M. Lachapelle: Save U.S. Postal Service

The U.S. Postal Service is losing money, partly because of email. To add insult to injury, Supplemental Security Income checks and checks from other U.S. government departments are required to be direct deposit. That saves the government millions of dollars, but the public will have to give that to the postal service to keep it afloat.

I would rather get something for my tax money, not just pay them to stay open.

I would keep people working and spread the money more evenly. Departments in the federal government are interactive and each is watching its bottom dollar.

Why not subsidize the postal service by using it instead of email? Make the cost of regular mail part of the budget required for all federal departments.

Maurice Lachapelle, Monmouth

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



MARK GRAVEL's picture

“Why not subsidize the postal

“Why not subsidize the postal service by using it instead of email?”

For the same reason we don’t ride horses instead of driving cars. It is out dated is your answer.

Allow private industry (i.e. UPS, FEDEX) to deliver first class mail and let the US mail system die at last.

ERNEST LABBE's picture

The people

The people would not like having UPS or Fed Ex handling the mail. UPs only has six delivery centers in Maine, I'm quite sure Fed Ex has about the same. They are both smart enough to know you cannot have a branch office on every corner or in every small town.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Yet that is probably one of

Yet that is probably one of the reasons why USPS cannot break even financially.
Something as to give! We cannot keep throwing good money after bad.

JOANNE MOORE's picture

Who is "we" ?

There are no taxpayer dollars being used. Having to pre-pay 75 years into the future for health benefits, 5 or so BILLION dollars a year, in a period of ten years, might just be one of the reasons.

No, just like Wall Street thugs want to privatize Social Security, so do extreme right-wingers want to privatize the post office.
Shortsighted and fiscally disasterous? Yup. But who cares? The post office has unions! Gasp! The post office serves all! That's Communism! Double gasp!!

Good luck paying through the nose for a stamp, suckers. You think 46 cents is high? You ain't seen nothin' yet.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Oh, one more comment. If you

Oh, one more comment.

If you are still communicating via first class mail, look in the mirror to find your sucker.

The only stamps that I buy are to send Christmas and Birthday cards. All other communication and bill paying is done electronically.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

The post office is also short

The post office is also short $1.3 Billion for worker’s compensation costs in addition to being short on operating costs.
According to the House oversight chairmain Darrell Issa: “The Postal Service's unfunded liabilities will soar to around $100 billion by the end of the decade. This will reverse hard-won progress. The unfunded obligations will be 25% higher than they were before the Postal Service started its prefunding payments.”

Payments to retirees are liabilities that the post office owes. If the post office does not pay, then these obligations come from the taxpayers.

You can apply any rationalization that you want, but the post office is and needs to pay its obligations, and it cannot. The taxpayer is on the hook for any shortfall.

Lastly, we are taxpayers, which may or may not include you along nearly 50% of American workers.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"No, just like Wall Street

"No, just like Wall Street thugs want to privatize Social Security"...
Why is it you never mention that any privatization of Social Security would be VOLUNTARY and would not affect current recipients of benefits?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Perhaps they are too busy

Perhaps they are too busy trying to steal the taxpayer’s money and don’t want competition?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Just the typical liberal way

Just the typical liberal way of ignoring relevant details while kicking the truth in the ass with fabricated "facts".

MARK GRAVEL's picture

I would be happy to have my

I would be happy to have my SS privatized because I would get something in return, if even principle. Under the current system, I’ll likely be ineligible because I sacrificed on many life’s pleasures to save money for my own retirement.

I’m 100% confident that the system will change withdrawal qualifications by the time I retire. I’ll be labeled as one of those evil 1%’er that saved during their lifetime.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

You can almost plan on it,

You can almost plan on it, unless the next two presidents can undo oBAMa's 'doings'.


Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...