37 proposed Wyoming Post Office closings/ "study list"

[archy]

Posting the info doesn't display here without the HTML formatting, so here's the link:

http://about.usps.com/news/electronic-press-kits/expandedaccess/states/wyoming.htm

[manfromnevada]

My local PO is on the list. Oh well. I'm not one to complain about the massive government spending and then say "but don't cut my goodies!"

Looks like I may be going 18 miles (one way) instead of 10 to get the mail. 
Mac

[FlyingDevildog]

For one thing the Postal Service doesn't use tax dollars to run. It gets it's income from postage.

It's also the only company to pre-fund it's retirement health care, and has since 2007 to the tune of 4 to 5 billon a year.

it's one of the only Fed companys to pay it's own way, at least until 2007, so thats why it's hurting for money.
If it didn't have to pre-fund the healthcare, it would be making a profit now, even with the reduce mail flow.

so don't get to hard on the lowly postal worker.

Dawg

[manfromnevada]

Huh?
Are we talking about the US Postal Service? The one that lost hundreds of millions (or billions) last year?
And it's not using tax dollars?
How's that again?

Mac

[Don Wills]

The story that the USPS is a separate company/corporation is absolutely false.  It has gotten tens of billions of dollars of taxpayer money to operate through its history.  It needs $5B or so right now to make it another couple of years.  There is no question that it is an agency of the federal government.  Google "wiki USPS" for more details.

The solution is simply - repeal its monopoly status and stop funding it.  If it is able to stand on it's own two feet, great.  But I'd put my money on a snowball's chance in hell vs. the USPS ever being profitable.

[Crappiewy]

Im not too suprised that manville and lance creek are on the list but am suprised that four corners isnt and Central Cheyenne is..

Im sure they could have funded all of them by not building the new Sundance post office.

[FlyingDevildog]

Huh?
Are we talking about the US Postal Service? The one that lost hundreds of millions (or billions) last year?
And it's not using tax dollars?
How's that again?

Mac

And where are you getting the facts on this?

the Postal Service does not get tax dollars to run.

please show me your facts to prove this.

[FlyingDevildog]

The story that the USPS is a separate company/corporation is absolutely false.  It has gotten tens of billions of dollars of taxpayer money to operate through its history.  It needs $5B or so right now to make it another couple of years.  There is no question that it is an agency of the federal government.  Google "wiki USPS" for more details.

The solution is simply - repeal its monopoly status and stop funding it.  If it is able to stand on it's own two feet, great.  But I'd put my money on a snowball's chance in hell vs. the USPS ever being profitable.

again where are the facts, and Wiki is not a good place to find facts about anything.

where are the facts, show me the prove of your statement. Where in the fed budget is the line to fund the USPS. it's not there.
all the funds to run the USPS is made from postage and none of it comes from tax dollars.

[Don Wills]

where are the facts, show me the prove of your statement. Where in the fed budget is the line to fund the USPS. it's not there.
all the funds to run the USPS is made from postage and none of it comes from tax dollars.

With regard to governance, I refer readers to this section of the US Code - http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/39/202.html

With regard to funding, it gets its "shortfall" the same way as does the federal government - through borrowing.  "From fiscal year 2006 to 2009, its [the USPS] debt increased from $2.1 billion to $10.2 billion."  That quote can be found in this Cato Institute study:  http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj31n1/cj31n1-9.pdf.  The USPS is just one of the several GSEs that pretend to be independent corporations, but are in reality governmental organizations.  As the famous quote says "Follow the Money".  The USPS debt is 100% insured by the US gummint.  Plus there are the annual "transfer payments" for federal government use of USPS services that have ranged between $100M and $500M per year.  And then there's these facts: the USPS pays no property taxes, would pay no corporate income taxes if it did have a profit, and doesn't have to follow many of the rules that a normal corporation must abide by or be fined by the IRS or state authorities.

To believe that the USPS is somehow a private corporation that isn't supported by the government is simply naive.

[Paul Bonneau]

Isn't there that little bit about the Post Office's government-enforced monopoly on first class mail? That must be worth some money.

Although I admit I don't know the details of that, as I haven't made a habit of post office bashing. There are lots worse things government does, than delivering mail badly.

