Another Reason to Abolish the USPS
This was originally posted on PoodleRose on July 25, 2013. Comments have not been migrated.
The United States Postal Service (USPS), long renowned for its poor service, wants to decrease the quality of its service further. In an effort to save money, the government sponsored monopoly wants more developments to utilize “cluster boxes” rather than door-to-door delivery.
There is certainly nothing wrong with taking steps to save money. Successful businesses do it all of the time. Cutting costs allows companies to reduce prices, increase returns to investors, or both. But the USPS is not a business. It enjoys monopoly status on many services, and that status is possible only because of government prohibitions.
As one example, private companies such as UPS and FedEx cannot deliver to mailboxes. The USPS enjoys the sole legal right to mailbox access, a fact which a 2008 report by the USPS admits puts private companies at a competitive disadvantage: “If existing competitors (e.g., UPS or FedEx) gain the ability to deliver to the mailbox, they may be able to offer a more competitive price on certain items… (page 58).” Because of the mailbox access rule, consumers will be forced to accept the steadily decreasing service of the USPS. And private companies will continued to be prohibited from offering consumers lower prices.
Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican who is leading efforts to save the USPS, says, “A balanced approach to saving the Postal Service means allowing USPS to adapt to America’s changing use of mail.” Apparently, a “balanced approach” also includes prohibitions on private companies and arbitrarily inflated prices for consumers.
The truth is, there is no economic or moral reason to save the USPS. The latest proposal to further reduce service is simply one more reason to abolish the USPS. It is an institution that depends on government coercion to exist. The USPS has long been a source of jokes for late night comedians. But unfortunately, the real joke is on the taxpayers who must subsidize the postal service and the patrons who must endure its declining service.