Economic Corner 22 10/22/2025

THE United States Postal Service 2025

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/11975-economiccorner022/

 

 

IF YOU DONT WANT TO CLICK THE LINK, READ ON

 

United States Postal Service 2025 

 

The United States Postal Service in the USA compared to other models
you can't compare denmark to canada. yes, denmark is getting rid of letter shipping. but postnord has a functional monopoly on the postal service in scandanavia denmark/sweden/finland and another. And by postnord's admission, they are ending letters, not mail. mail is letters+ packages. packages are on the rise. letters are on the decline, not mail though, and this is part of the argument in the usa or canada, that mail has risen, not in letters but in packages , and to be blunt, the post office should had been where the internet was designed through. the internet literally uses addresses but the people implementing it never though to go through the post office. Government officials biggest flaw is when they don't make functional laws that forsee problems. Lyndon B Johnson's speech on the immigration act is why in 2025 immigration is the issue it is.  I quote Lyndon B Johnson October 03, 1965 speaking on the just passed Immigration Act of 1965. 

"It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not reshape the structure of our daily lives, or really add importantly to either our wealth or our power. Yet it is still one of the most important acts of this Congress and of this administration. For it does repair a very deep and painful flaw in the fabric of American justice. It corrects a cruel and enduring wrong in the conduct of the American Nation."
 

What? 
Allowing millions of hungry or fiscally poor people to enter any human populace under any government is going to affect the lives of everyone in said populace. It will reshape the lives of everyone in said populace. It will add, in white peoples case it did,  or diminish, in Black descended of enslaved's case it did, their fiscal wealth or power. In 2025 the immigrant populace herded into the usa has never corrected any wrongs in the usa, but has added more by their existence. Now, in 2025, who has the answers to all the various desires in all the various races in the usa? 
Immigration Act speech 
https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2785&type=status
Kerner Commission 
https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2685&type=status

The Post office should never had competition. 
I quote the brookings report, for it mirrors what I have said time and again.

"First, we highlight how market forces and the postal service’s obligation to provide quality nationwide mail service at uniform rates contribute to the financial challenges faced by the postal service."
 

Read the primary mission statement of the United States postal service

"The Postal Service shall have as its basic function the obligation to provide postal services to bind the Nation together through the personal, educational, literary, and business correspondence of the people. It shall provide prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons in all areas and shall render postal services to all communities. (39 U.S. Code, Section 101)"
 

The problem with postal services is that they are at heart, socialist or communist entities. That mission statement says nothing about financial profit. It is all about having a federal system that can cut through any boundaries to reach any and all peoples in the usa.  The idea is, everyone who has a home can get mail: letters+packages+ other. It is a equal system. The problem is , fiscally wealthy people, usually whites, have always wanted to take the profitable sector of the postal industry. And that imbalance is the heart of the problem. 

"FedEx reported $35 billion in debt in 2024.  USPS also already faces considerable competition from private companies, such as am*zon, FedEx, and UPS, in delivery of its competitive—and profitable—products, such as parcels."
 

But it started with UPS. UPS was started as a specialty delivery service in 1907. Not faster but more secure than the postal service.
FedEx was started in  1971 for urgent shipping. Way faster for businesses. 
UPS and FedEx have never been about sending mail to a town of ten people. It has never been about letters to santa claus from fiscally poor children. 
support
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg8jllq283o
support
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/return-to-sender-what-privatization-might-mean-for-the-future-of-the-usps/
in amendment
potentially, the tragedy of post offices is they serve an important function, they allow populaces under any government the ability to community absent electricity. This is why nearly every country with a certain level of wealth has a post office. The problem is, government officials in most governments in humanity whether elected or not, don't make functional laws. They make philosophical or fiscally lobbied laws. Both of which do one thing, kick problems down the road. When the road ends, all that is left is some form of chaos because the decades or centuries to actually do something that is financially or organizationally feasible has passed. 
referral
https://discord.com/channels/1238281346833715283/1238654689097289828/1425878435011629066

 

Prior Edition

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/11653-economiccorner021/

 

 

COMMENTARIES

 

@profd

 

I have questions to you

 

By your studying,  when did the "system of capitalism" begin in humanity? I noticed in past dialogs you use that to refer it as a power over the government of the usa, maybe over humanity? am I wrong that you referred as i said? 

