Wait, That's How Scott Pelley Reacted to His Firing From CBS News?
John Cornyn Stepped on a Social Media Landmine...and the Results Were Very Messy
Bernie Sanders Says the Socialist Part Out Loud With New Artificial Intelligence Bill
Trump Slams 'Boring' Artists Who Bailed on Freedom 250 Concerts – Here's What...
Some of Scott Pelley’s Comments Explain the Type of Man He Is and...
Democrat Abdul El-Sayed Pushed the 'Hoodies and Hijabs' Hate Crime Hoax, but Here's...
Reps. Ted Lieu and Sara Jacobs Turned Today's Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing Into...
Katie Porter Falls Flat in California's Gubernatorial Race
Nithya Raman Breaks Down In Tears As She Falls Behind in Los Angeles...
Roy Cooper Has a Terrible Record on Public Safety and Illegal Immigration
Democrats' Maine Senate Gamble Raises Questions About Standards
Young Voters Falling for Socialist Myths
'Fascist Collaborator': Bravo Host Goes Off the Rails Over Scott Pelley's Firing From...
Principal Pulls Valedictorian From Stage Mid-Speech After She Condemns ICE and Israel
Not So Fast: Not All of the View Hosts Are Out on Platner...
OPINION

Should the USPS Diversify into Nonpostal Markets?

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Should the USPS Diversify into Nonpostal Markets?

One possible solution offered up for the struggling U.S. Postal Service is to allow it to diversify into nonpostal commercial markets (e.g., insurance, logistics, banking, etc). After all, the share of revenue generated from diversified products at foreign posts has been on the rise and in many cases now accounts for the majority of a post’s revenue.

Advertisement

However, a new paper from postal expert Michael Schuyler concludes that the USPS entering “new nonpostal commercial ventures would probably end badly.” Here are some of the important takeaways from Mike’s paper:

  • “When foreign posts move into nonpostal markets, they often extract large sums from postal ratepayers and the government (which ultimately means taxpayers) to cover start-up costs.” The USPS is bleeding red ink and thus doesn’t have money for start-up costs – so it doesn’t take a genius to see where the money would have to come from.
  • When it comes to nonpostal commercial ventures, the USPS has an abysmal track record. Mike cites a Government Accountability Office report that looked at new postal products introduced over a two-year period and notes that “Among the nonpostal products on the list were retail merchandise sales (profitable), several electronic initiatives (all money losers), and the processing of credit card payments (unprofitable).”
  • Diversified products at foreign posts usually earn lower returns compared to industry averages. “Below-average profits suggest that when postal operators enter nonpostal commercial markets, they displace more efficient private-sector businesses, leading to less productive and vibrant economies.”
Advertisement
  • Would the USPS and its new private sector competitors operate on a neutral playing field? That’s doubtful. As I note in an essay on postal privatization, the USPS already enjoys several privileges including exemptions from taxes and various regulatory requirements. Mike notes that “special breaks [for the USPS] would misallocate resources, raise fairness issues, and might have high costs for the overall economy.”

In sum, it’s a really bad idea. Unfortunately, policymakers in Washington have a soft spot for bad ideas.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement