Stop the U.S. Mail
Andy Kessler of Wired wonders about American tolerance of the monopolistic US Postal Service:
It's been said that Americans will put up with anything - as long as it doesn't involve waiting in line. And as I wasted half a day mailing a gift this past holiday season, I asked myself why that sentiment doesn't apply to the US Postal Service. In the age of instant communication, with trillions of dollars crossing borders in nanoseconds and grandmas sending email, why do post offices even exist?
He goes on to point out that the monopoly enjoyed by the Post Office means that the American Postal Workers Union can continue to succesfully fight against labor-saving technologies and, "The USPS monopoly means no shareholders to complain, and no lawyers to file class actions against it." He also argues that alternatives already exist to everything (useful) that the Postal Service does. Bills can now be paid online and private carriers like UPS and FedEx could easily move into first- and third-class mail. If junk mail didn't make the cut, who cares?
"...in 1825, Congress outlawed private mail delivery within cities and gave the USPS a monopoly over first-class letters and third-class items like magazines, catalogs, and junk mail (a prize if you can tell the difference)." Note first that the monopoly State is the sine qua non of the Postal Service monopoly. Note also that by making these services a monopoly, Congress removed them, to a great extent, from the market. What does this mean? It means that Americans are unjustly prevented, by force, from using private mail carriers that we think will do a better job. It also means that the US Postal Service is cut off from competition and, therefore, from the incentive to innovate in services and do things cheaper. "Monopoly" originally got its bad connotation from the efforts of the English classical liberals to combat royally granted monopolies. The libertarian war against monopoly continues.
Comments (6)
Aaron Morse
I posted about this on my blog (CDZBlog), and was refered here by a comment there.
I am definitely in agreement that the USPS should be privatized -- the government breaks up monopolies (Microsoft and Standard Oil as two more famous ones) and yet runs its own. And why should the government run the post office in the first place? But at least give us alternatives (with competition, the price will go down to send letters, as opposed to rising as it has lately to my chagrin.0
Published: February 7, 2005 3:23 PM
William Woodruff
The billions of dollars which pass through UPS, FedEX, DHL et al is a glowing expample of the slowly loosing grip the USPS has on the delivery of mail and parcels within the US. Aside from the tens of millions of e-mails and digital documents which are nearly perfect substitutes for 1st Class mail.
Published: February 7, 2005 4:57 PM
Andy
USPS still has the fastest shipping times for small packages...which = consumer market. Most companies like to ship with UPS and FedEx for the lower rates, but as an avid ebayer, i'd rather it be sent through USPS. Thier delivery times have always been impeccable for me.
Published: February 8, 2005 1:15 AM
Stamp Collector
What UPS et al. need to do start ofering collectible stamps to go on the routing slips. Make em' diverse and limitied, so that there can be an actual market in collectibles. Once people are putting stamps on UPS and FedEx, I think many will make a connection that didn't exist before: these are mail deliver services, just like the USPS. Then these people can ask a question that had never occurred to them before: why do we have a governement mail service, TOO?
Maybe stamps won't be the magic bullet, but most people I talk to don't seem to make the connection that the USPS is in the same business as FedEx. Putting collectible stamps on FedEx packages helps people see the similarities.
Published: February 8, 2005 1:23 AM
C. Strong
USPS still has the fastest shipping times for small packages...which = consumer market. Most companies like to ship with UPS and FedEx for the lower rates, but as an avid ebayer, i'd rather it be sent through USPS. Thier delivery times have always been impeccable for me.
I have to send out packets of reports and various documents including pay roll for the company I work for. For each packet I send I give the USPS $3.85, and these things weigh a little less than a pound. If some of these documents don't get to the head office to be delt with then my company could be fined large ammouts of money by companies we do business with, or workers might not get paied on time and could suffer negative things from that.
In the last 3 weeks I have sent out three of these packets, only 1 of them got there, and it took 4 business days to go less than 40 miles for the one packet that did make it.
The USPS has no incentive to do a damn thing to improve their system, and to keep their "customers".
Published: February 8, 2005 6:39 AM
Curt Howland
The absurdity of the USPS continues because of the false impression that only with a monopoly as incentive, will an organization deliver "everywhere". Demonstrably false if one looks at UPS and other carriers, except for the "flat rate" aspect.
How about going after the legal monopoly that is Baseball? At least I'm not a criminal if I don't go to their baseball games to pass the time.
Published: February 8, 2005 4:02 PM