U.S. Postal Service Go Bye-Bye?

Yesterday on WBUR Boston's radio show, On Point, hosted by Tom Ashbrook, an interesting discussion took place that raised some thought provoking questions about whether the United States Postal Service is still necessary today. It is unarguable that the U.S. Postal Service was historically responsible for helping to nurture our democracy and circulate information, especially in our nation's early political and cultural histories. However, questions are now being asked whether the federal government ought to be subsidizing or lending to a service that may no longer be of need, particularly with our recent economic woes. With new information and communication technologies such as fax, email and other online documents printable at home or the office, not to mention private competition such as FedEx and UPS, how much do we still need the government to deliver our mail? It seems that the desire to have the Post Office is there, but is the demand?

The USPS has reported losses in the billions since 2007, according to their annual financial reports, and the projections seem to indicate continued shortfalls for 2009 and 2010. Congress is responsible for oversight of the Post Office. According to a new Epoch Times article, the U.S. Postal Service is not a profit-oriented business but acts as a private enterprise, and is technically an independent agency of the government. It is required by Congressional oversight to break even. Since the USPS has not been breaking even, discussions are emerging about the USPS's business model and ability to stay viable. Also, it is worth mentioning that the P.O. is able to barrow from the U.S. Treasury at a discounted rate, does not pay taxes, and is able to attain private property under the government's eminent domain laws.

If you have been into a U.S. Post Office recently, you may have noticed the increasing number of other items available to purchase besides stamps, such as framed art of commemorative stamps, special gift boxes and even beanie babies. In Europe and Japan, according to a guest on Ashbrook's show, A. Lee Fritschler, the post offices there have more governmental and non-governmental functions tied into what they do, such as renewing driver licenses, buying insurance and adding cell phone minutes to name a few examples. However, with so much competition, will U.S. Post Offices have to be mini-marts with Burger Kings inside, with the Post Office buried in the back behind a rack of t-shirts in order to exist? This is a serious question.

In the past the U.S. government subsidized the U.S. Postal Service to keep rates cheap, which has been arguably important to the growth of our democracy. These subsidies made it possible for print media, such as newspapers and magazines, to circulate at rates that were sustainable. For over 100 years the public has been relatively content to subsidize the U.S. Postal Service. However, there are many more options for a person or an organization which wants to circulate information. On Point's host, Tom Ashbrook asked, "Is the central role that the Post Office played still there? Would it leave a void if it wasn't there? Or would it be filled with other options?"

According to another guest on On Point, Richard John, a historian who teaches at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism, "The United States has over half the mail in the world. It's still an enormous institution. The increase has been in advertising circulators and what we used to call 'junk mail' or what he U.S. Postal Service has redefined somewhat artfully as 'standard mail'...we are no longer subsidizing newspapers and magazines to the extent that we once were." And this is partly what has caused the fall of print media. With email and other options, the public seems less willing to pick up the slack. Further, it turns out that tax payers are partly paying for the junk mail they receive. In Europe, junk mail was put to a stop through the postal system. Discussion about the pollution junk mail causes due to trees being cut down, air pollution and fuel usage from delivery of it, and the chemicals used to make it were all reasons the European post offices were disrupted by legislation from distributing it. Richard John claims if U.S. taxpayers were more aware that their tax dollars are being spent on helping them receive junk mail, they'd be outraged.

Personally, I use the USPS quite a bit. I send all of my packages through the Post Office. They seem to me to be reliable as can be. I have never heard that anyone did not receive mail I have sent them. I don't feel the same about fax. I always wonder if my fax went through. Further, if you've ever sent a package or letter while overseas, did you worry if it would get there? I can attest that I have worried. Most people do not worry about that in the U.S. because the USPS is so reliable. Wedding invitations through email or Facebook would not be the same, but I suppose they could be sent via FedEx or UPS. For some reason I am nostalgic about the USPS. I would feel as though life had really changed if it were to go away. The history of the early circulation of information and our democratic society would seem to not be a part of my daily life anymore. However, if maintaining the USPS is causing me to have to pay for junk mail I don't want and is also terrible for the environment, then I'm not for that. On the other hand, the USPS has about 600,000 employees (not to mention retirees) according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

What would happen to the shipping rates in the USPS were to vanish? Would they skyrocket? I don't know. The bottom line of a business is to make money. It seems that if FedEx or UPS wasn't making enough money in rural areas, they could easily stop service there. What would people in rural areas do to receive packages and other hard copy materials if a FedEx and UPS feel they are not enough making money in those areas? At least the USPS is mandated to provide service with regulations that require service in certain areas, including rural areas.

What do you think? Please join in and share your thoughts.

Listen to the On Point broadcast of the Fate of the Post Office:
http://www.onpointradio.org/2009/08/the-fate-of-the-post-office

Michigan's History At Risk

Hello all. I hope you are having a better day than it appears the state of Michigan is having. I am deeply disturbed and vehemently against Governor Jennifer Granholm's recent executive order to abolish of the Department of Histories, Arts and Libraries. I will never accept an excuse for this. I believe she is, whether she wants to or not, single-handedly with the stroke of a pen helping to destroy the history AND FUTURE of Michigan. The following statement from the American Library Association's President, Camila Alire, sums it up nicely: "During tough economic times, difficult choices must be made. But libraries are a part of the solution when a community is struggling economically and are a necessity in efforts to get America back on their feet." One cannot Goggle one-of-a-kind primary sources/documents that the state of Michigan's Departments of History, Arts, and Libraries preserves, organizes and makes accessible to its public and researchers.

