https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-04-04/congress-not-amazon-messed-up-the-u-s-postal-service



The fact that the federal government is already taking $6billion per year from the USPS (mandated pre-funding of their retirement) both accelerates the collapse while also protecting employees against the inevitable day whenever it comes. The retirement for employees is not a sticking point when it comes to the issue of whole thing collapsing this year. That aspect has already been prepared for.




The idea of it 'going away' is not part of the discussion. The discussion is about the existing infrastructure becoming privatized.

This post was edited by Kayeto on Apr 5 2020 09:00am

401K in the US is market investment, pure and simple. Effectively you take whatever percentage of your paycheck you select and invest it into your portfolio (the company of which is determined by the employer). The amount is not "deductible" exactly, it simply counts as pre-tax. AKA it's not taxable income. But it's not easily accessible either. As long as you're still employed by your employer, you cannot cash out the fund. At need, you may request loans from the fund, but those loans will be pretty heavily taxed, and have a high interest rate. If you quit or get fired prior to retirement age, and choose to cash out the fund rather than roll it over into an IRA or some other form of retirement account, you end up paying the standard tax on the income, plus a 10% penalty. Effectively, they treat 401K contributions as though you haven't earned them yet. Because in a real sense, you haven't, and you won't until you retire, at which time once you either withdraw them or roll them into an incremental payout account and start getting "paid" then you will be taxed on the income.

As a market investment though, you're investing into companies who're using the investment to do what companies do: Make stuff, help people, and in general push the economy forward. As with any standard stock, there are dividends (assuming your portfolio isn't complete garbage), and those dividends, in the case of a 401K account, are automatically reinvested into more shares of whatever originated them. So it's not just a savings account with some interest rate. Depending on how you manage the account, it's a portfolio that you're investing in, your employer is investing in, that's also self-multiplying due to it's own success. Quite an effective tool, and an incredible boost to the market economy the entire time it's doing it's job of seeing to your future.

On the flip side, the public sector benefit scheme is sort of designed to act similarly to the market-side version, except it really kind of "competes" with the market. Most of it is just numbers on paper. Nobody is benefiting from your investment. You receive set gains on some funds, market shadowy type gains in others, and mixture in yet others, but realistically, all your money goes into the general fund to be spent however congress and the executive branch see fit. Much as with Social Security, there's no "account" or "fund" actually there. It's all at the will of the Federal Government. But you CAN have it invested into stocks, mutual funds, etc. But I've read a ton of their paperwork and analysis, and naturally, they advise AGAINST doing any such thing, because I mean, then they can't just spend your money, it has to go to the market you've invested in. Also, where with the private market, it's actual financial firms who specialize in investments such as Merrill Lynch who're putting together packages, recommending portfolios, and providing all the financial data you need for your financially successful retirement, with the TSP plan it's a department within the same government that's over $23 Trillion in Debt and thinks that pensions are still a feasible business practice.

At any rate, match percentages, given the benefits, of 3-5% are pretty standard. Companies on the high end of the Fortune 500 go as high as 6 or 7%. I believe I saw one or two that are at 8%. There are a few where specialized employees get wicked deals. Like there is an airline that will given their pilots 5% of their gross towards 401K by default, not even a match, and on top of that they will match up to 5%. Note that that's the rarity, and pilots have been in extremely high demand for quite some time, AND the airlines have been trying to scalp them from the Military, so the better the package, the better their odds of encroaching on those wonderful government benefits.

At any rate, the more you know.

@bolded - that is the definition of tax deductible

You are correct, but I think he is trying to explain that it isn't like most tax deductions where you never end up paying taxes. It is a tax deference where you deduct it now but end up paying taxes on it later. If you already knew this, sorry.

This post was edited by RzChaos on Apr 5 2020 12:44pm

Partially privatizing it, and using the immense amount of offices to also offer bank, insurance, mobile, and others services...

A little bit of both, really. The first point is that you never pay taxes on it in the first place. So for instance, a deduction like healthcare costs, or the standard deduction, or charitable donations, you pay the taxes now, get a return once you file. With 401K contributions, you never pay taxes on that income in the first place. So that money that's removed from your paycheck as "taxes" that you never receive in the first place, you can't choose what to do with, is reduced by 401K investment. So when you file your taxes, you can't list the 401k as a deduction, because it's never included in the taxable information.

Perhaps I'm simply caught up on a technicality, I'm not sure. But it's kind of in a class separate from any other.

Should be run like a private non for profit business, in fact if it was up to me I would change its administration from bureaucrats to business minded individuals.

I think as we’re moving to the digital age, the postal service will be increasingly obsolete.

For all the people that think government should be in charge of more things in society this is pretty emblematic of government inefficiency. Imagine the colossal waste if they ran healthcare.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Apr 5 2020 08:35pm

Sure, healthcare would cost like two times what it is in others advanced countries and only 2/3 of population would have an easy access to it.
I want to believe.

First: The USPS is losing money. All of it's private market "competitors" are not only making a profit, but are helping keep the USPS propped up with their package delivery contracts. Claiming it'd be "worse if private" is to ignore what quite literally exists right now today.

Second: Government incursion into "healthcare" with the ridiculous ACA raised prices across the board, from office visits to pharmaceuticals to hospital stays to surgeries. Top that off with everyone under the age of 50 watching their insurance prices go up 3x, and for a good 5 years being fined if they didn't purchase this financial service and...

Welp, I fail to understand how your claim makes sense or is relevant in any way.

One of the reason they profit is because they can utilize below cost package delivery contracts. Make UPS deliver to every rural area and they may still make a profit, but they will be much more strained to do so.

The ACA is a beast in itself, but virtually nobody involved in the actual field thinks we are worse off now compared to when insurance companies could drop you for preexisting conditions and throw an army of lawyers at you if you threaten to sue. There's lots of structural issues with the healthcare in America, and with the ACA, but those costs increasing aren't the result of the ACA, they were happening before except with less people being covered.