[sbeckman]

Isn't there that little bit about the Post Office's government-enforced monopoly on first class mail? That must be worth some money.

Although I admit I don't know the details of that, as I haven't made a habit of post office bashing. There are lots worse things government does, than delivering mail badly.

The problem is that they have lost so much market share to e-mail, cell phones, texting, etc. that they are now hurting.

Certainly.

[manfromnevada]

Here's another story regarding the closings from CNN Money:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Postal-Service-urges-Congress-cnnm-1438592944.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=2&asset=&ccode=


The post office claims it needs to eliminate 220,000 positions, or more than 30% of its staff by 2015, but only 100,000 of those positions can be made through attrition. The other 120,000 must come from lay offs, according to the documents. "To restore the Postal Service to financial viability, it is imperative that we have the ability to reduce our workforce rapidly," the USPS wrote.
The USPS is also asking Congress to change legislation that requires postal workers to get federal health care and retirement benefits. Instead, the Postal Service would replace them with its own benefit plans.

Currently, postal employees participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits program, the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System. If given congressional approval, the Post Office would replace those with new plans that would save money, while offering comparable benefits to employees, according to the documents.


Mac

[manfromnevada]

Here's the latest on the postal service:

Post office is nearing default as losses mount
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Postal-Service-Is-Nearing-nytimes-3043052091.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=3&asset=&ccode=

They are hemmed in on all sides.
CANNOT (by law) raise postage faster than the inflation rate.
CANNOT (by law) supplement their income by selling other products (chips, cell phones, calendars)
CANNOT (by law) lay ANYONE off!
The sales volume is decreasing rapidly due to the Internet. That's not going to improve.
They must get congressional approval (good luck) to close the various low productivity offices or to eliminate Saturday delivery.
They MUST (by law) fund the generous pension fund of the government employees.

I think this is going to become a hot potato in Congress just like the debt ceiling. Should be interesting.

Mac

[bobcat]

Also this article from Newsmax.  More of the same.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/BB-BNALL-BNCOPY-BNSTAFF/2011/09/06/id/409896

Looks like Sat mail, some jobs (assuming contracts can be modified or broken) as well as pension funding (already being deferred) is on the block.  They project they'll be behind another $9BB next year.  Heck, they ain't even on a sustainable path.  Histoire.  Poof.  Finito.  Unless CONgress keeps pumping them up.

We've lost several itty bitty Postal Orifices here in the higher population density Midwest, too.  It ain't a big deal with rural carriers.  The old folks lost their liars benches and that's about all.  I'm a 30-40 minute drive away from a Post Office anyway and it's just not a big deal.  I simply combine a PO visit with other 'town' business.  Besides, if there is enough volume, an enterprising individual could open up a Mailboxes, Etc. type store where the USPS has abandoned customers...

The USPS is a government entity, no matter how independent they say they are.
1) They borrow money for deficit operation from the US Taxpayer and have for years as has been pointed out.
2) I've delt with USPS as a supplier of equipment and the contracts that we had to review, sign and fulfill were on 'USG' stationary with USG legalese boilerplate.  Actually quite similar to DoD, FAA and Bureau of Reclamation, et. al.
3) The head dog at USPS is a political appointee.
4) Ask any Postal Carrier and they will tell you they are a fed government employee, with all it's perks and privileges...
5) USPS also openly claims government status with respect to carrying firearms on it's 'property'-remember?
6) Want more proof?  The larger USPS buildings/properties sport USG No Trespassing signs and the vehicles (except rural contract carriers) sport USG license plates.

As Mac suggests, this is gonna be another hot 'tater in CONgress.

I'm with Don, let'em stand on their own.  If they do, fine, if they don't there are plenty of other private outfits that can haul the mail.  Heck, USPS has flight contracts with FedEx and UPS and various airlines now.  It's not a stretch for 1st class to come via UPS, FedEx or some yet to be formed corp as soon as the 1st class monopoly is lifted.  Their business model is archaic and it shows.

[Paul Bonneau]

Not only that, but there is more first class traffic that can be transferred to internet. For example legal documents, combined with public-key cryptography, should be just as valid as hard copy. And getting DVDs in the mail for entertainment will become more and more obsolete as the internet speeds get higher.