12
I'm a mail carrier.... Uniblab Jan 2013 #13
+1000 abelenkpe Jan 2013 #31
I agree with everyone on this thread, this is fucked. iemitsu Jan 2013 #14
In related news, Koch Industries has privatized the State of Wisconsin. Coyotl Jan 2013 #21
Don't laugh too quickly starroute Jan 2013 #23
Here in Oregon we've got vote by mail, which has been working great... SparkyOR Jan 2013 #24
get rid of the fucking pension funding requirement. The post office operated profitablly upaloopa Jan 2013 #26
Now that the wholly manufactured "Fiscal Cliff" act is over for now.... AlbertCat Jan 2013 #32
I have a plan! sofa king Jan 2013 #37
Yeah, and I bet you... ReRe Jan 2013 #38
The USPS is not "financially ailing", it's been looted by Repugs ProfessionalLeftist Jan 2013 #40
Precisely Sherman A1 Jan 2013 #42
Union busting isn't the only reason jmowreader Jan 2013 #48
They will pare off anything that can make money Cosmocat Jan 2013 #50
If that's their logic, they should cut down defense/pentagon spending ProfessionalLeftist Jan 2013 #53
Can't wait to start paying more for less! Ash_F Jan 2013 #44
Time to start paying for junk mail Rain Mcloud Jan 2013 #47
I live in a small town loyalkydem Jan 2013 #52
That worked out so well with telecom Crow73 Jan 2013 #54
"study" = "find plausible-sounding ways to" closeupready Jan 2013 #56
Pitney Bowes is PAYING for this study? happyslug Jan 2013 #57
Thank you!!! for that info about Certirfied mail. dixiegrrrrl Jan 2013 #63
Certified mail is good enough, if you want confirmation of acceptance happyslug Jan 2013 #64
The People Need To Take Over The Congress november3rd Jan 2013 #60
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!! tilsammans Jan 2013 #61
I only wish they would come up with a way to stop the junk mail. Brigid Jan 2013 #65

Ed Suspicious

(8,879 posts)
1. Fuck them neo-lib bastards! Jesus I hate these people!
Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:54 PM
Jan 2013

Anything to get their business owning buddy's hands in the pot o' cash and to bust unions.

Festivito

(13,452 posts)
15. You mean neo-CON bastards, trying to bust unions.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:51 AM
Jan 2013

It is the Republicans who make a company, here the USPS, fund 75 years of retirement ahead of time and ridiculously to do so in ten years -- the self-described conservatives and neo-cons.

It is the media that refuses to report the ridiculousness of these Republican required payments.

Ed Suspicious

(8,879 posts)
19. Actually I did mean neo-lib. Most repukes are neoliberals as far as I can tell.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:04 AM
Jan 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism refers to economic liberalizations, free trade and open markets, privatization, deregulation, and increasing the role of the private sector in modern society. Today the term is mostly used as a general condemnation of policies that deregulate and increase the role of the private sector.[1]

Festivito

(13,452 posts)
22. That's from the 1930s. It changed in 30 years. Now, it's another 30+ years.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:30 AM
Jan 2013

Also from your wiki reference:

In the sixties, usage of the term "neoliberal" heavily declined. When the term was reintroduced in the following decades, the meaning had shifted. The term neoliberal is now normally associated with laissez-faire economic policies, and is used mainly by those who are critical of legislative market reform.


The meaning of neoliberalism has changed over time and come to mean different things to different groups. As a result, it is very hard to define. This is seen by the fact that authoritative sources on neoliberalism, such as Friedrich Hayek,[33] Milton Friedman, David Harvey[34] and Noam Chomsky[35] do not agree about the meaning of neoliberalism.


Your use of neo-lib as a bad thing is left to imply that liberal is wrong. That does not bode well for us around here.

Ed Suspicious

(8,879 posts)
36. I don't think it's appropriate to conflate
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:57 AM
Jan 2013

Neoliberal economic doctrine and it's adherents with political liberalism and the Democratic party.
When one can describe both Bill Clinton and Milton Friedman as Neoliberal, well, that should illustrate the point that the term "neoliberal" is not addressing a particular political party.

#!

In the link, Chomsky talks about the anti-democratic effect of Neoliberal doctrine. He points out indeed how striking it is to see that "every element of the Neoliberal Package is specifically designed to undercut democracy." Near the end he talks about the idea of privatization as a neoliberal mantra, and how privatization by definition undercuts democracy by removing something from the public arena and putting it in the hands of unaccountable private tyrannies that are created and supported by the state which is what corporations are." This is especially germane to the conversation we're having here about privatizing the public postal service.

The meaning of neoliberalism has changed over time and come to mean different things to different groups. As a result, it is very hard to define. This is seen by the fact that authoritative sources on neoliberalism, such as Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, David Harvey and Noam Chomsky do not agree about the meaning of neoliberalism.


I referenced the wikipedia article as a quick and dirty explanation of why I chose the word. You quoted this section on how the term seems to have an unsettled meaning. I suspect that if these intellectual giants are lacking agreement, we'll find ourselves at a similar impasse, but I hope you better understand why I chose the word and can be assured that I did not chose it to denigrate the democratic party except where it's members are prone to ascribe to neoliberal doctrine.


Festivito

(13,452 posts)
43. I see. Them economically-neo-lib bastards, lacks the same flair.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:20 AM
Jan 2013

Or, them University-of-Chicago-school-economically-(not-politically)-neo-lib bastards lacks that succinct impact.

I see that you mean well, and I think you see that I mean well. The prolific troll postings around here have made me assimilate to your nom de plume.

So, I'll stick with them Milton-Friedman bastards and you continue with them neo-lib bastards to our hearts content. After all, a more perfect union does not start off perfectly.

iemitsu

(3,888 posts)
59. Actually neo-liberalism's definition has not changed, Chomsky is using it correctly.
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:09 AM
Jan 2013

The problem is that most Americans use the term, neo-conservative to mean neo-liberalism. This is unique to the United States, the rest of the world understands the denotation of the term.
Liberalism is a term associated with the American Revolution and the "free-market" economy.
Our conservatives, who push neo-liberal policies, have issues with anything called liberal, and they certainly don't want their minions having to grapple with accepting policies tied to such labels (having been conditioned to respond to the word with the unthinking, auto-hate response) so, conversely, we liberals are not prepared to think of liberal policies as promoting business/free-market ethics.
That is why many liberals prefer the term progressive to describe their political philosophy. But even that term has its problems. Most people think that progress is a good thing, a thing worth pursing. Progressive political thought believes that through the application of science and reason mankind can and ought to improve the human condition.
We all have our own notions of what kinds of progress would actually improve our lives and the lives of others. And some of the policies that many think would improve our lives is not easily quantified or measured like, less stressful lives, living in harmony with man and nature, or being treated with respect.
Without measured progress to justify government spending it is hard to defend continuing these programs, so progressives came up with a standard measure for progress. Progress is measured by the accumulation of material goods and wealth. Within a capitalist society this was the logical proof that one's life was improving.
But many American progressives/liberals don't actually see progress and material gain as the same goal. Those, who think that we need to promote sustainable lifestyles and protect the environment, in my opinion, are the true progressives but in order for them to achieve their goals, progress must be redefined.
Imprecise or inaccurate usage of words is problematic in society. It has gotten to the point where the same words inform two different realities in America.

Ed Suspicious

(8,879 posts)
20. But I whole-heartedly agree with your analysis of the media and the idiotic funding requirements
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:06 AM
Jan 2013

designed to have this precise effect on the postal service. Designed to make then not operationally viable.

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
62. Yep..that has been the idea behind all this P.O. 'scare"
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:33 AM
Jan 2013

Plus, privatization means layoffs, reduced quality, increased prices
and of course union busting.
They wil buy out the "close to retirement" people,
cut services and workers.
Same pattern as we have seen for years.

bl968

(360 posts)
2. Just say no!
Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:57 PM
Jan 2013

The Constitution of the United States:

Article. I. Section. 8. Clause 7: The Congress shall have Power to establish Post Offices and post Roads;

It's a duty of the federal government.

MBS

(9,688 posts)
45. + 1000
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:24 AM
Jan 2013

The post office's current problems are directly a result of the ridiculous pension funding requirement, which was Congress's doing.
Please just fund the post office properly.
The post office has been doing a great job under unreasonable financial circumstances. People take the post office way too much for granted. (Just compare the functioning of the USPS to the postal service of other countries: we should be proud of the USPS)>

Dyedinthewoolliberal

(15,463 posts)
58. You are right!
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:54 PM
Jan 2013

The Post Office gets a bad rap! Congress needs to change that riduculous rule and while we're at it, how did it pass in the first place, and even if first class mail is declining that isn't good enough to break up the PO and hand it over to private enterpise. Then the cost of a mailing to Miami from Seattle will be something like $5 instead of .45.............

CurtEastPoint

(18,529 posts)
3. The reason the USPS is suffering is by Congress's own doing: making them fund
Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:58 PM
Jan 2013

outrageous # of years ahead their pensions. It was done on purpose so they could privatize it and get rid of unions.

