It is strange to me that Reuters says that the postal service "has lost more than $100 billion since 2007." According to the Treasury department, the defense department "lost" $399 billion in 2025...
It is strange to me that Reuters says that the postal service "has lost more than $100 billion since 2007." According to the Treasury department, the defense department "lost" $399 billion in 2025 alone. Of course, nobody reports it as a loss -- that's just how much it costs to run. It seems like Reuters is begging the argument that the post office should be a business, by already assuming it is meant to turn a profit.
Yeah this is like saying that the government "lost" money on building highways. But the framing is intentional, at least by Republicans, as they want to privatize it.
Yeah this is like saying that the government "lost" money on building highways.
But the framing is intentional, at least by Republicans, as they want to privatize it.
I question this number. I'd imagine a big chunk of it is the investment in vehicle upgrades. A huge amount of postal delivery vehicles are old gas guzzlers with no A/C. They're starting to move...
Reuters says that the postal service "has lost more than $100 billion since 2007."
I question this number. I'd imagine a big chunk of it is the investment in vehicle upgrades.
A huge amount of postal delivery vehicles are old gas guzzlers with no A/C. They're starting to move towards electric vehicles.
I recall reading a cost analysis on how this will ultimately save a tremendous amount of money, because the gas vehicles require repairs and, of course, consume gas.
But it does require an investment with an initial cost that could be reported as a "loss." Not only due to the vehicle purchases themselves, but also charging infrastructure.
Can someone explain to me if there's any legitimate reason for the phrase "Democrats said" to be there? In fact, "violate federal law" seems too weak. The Postal Service is established in the...
Republican President Donald Trump, who in February called the agency a "tremendous loser for this country," said he was considering merging the Postal Service with the Commerce Department, a move Democrats said would violate federal law.
Can someone explain to me if there's any legitimate reason for the phrase "Democrats said" to be there?
In fact, "violate federal law" seems too weak. The Postal Service is established in the Constitution. It would be unconstitutional to get rid of it.
And even if the (IMO, irresponsible and scary in its implications) position of Reuters is to be neutral here, "Democrats" is the wrong word, right? It should be something more general, like "critics".
It only violates federal law of the court system says it does. I doubt there is existing case law to cover this instance. Until it goes to court and we get a court ruling, the most anyone can...
It only violates federal law of the court system says it does. I doubt there is existing case law to cover this instance. Until it goes to court and we get a court ruling, the most anyone can factually say is « this person thinks it’s against the law ». That person could be a professional lawyer, a political opponent, or /u/heraplem. There isn’t even a court case yet, let alone an official ruling.
As long as the post office exists in some form, what structure it takes doesn’t matter too much. It was organized as a cabinet department for 180 years, before Nixon reorganized it into the USPS...
As long as the post office exists in some form, what structure it takes doesn’t matter too much. It was organized as a cabinet department for 180 years, before Nixon reorganized it into the USPS we know today.
One reason might be that the reporter doesn’t want to make a legal ruling themselves, so they quote someone else. Perhaps they could also find a legal expert to quote, but this is a short article...
One reason might be that the reporter doesn’t want to make a legal ruling themselves, so they quote someone else. Perhaps they could also find a legal expert to quote, but this is a short article written about breaking news.
It is strange to me that Reuters says that the postal service "has lost more than $100 billion since 2007." According to the Treasury department, the defense department "lost" $399 billion in 2025 alone. Of course, nobody reports it as a loss -- that's just how much it costs to run. It seems like Reuters is begging the argument that the post office should be a business, by already assuming it is meant to turn a profit.
Yeah this is like saying that the government "lost" money on building highways.
But the framing is intentional, at least by Republicans, as they want to privatize it.
I question this number. I'd imagine a big chunk of it is the investment in vehicle upgrades.
A huge amount of postal delivery vehicles are old gas guzzlers with no A/C. They're starting to move towards electric vehicles.
I recall reading a cost analysis on how this will ultimately save a tremendous amount of money, because the gas vehicles require repairs and, of course, consume gas.
But it does require an investment with an initial cost that could be reported as a "loss." Not only due to the vehicle purchases themselves, but also charging infrastructure.
Can someone explain to me if there's any legitimate reason for the phrase "Democrats said" to be there?
In fact, "violate federal law" seems too weak. The Postal Service is established in the Constitution. It would be unconstitutional to get rid of it.
And even if the (IMO, irresponsible and scary in its implications) position of Reuters is to be neutral here, "Democrats" is the wrong word, right? It should be something more general, like "critics".
It only violates federal law of the court system says it does. I doubt there is existing case law to cover this instance. Until it goes to court and we get a court ruling, the most anyone can factually say is « this person thinks it’s against the law ». That person could be a professional lawyer, a political opponent, or /u/heraplem. There isn’t even a court case yet, let alone an official ruling.
As long as the post office exists in some form, what structure it takes doesn’t matter too much. It was organized as a cabinet department for 180 years, before Nixon reorganized it into the USPS we know today.
Trump’s golfing habit is a “tremendous loser for the country”. I’ve heard it’s cost taxpayers over $140 million.
One reason might be that the reporter doesn’t want to make a legal ruling themselves, so they quote someone else. Perhaps they could also find a legal expert to quote, but this is a short article written about breaking news.