The Postal Service's top financial official painted a grim picture of his agency's financial state Friday, as USPS announced that it had lost $5 billion over the last year.
"We are sitting here at a very precarious situation, our liabilities exceed our assets by $40 billion," said Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President Joseph Corbett, during a press briefing. "Liabilities of $60 billion exceed the assets of roughly $20 billion. ... We have a $5 billion loss and a $1 billion operating loss."
The agency's seventh straight annual loss came despite its first growth in revenue since 2008. Operating revenue rose 1.2 percent to $66 billion, thanks to growth in the post office's package delivery business and higher volume in standard mail.
But that was not enough to offset long-term losses in first class mail — the post office's most profitable service — where revenues declined by 2.4 percent.
More
Some savings points....
ReplyDeleteReduce the PG Salary from 1.5mil to $150k, Get rid of all media ads including radio / tv, and privatize the entire system to have others take the risk. And with the $40billion for pensions, those people take lump sum reduction payments. When the private sector has no money, they have to take the punishment, so will the public employee.
Where is the Post Office's government bailout like Wall Street got, or Freddy And Fanny ???
ReplyDeleteAll post offices should be closed asap. we have many good managed delivery companies , this system has to go , fire them all.
ReplyDeleteNanticoke should be top on the list of screwed up employees.
Abysmal? Thats'a a pretty light term! Years of abysmal losses would kill all private sector companies in 6 months. Yet,the Postal service somehow survives for years. Article 1, section 7 provides that "to establish post offices and post roads", but does not mandate who needs to be running the business. I think we need to farm this out to email, Fedex, DHL,and UPS,if they dare accept.
ReplyDelete3:14 Change that to NO pensions, unless the person put it in themselves, and I'd be on board.
ReplyDelete