 

amandabeech

(9,893 posts)
16. Plus a thousand.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:56 AM
Jan 2013

It'll cost $50 to get a small envelope to my 91 year old mother in rural Michigan from here in the DC area.

mac56

(17,557 posts)
25. Yup
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:57 AM
Jan 2013

Here's a post from my blog.

http://namebrandketchup.wordpress.com/2012/11/28/let-us-now-praise-the-united-states-postal-service/

USPS provides this country’s best value for the money. When another service can move a little girl’s birthday card from a small Minnesota town of 210 people all the way to Hawaii within a couple of days for just 45 cents, I’ll consider otherwise.

 

amandabeech

(9,893 posts)
34. Small towns really depend on the PO.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:40 AM
Jan 2013

There is no Fedex or UPS station in my Mom's town. The nearest is 20 miles away.

I didn't have problems with the PO until I moved to Maryland, but I've lived in so many places, and it is the only one that I have complaints about.

It's an old joke about the PO, but the reality is that it delivers so much mail accurately in a small amount of time for an extremely reasonable price.

Just the thing to make a bunch of wall streeters a bunch of money.

mac56

(17,557 posts)
35. Among other reasons
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:57 AM
Jan 2013

many senior citizens I know look forward to the letter carrier's daily visit. Friendships are built and communities are developed. The Fedex or UPS driver won't have that same ability.

 

amandabeech

(9,893 posts)
49. Yes, it does help.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 08:22 AM
Jan 2013

Any regular contact is great for seniors, and a good letter carrier or rural delivery person can report that a senior has not been seen or is not going to the mailbox.

Ed Suspicious

(8,879 posts)
7. It's already efficient and inexpensive. It has to compete with private services already.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:05 AM
Jan 2013

This is angling for the greedy bastards trying to get their hands in the money jar. This is union busting and it's disgusting.

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
27. It doesn't have to compete with the private services
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:00 AM
Jan 2013

the private services have to compete with them, that is the main drive to privatize everything, because good, well paid union labor is hard to compete against.

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
6. Noooooo!
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:04 AM
Jan 2013

I love my post office, and I love the ladies who have been working there since forever, who really know their stuff, and who earn a decent wage to live on.

Historic NY

(37,449 posts)
8. You mean how to rip off the public, here come 5 dollar letters....
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:06 AM
Jan 2013

eliminate the pension overfunding......and revamp some usless operations. By all accounts the post offices guarentee Christmas delivery program was a success this season. They tried something new working with companies and business during the season to expedite shipping parcels.

 

amandabeech

(9,893 posts)
17. Privitization never FAILS to make rich those who demanded the privitization.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:57 AM
Jan 2013

Everything else goes to hell in a handbasket, though.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
11. It doesn't take a think tank to figure out how to get them in financial shape
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:27 AM
Jan 2013

just stop the requirement pre-fund their pension funds for the next 75 years and do it in 10 years. That is so ridiculous that no government agency or business in the country does anything remotely similar.

The requirement was part of a plan to privatize it.

CHeck this out:
http://deliveringforamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/infographic_20120711.pdf

Uniblab

(25 posts)
13. I'm a mail carrier....
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:37 AM
Jan 2013

And the simple solution is to undo that union killing law Bush passed during the lame duck session. Making us pay 75 years of medical benefits to future retirees in a 10 year window. WTF? Bush's hope was to cripple the postal service and force it to be privatized . Thus, no more union. No company in the world could survive if they had to do this and Bush knew this. Fucking repugs are trying to destroy our jobs.

abelenkpe

(9,933 posts)
31. +1000
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:10 AM
Jan 2013

You're right. The post office needs media to report that fact loud and clear. Privatization will cost workers and consumers. It is never the more cost effective solution. So lame that anyone would even consider this this day in age. Hopefully the government will wise up and do as you suggest.

iemitsu

(3,888 posts)
14. I agree with everyone on this thread, this is fucked.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:45 AM
Jan 2013

We won the election in 2008 and we one this last month. Obama and democrats are supposed to stop this insane give-away of the public commons, not endorse it.
We all need to be on the phones again to see if we can have some influence in this process.
I am sick to death of being sold down river by my own party. How dare they?

 

Coyotl

(15,262 posts)
21. In related news, Koch Industries has privatized the State of Wisconsin.
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:17 AM
Jan 2013

Yeah, like both will happen

starroute

(12,977 posts)
23. Don't laugh too quickly
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:53 AM
Jan 2013

The privatizers are clever, devious, ruthless, and patient. And they *will* have the last laugh if we don't take them seriously.