I have to draw the line and it is here. I have written Governor Granholm to let her and her administration know how I feel. I encourage you to do the same. Please spend less than 10 minutes to save Michigan's history. You never know, we may need it some day.

Contact Governor Granholm:
http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0,1607,7-168-21995-65331--,00.html

If you are interested, review the Executive Order:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/gov/EO36_285881_7.pdf

American Library Association's President, Camila Alire's statement:
http://www.ala.org/ala/newspresscenter/news/pressreleases2009/august2009/michigan_ala.cfm

Evaluating Information

One wonderful aspect about the abundance of information technology available for anyone interested in accessing it, is that one has the opportunity to be a blogger. Here I am on my newly created Blogger blog blogging! Yippee! Being a blogger was always on my short list of experiences I wanted to have. I now have the power to say…anything. Anything I could possibly want to say about anything. As the saying goes, with great power, comes great responsibility.

I love accessing information. But what I really want is good, accurate information that is not saturated with opinions disguised as facts, or false information disguised as facts. I’ll be honest, it drives me nuts that too often I speak with friends and family (intelligent people) who assume everything can be Goggled. To some extent they are correct. Practically everything can be Goggled at this point, but the information which is retrieved is not being evaluated for veracity enough. Just because a document was retrieved, does not make it valuable. I know it is impossible for everyone to do their own research about everything and we have to trust the dispersers of information in almost every case, but what I’m saying is not enough critical thinking is occurring with most people. I know I am being vehement and that tends to attract suspicion. Suspicion is not wrong when it comes to the information age we are currently in--where Web 2.0 (blogs, user generated content) allows anyone to say anything they want whether it is true or not (me for that matter). I think about this everyday and now realize my life’s mission is to encourage critical thinking. Thankfully this is a broad life’s mission and I can carry it with me whichever direction I go in life.

It wasn’t until I was a college freshman, I’m shy to reveal, that I heard the phrase “critical thinking.” I’m not saying I had never thought critically before hearing the phrase. I’m only saying communication about scrutinizing information and researching the sources from which the information came from was explained to me as being extremely important. I don’t recall a ton from my freshman year of college that pertains directly to academia (that was about 10 years ago now), but I do distinctly remember the critical thinking discussion.

To bring this entry full-circle, journalism, Google, and information technology are all great. They allow one to communicate urgent facts that need to be known. However, for as much information that is accessible, there is a great deal of misinformation. So, I hope beginning with you, you will recognize and keep in mind that writers and commentators, whether they are considered experts or not, hold biases and may not be sharing facts, but rather opinions. There are facts—and there are opinions. Opinions can change, but facts cannot.

Smart Phones, Google, Apple, and the Next Ten Years.

I recently purchased T-Mobile's newest (as of 8/1/09) smartphone, the "MyTouch 3G". I've been a loyal T-Mobile customer for 11 years, since 1998 (can you believe it?). No, I have never switched phone service providers, although I have sought information about other providers a few time. However, I've stayed with T-Mobile based on their customer service, equally low or lower rates, and the loyalty minutes they provided to me for my long-time patronage. How can I leave that?

So far I am really enjoying the MyTouch. I was slightly jealous for some time of IPhoners. It seemed like they had all the fun. It turns out the MyTouch is basically the same thing--go figure, the name even seems to imply it, am I wrong? That doesn't bother me, though. Although I was a loyal Mac user for many years, I actually switched back to PCs. Having an IPhone probably would have made more sense if I still used Mac products. The odd thing is is that I don't miss the Apple world much at all. I wouldn't say I don't miss it one bit, because I do, but it's only a bit.

The mobile operating system on the MyTouch is Google's Android. It is one more vacuum into the Google world (I say this as I am in Blogger...). However, if you feel comfortable in Google's universe, then you are probably right at home. I am lazily against the magnate of Google, but I am suspicious of the monopoly. I suspect Apple and Google will for only a short time longer become more competitive in their rivalry in the smartphone world. Apple was lucky to have rocked the smartphone world first with the Iphone and all it's capabilities. However, I am guessing Apple will have to be the first again at something else as smartphone and music downloading competitors who are not Apple heads, such as myself, get their needs met by second and third place finishers. What else can Apple do? What does anyone need or want anymore? Besides jobs in the U.S. We shall have to see. Ten years ago we couldn't have known the extent to which information and communication technologies would change our lives, even the lives of the reluctant to change, but they have. What will another ten years bring? Will Google and Apple merge? Will another small start-up, perhaps not even in Palo Alto, do what Google has done? Could any start-up resist Google's massiveness, even if they wanted to? Share your thoughts and crystal ball visions on the information technology to come in the next ten years. Tell us what you think.