 

In your assessment, do other systems besides fiscal capitalism have competition? and what are the other systems?

 

URL

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/11975-economiccorner022/#findComment-77152

 

 

IN AMENDMENT

 @ProfD

made statements so I replied outside continuity

 

5 hours ago, ProfD said:

There is always competition under a system of capitalism. 

This is his opening statement. So what are the questions automatically? 

Is he suggesting other systems humans have employed are bereft of competition? 

If so , he is wrong. If not, then why mention this?

Competition isn't the issue, quality is. Two people can always play chess, but in certain game rooms one can not sit across another unless they have achieved a certain quality. 

In this case, The post office of the usa was made to sit across private firms whose qualities were negative in comparison. Yes, they are competitors but it is like someone who has been playing chess for over fifty years sitting across from someone who never even heard of the game chess. Yes, the private firms will get stronger like any person just starting a game will, but the superior competitor, in this case, the post office, will get weaker against such opposition by default. Cause the opposition doesn't offer a challenge except long term. 

Now, this means the government allowed a dysfunctional competition. 

5 hours ago, ProfD said:

It is hard to predict new and emerging technologies and how it affects the way we do things.

This is a lie. This was Tesla's entire point. Edison and Westinghouse simply wanted to use technology for financial profit, but Tesla wanted to not only make technology but guide its use. It is not hard at all to guide the use of technology to positive ends. What is hard is blockading financially greedy from using technology absent concern of its use for financial profit, and abset that concern creates environments of abuse + misuse. 

I lived to see programming become potent enough to be deemed artificial intelligence, in no way is this era hard to predict. The problem is the usa has a system of slavery which is designed to make profit regardless of the condition of others, and in such a system, the use of programming power has been abused + misused while making money. 

5 hours ago, ProfD said:

The pony express was replaced by faster forms of transportation.  Trains and other vehicles worked out great for the postal service.  The postal service employed millions of people directly and indirectly too.

 

As mentioned above, the United Parcel Service (UPS) was started over 100 years ago as a delivery service.   That business took off especially as gross consumerism ramped up. 

Is he suggesting technological change requires new firms? if so , that has no basis in truth. The train is still the most efficient transportation system even with the automotive or aeroplane markets subsidies. BAsed on what he said, so far in his argument, automotives + aeroplanes should be more efficient. 

 

5 hours ago, ProfD said:

While the postal service could handle billions of pieces of mail and parcels annually, larger packagers and faster delivery times required something different.  A demand and convenience private companies were more than wiling to fulfill under a system of capitalism.

Why did they require something different? And even if they did, why did that demand an allowance for private companies. In my eyes, his equation doesn't add up. If the post office needed a branch for faster delivery or larger packages, why couldn't the government develop a service within the post office for that? what he is saying is the government of the usa, which had and has many engineers in it, couldn't develop a system for quicker delivery to the needs of financially above average customers? I wonder how many believe that?   I don't see why fiscal capitalism has anything to do with this. He is suggesting that fiscal capitalism as implemented in the usa can't tell businesses not to compete against a government agency? if that was true, the us military would have competition now. Cause war is very profitable. But... 

5 hours ago, ProfD said:

IMO, long before the internet and mail, personal computers should have been viewed as the technology that would drastically the alter the way we collect and store information (data) but also how we communicate. 

 

I want to say, in cheap hindsight he is correct. But why do I say cheap hindsight, because his point misses as in the other sections of his argument the governments role in all of this. Government is designed to govern, not make money, not make war, not make peace, not share wealth, but to govern. 

The truth is, the problem with this issue is the people in the usa government are not engineers. Most of the people in the usa government have one of four educational backgrounds: lawyers/business administration/soldiers/doctors. But what is the problem? IS it education? no. Being educated isn't a reflection of what one is experienced in studying. Being educated is a measure of knowledge through experience. 