SparkyOR

(81 posts)
24. Here in Oregon we've got vote by mail, which has been working great...
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:56 AM
Jan 2013

...so far. Now what are the possibilities of privately controlled entities "losing" ballots from certain districts? hmmm

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
26. get rid of the fucking pension funding requirement. The post office operated profitablly
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:00 AM
Jan 2013

without tax dollars until the repukes put the pension funding burden on them!

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
32. Now that the wholly manufactured "Fiscal Cliff" act is over for now....
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:20 AM
Jan 2013

... we must urgently raise the curtain on another wholly manufactured crisis act.

When are they gonna stop this theatre and really get something done.... like solve a real problem?

sofa king

(10,857 posts)
37. I have a plan!
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:00 AM
Jan 2013

Make postage stamps considerably more expensive, but each sent postage stamp will be redeemable for one large mug of beer at a bar.

I call it the Frank n' Stein Plan.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
38. Yeah, and I bet you...
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:00 AM
Jan 2013

....they get their funding from the Koch Brothers (or their 0.01% ilk). Our postal system is just fine, thank you. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I'm sick and tired of think-tanks running our country, GDit! We've seen how privatizing works. If it ain't broke, they break it. Thanks, but no thanks, we're on to your "privatizing" scam.

ProfessionalLeftist

(4,982 posts)
40. The USPS is not "financially ailing", it's been looted by Repugs
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:01 AM
Jan 2013

...and privatizing it is only being done for the purpose of getting rid of the unions.

It was the GOP who passed legislation requiring the USPS to pre-find its retirement system 75 years in advance. And that's why it's "ailing" and that's the only reason. The GOP did this so they could claim that the USPS is "ailing", inefficient and therefore should be privatized. It's all a goddamned ruse to bust the unions.

Typical Republican criminal bullshit.

Edit: As others have pointed out here, this is just another effing manufactured crisis by the Repubs. The USPS isn't broke and neither is the US. All the money has been looted by Repigs and their corprat friends so the rest of us don't have any. Now, they're after the postal svc., Social Security, and Medicare. GOP wants ALL public funded institutions and programs privatized so their corprat friends and themselves can have all the money in and going to them from tax dollars. They're looting the entire nation right under our noses - selling the whole thing out to corprats here and abroad.

jmowreader

(50,419 posts)
48. Union busting isn't the only reason
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:45 AM
Jan 2013

It is a very big one.

Another is the private sector really wants the USPS out of the overnight and two-day marketspace. The USPS does rapid delivery better and cheaper than the private sector. Can't have that!

Cosmocat

(14,535 posts)
50. They will pare off anything that can make money
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 08:45 AM
Jan 2013

and leave the government to run what does not make money, and say how horrible government is because it runs at a deficit.

ProfessionalLeftist

(4,982 posts)
53. If that's their logic, they should cut down defense/pentagon spending
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 09:26 AM
Jan 2013

That's the biggest deficit-spending operation we have in the U.S. gov't. Funny how it's never mentioned for cuts.

Really though, these guys aren't driven by logic (obviously). They're only driven by sheer GREED. Pentagon/defense makes their corprat friends LOTs of money - taxpayer dollars going directly into corprat pockets. Oh they like that!

 

Rain Mcloud

(812 posts)
47. Time to start paying for junk mail
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:39 AM
Jan 2013

and re-connection fees for the utility bills that show up a week after the power was cut off.
Welcome to Neo-con paradise 2.0,hey,it worked so well in Iraq and Afghanistan that they want it here:
[link:http://www.peaceandfreedom.org/home/articles/general/388-there-was-a-plan-to-rebuild-iraq-but-it-didnt-work|

loyalkydem

(1,678 posts)
52. I live in a small town
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 09:23 AM
Jan 2013

we don't even have a mail box. These folks don't think. This is why we need a democratic congress to reverse what the lame duck of 2006 did.

 

Crow73

(257 posts)
54. That worked out so well with telecom
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 11:02 AM
Jan 2013

If we had leased the access we would not be in the stone age with our national network coverage.

 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
57. Pitney Bowes is PAYING for this study?
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:17 PM
Jan 2013

The US Postal Service has ALWAYS been a public-private partnership. Unlike UPS, the Postal Service contracts to PRIVATE HAULERS, the hauling of mail and packages between cities., It contracted with Amtrak to haul mail and packages between New York City and Chicago via Pittsburgh till the mid 1990 (When Amtrak lost the contract to private trucking companies). Mail and Packages go via "Space Available" bases on Airplanes (Which is also an indirect subsidy to the same air lines). Bitney Bowes sell and operate almost all of the metered mail devices used by businesses and it is a PRIVATE COMPANY. In many ways the US Postal Service uses a lot more outside contractors then dies UPS and other package delivery firms.

