Log in

View Full Version : National Postal Services



The Idler
3rd October 2009, 14:25
What is the best way to run a national postal service and why? What's wrong with the libertarian case that anyone should be able to run a postal service. The following are some quotes from Wikipedia.

Royal Mail is the national postal service of the United Kingdom. Royal Mail Holdings plc owns Royal Mail Group Limited, which in turn operates the brands Royal Mail (UK letters), Parcelforce Worldwide (UK parcels) and General Logistics Systems. Post Office Ltd., which provides counter services, is a wholly owned subsidiary.
The American Letter Mail Company was started by Lysander Spooner in 1844, competing with the legal monopoly of the United States Post Office (USPO) (now the USPS) in violation of the Private Express Statutes. It succeeded in delivering mail for lower prices, but the U.S. Government challenged Spooner with legal measures, eventually forcing him to cease operations in 1851.[1]
Several countries, including Sweden (1 January 1993),[16][17] New Zealand (1998 and 2003), Germany (2005 and 2007)[18] and Argentina have opened up the postal services market to new entrants. In the case of New Zealand Post Limited, this included (from 2003) its right to be the sole New Zealand postal administration member of the Universal Postal Union, thus the ending of its monopoly on stamps bearing the name New Zealand.
In 2001 the government set up a postal regulator, Postcomm, and offered licences to private companies to deliver mail. In 2001, the Consumer Council for Postal Services, more commonly known as Postwatch, was created for consumers to express any concerns they may have with the postal service in the UK.

From 1 January, 2006, the Royal Mail lost its 350-year monopoly and the UK postal market became fully open to competition.
FedEx and United Parcel Service (UPS) directly compete with USPS express mail and package delivery services, making nationwide deliveries of urgent letters and packages. Due to the postal monopoly, they are not allowed to deliver non-urgent letters and may not use U.S. Mail boxes at residential and commercial destinations. These services also deliver packages which are larger and heavier than what the USPS will accept. DHL Express was the third major competitor until February 2009, when it ceased domestic delivery operations in the United States.

Tiocfaidh Ar La
3rd October 2009, 14:44
E-Mail, it's mostly free. Get with the times:laugh:

yuon
3rd October 2009, 15:42
Are you talking about right now? Or some future free society?
In a future free society, it is obvious that the profit motive won't be an issue.

Right now, I don't see a problem with multiple competing mail services (just like I don't see a problem with multiple competing mobile phone services), so long as they interact with each other.

Ideally, right now, we would probably have a community run "effective monopoly" which would be run on a not-for-profit scheme. Possibly propped up by the government.

Anyone who can compete with that, good luck to them.

E-Mail, it's mostly free. Get with the times
Try sending a present, or even a pressed flower, through email.

Misanthrope
3rd October 2009, 15:49
As of now, national postal services have a solely state issued monopoly on the market. If there were competing firms then prices would inevitably be lower. This is really a non-issue, a state run firm is no different then a private firm.

Psy
3rd October 2009, 16:35
The post office is mostly a subsidy for the sending of bills, checks, invoices, notices ect. Think of the extra cost if banks had to pay more for couriers to send eviction notices instead of sending it a bulk rate that is subsidized by tax dollars as the US Post office is running at a 2 billion annual loss that subsided by federal money.

The reason the US Post Office is a legal monopoly is because its prices are overall below cost because they are uniform regardless of cost to deliver, a capitalist might be able to get profits from delivering mail for a lower cost in certain areas but they can't for delivering mail anywhere in the USA like sending mail from Miami to Alaska.

Thus state can't allow capitalists to take over mail delivery as in the long run it would increase the cost of capitalists to operate within the USA and drive down the rate of profit that currently is in negitve territory so the US state is not going to put more negative pressure on the rate of profit by making capitalists pay the actually cost of mail.