Now similar to the personal computer and the internet is the car and the automotive roads or the train and the train tracks. They each drastically changed how people in the usa communicate, store data. So let's look at the four educational backgrounds concerning : the transcontinental railroad(s) whose parts are still in use, the highway system with elements like Route 66, the interstate which is still being added to and deleted the use of route 66 o other parts of the highway system. 

 

What are lawyers experienced in studying? the law and the processes of legal environments. 

In what arenas do lawyers experience help or hurt in government? Lawyers are helpful in matters of the law, its adherence. Lawyers are best to uncover an aspect of a law that will coincide with another law, thus making legal loopholes or collisions. That is helpful. Important tool to preserve the strength of the law. But, doesn't clean up the law.  Lawyers are hurtful in matters where criminal or dysfunctional activity can occur through the law. 

Let's relate: what experience do lawyers have in implementing transcontinental railroads, highway systems, interstate highway systems, or electronic internets. Do they have experience making trains or cars or computers? no. So, maybe the implementation of these technologies would had been better if the elected officials were not dysfunctional. 

 

Next , what are business administrators experienced in studying? using accountancy or counting, making averages, developing statistics. 

In what arenas do business administrators experience help or hurt in government? Business administrators help in assessing numbers around a laws use. Making statistics. 

That is helpful. Important tool of guidance. But terrible for implementation. Business administrators are hurtful in functionalizing holistic solutions, averages or statistics by default are designed to accept negligibilites. But efficient law can't do that. 

Let's relate. What experience to business administrators have in implementing transcontinental railrods, highway systems, interstate highway systems, or electronic internets? Do they have experience crafting trains cars or computers? no. the people who craft said items or craft the machines that craft said items are engineers or craftspeople. So , maybe the implementation of these technologies would had been better if the elected officials were not dysfunctional. 

 

Next , what are soldiers experienced in studying? weapons management+ tactics on mock fields of battle+ coordination with other human beings. 

In what arenas do soldiers experience help or hurt in government? Soldiers are great in war, preparing for war, preparing other human beings for war. That is helpful. But too often not great for peace. Soldiers are hurtful comprehending libertarian/ not the usa school of governing though but the word use sense as in free thought. The law always allows potential for free thoughts or actions and soldiers are poorly suited to see or react to that or implement sight or reaction into the law. 

Let's relate. What experience do soldiers have in implementing transcontinental railroads, highway systems, interstate highway systems or electronic internets? They may have done it for the militaries needs. But do they have experience implementing said systems for a use outside the military? rarely. Do they have experience crating trains cars or computers for non militaristic use? no. The people who craft said items for nonmilitaristic use are not soldiers usually. Usually disdain the chain of command culture. So maybe the implementation of these technologies would had been better if the elected officials were more accustomed.

 

Next, what are doctors experienced in studying? individual and collective illness+ remedies+ measures of health.

In what arenas do doctors experience help or hurt in government? Doctors are best in assessing potential damage to health or symptoms of illness. That is helpful. But doctors can be too rigid to their findings. The health of an individual or group doesn't have to mirror what any study suggest and that dissimilarity can lead to worse health for an individual or group, that is the essence of medical malpractice.

Let's relates. What experience do doctors have in implementing transcontinental railroads, highway systems, interstate highway systems or electronic internets? no. Do they have experience crafting trains cars or computers? no. Too often engineers develop the doctors tools with input from the doctor. 

 

The point? engineers are better suited in government cause they prefer action not laws, and are used to building/destroying/rebooting systems. Their great weakness unlike the others is their flexibility. Where the lawyer wants to maintain the law, the engineer says lets consider what the law doesn't handle. Where the business administrator wants to calculate the influence of the law, the engineer wants to design the law to handle all potential situations. Where the soldier wants the law to be implemented , the engineer questions if the law is needed. Where the doctor is measuring the risk of health, the engineer is focused on the purpose.