Thus why is Bitney Bowes FUNDING this study? Is the drop in BUSINESS USE OF THE MAIL THAT SIGNIFICANT? Maybe, but NOT due to the drop in first class mailing by businesses but the drop in usage of postal meters due to the Postal Service adoption of getting stamps via the Internet. i.e. people who uses stamps, have dropped using first class mail, but businesses, who use to use postal meters have NOT reduced their level of mailings.

I suspect Bitney Bowes is worried that its business may decrease if the Postal Service reduces mail deliveries to three days a week, thus Pitney Bowes wants businesses to send mail, and this is the first shot by Bitney Bowes in the fight on HOW the reduction in mail service takes place. Given that the Postal Service already hires outside contractors to most mail (Registered mail is an exception, that stays within the hands of Postal Service Employees, but it is a very small part of the Mail Service, way smaller then its often confused cousin Certified Mail).

Side note: People confuse Certified Mail with Registered Mail all the time. The Confusion is both cost extra, and the received of both must sign for the Mail. The difference is how it is handled in between. Certified mail is treated like any other type of mail except the end user must sign for it. Registered mail is signed for by everyone who had possession of it at any time. I.e, you go to the Post Office, the Clerk accepts your Registered Mail, he then gives it to the truck driver driving to the local distribution point, who signs for it, When the truck driver gets to the local distribution point, it is again signed for by whoever receives it. That person then transport to the next distribution points and hand it off to the next person who also signs for it. This signing for the package continues till it is delivered to the recipient., who also signs for it. Please note, it is the INDIVIDUAL Letter that is signed for, if they are dozens, the person receiving the Registered Mail MUST sign EACH as the receiver of that package.

The key to Registered mail, is if the package is lost, you know exactly who had possession of it at that time and that person is liable for any content of that package. Thus registered mail is generally restricted to packages of high value, for example when the Hope Diamond was given to the Smithsonian Institute, the Diamond dealer who owned it and donated it, shipped it the way he always shipped his diamonds, by Registered Mail. My Father had to delver Diamonds, via registered mail almost every week when he worked in Downtown Pittsburgh in the 1970s (He delivery the diamonds to one of the few diamond cutters in the US outside of New York City, it has been out of business since the elderly owner closed shop in the 1980s). He once delivered a heavy package to a Lawyer in Pittsburgh, he had the lawyer sign for the package (it was registered mail) and asked why was so small a package was so heavy, he was told it was two gold bars. I do into Registered Mail for people confuse it with Certified Mail all the time. Certified mail is used when someone wants a signature that someone received something (generally a legal document). Registered mail is used when the sender wants to know WHO HAD THE PACKAGE IF AND WHEN IT IS LOST. If it is received, no one really cares (Except the Letter Carrier who has a signature that he delivered it and did NOT lose it).

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
63. Thank you!!! for that info about Certirfied mail.
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:37 PM
Jan 2013

I really did not know the difference.
I used Certified to send IRS letters back, and mortgage docs.
I am thinking now that when I send paperwork to Bank of America I will use registered mail,
since BOA has such a bad habit of claiming they did not get what people sent. It is a good way to prove "chain of custody".

 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
64. Certified mail is good enough, if you want confirmation of acceptance
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:30 PM
Jan 2013

Registered mail is a waste of time for that purpose, you do NOT need to know every Postal Employee who handled the package, all you need to know is BOA received it. Certified mail can provide THAT level of service.

The extra cost of Registered mail should be reserved for valuable items, cash, diamonds, gold etc. In such situation you may want to know who was the last Postal Employee to have the package. You do NOT need that information for documents sent to someone like BOA.

You want to know HOW BOA handled the paper work you sent them, NOT how the Postal Service handled the paper work. Your problem is BOA apparently does NOT know how to handle its internal paperwork movement. That is beyond the ability of the Postal Service, that is up to BOA and registered mail will NOT help you in that regard.

 

november3rd

(1,113 posts)
60. The People Need To Take Over The Congress
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:44 AM
Jan 2013

The Tea Party Conservatives are right about that much. What they're wrong about is How and Why.

The American people have the right to conduct and control our own mail service, independently of any Feudalist, Oligarchic, Neo-Liberal, Post-Capitalist Monopoly.

All those private couriers sponge like crazy off of taxpayers and USPS.

If USPS went private, costs would skyrocket, and service would die.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Think tank to study priva...