← Back to context

Comment by munchler

2 days ago

I suspect the post office is still supported by a durable majority. If it isn’t, then it will probably lose government funding as well.

8 comments

munchler

Reply
saagarjha  2 days ago

A durable majority doesn't even support funding education, and it is losing federal funding as we speak. Do you think this is a good thing?

  • ptero  2 days ago

    I don't think this is correct. The majority of people prefers states to have more influence on school curriculum and federal government to have less. Yes, there are downsides to that, but it generally means that hours on STEM will increase and hours on ideology will decrease.

    Removing federal influence in setting agenda while sending federal funding directly to states without federal oversight of programs would not be a bad thing. My 2c.

nobody9999  1 day ago

>I suspect the post office is still supported by a durable majority. If it isn’t, then it will probably lose government funding as well.

To which funding are you referring?

In fact[0]:

"Unlike many government agencies, the United States Postal Service (USPS) does not receive direct taxpayer funding for operating expenses. Government appropriations are limited to specific purposes, such as the Postal Service Health Benefits (PSHB) Program."

And[1]:

"In 2006, Congress passed a law that imposed extraordinary costs on the U.S. Postal Service. The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) required the USPS to create a $72 billion fund to pay for the cost of its post-retirement health care costs, 75 years into the future. This burden applies to no other federal agency or private corporation."

[0] https://govfacts.org/federal/usps/how-usps-stays-afloat-fund...

[1] https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis...