Is there any good argument against privatizing the post office?
Brad asked:
The post office is inefficient at delivering mail and has been out-competed in every area in which private enterprise is legally allowed to compete with it. People do not use the post office to deliver packages, but rather Fedex or UPS.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, March 7th, 2010 at 12:00 am and is filed under Government.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
The post office is inefficient at delivering mail and has been out-competed in every area in which private enterprise is legally allowed to compete with it. People do not use the post office to deliver packages, but rather Fedex or UPS.
Is there any good reason why we shouldn’t just privatize the post office, abolish its monopoly privileges, and let it compete on the free market? The only remotely respectable argument against privatization of the post office that I can think of is that the inefficiency of the post office is a good argument against those who advocate that the government start other business enterprises.
Other than the fact that privatizing the post office will mean that post office employees will no longer be able to be paid outrageous salaries, why shouldn’t we privatize the post office?
March 8th, 2010 at 2:18 am
A friend of mine is a mail carrier. He does his route, then goes to the donut shop for four hours. Not everyone is cut out for a real job. Just leave it. Thor
March 10th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
Fedex or UPS will not guarantee to come to every house in the USA and deliver a letter anywhere in the country for 41 cents (or even less for bulk rate).
The post-office is constitutionally mandated and cannot be privatized, but it operates somewhat like a private company, at only a slight loss. There is complete competition between the USPS and private carriers for package and express deliveries. brucec83
March 13th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
Yes. The unions would never permit it. Philip H
March 16th, 2010 at 7:14 am
I would better privatize police and firefighters. $60K a year just for cruising around sounds outrageous.
Army privatization sounds good to me to. And of course public schools needs to be privatized. And yes, SS should be dismantled. V2
March 18th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
If we are going to privatize the post office, we should be ready to give Rs.1000 to the post office to send our letter (no parcel) from Kanyakumari to Gulbarga in India. Governmental post office would take just Rs.50, at the maximum. Moreover, private ones have no equality. They will only benefit the rich, not the poor. Moreover, there are many accounts of the poor people in the post office. This service can be shut down by the private companies as it would be loss making for them. Moreover, today’s governmental post service is as strong as the private ones. Although the private ones are fast, these post offices can be trusted. So, we should be against the privatization of post offices as they have helped people a lot. Archit
March 19th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Contrary to Brucec83’s answer, the post office is not mandated by the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution give Congress power over the post office but does not require there to be a post office, (United States ex rel. Milwaukee Publishing Co. v. Burleson). However, as long as it operates a the “Postal Service” and handles “mail”, there must be congressional oversight. FedEx and UPS cannot deliver “mail” and have to be very careful about the regulations regarding such. There are very specific legal definitions separating “mail” from “express letters”. winger58