They are selling forever stamps that aren't really forever...

It is in fact true that the Republicans in Congress passed the law on the way out the door before the new Congress came in. No business would ever create such a damaging financial move. Name another company that would decide to fund 75 years of Retiree Health Care Benefits in a 10 year window. The Republicans want to privatize everything and are anti Union. They do things like this all the time. They are the party that supports big business in this country.

Also the other issue is that Congress is holding the Postal Service back from modernizing and being able to offer more services that could generate income. The Republicans block this because they receive money from UPS and Fedex who want the USPS gone. Also the Republicans hate Unions because they support the Democrats politically.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev, there are in fact real differences in terms of how both parties make law. Yes they are all backed by big money, but the ratios are completely different. The Democrats are not trying to kill Unions or block people from being able to vote. The Republicans have been systematically destroying Unions for decades. They've been trying to privatize everything and get rid of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. They protect Subsidies for Corporations, Big Farma, Big Oil as well. They support income inequality in salaries and in the tax code as well. They've resisted Universal Health Care. Every move they make is to only support big business. Sure Democrats have big business supporters, but overall the main thrust of their policies are not aimed at making Big Business even more dispropotionatly richer, while making the average person poorer.

The Democrats are not trying to kill Unions or block people from being able to vote. The Republicans have been systematically destroying Unions for decades.

Can you show me some chart depicting people participating in unions for last, say, 30 years?

but overall the main thrust of their policies are not aimed at making Big Business even more dispropotionatly richer, while making the average person poorer.

Last time I checked I did not find evidence to this. I mean here public statistics since 80s.

What's the most probable outcome? Kill the pension and health benefits for retirees and downsize USPS operations?

The main problem is not "republicans" or even "democrats". It's that the service that the USPS provides is not important anymore but instead of scaling back or adapting like any real company would have done, they act like it's business as usual and keep handing out ridiculous pensions, benefits and pay for minimal useful work and they don't feel any pain because the government keeps handing them money without any real ramifications for not adapting to the times. If they were a true private company, they would have died a long time ago.

We had discussion about it. Post represents core social service. And privatization, declining to finance deficits is real true sign of corporate goverment.

As for pensions. They are not ridiculous. If now manufacturing had been working perfectly, education had been wastly improved, energy will be very cheap, etc, etc no one will call retire money big or similar. But this is not the case. Current pension system will stop working completely, and all will fall back to usual state it had been thousands of years - children support their parents.

Union participation is way down and has tracked right along with income disparity. As we've lost Union jobs the average salary in the US has stopped improving along with the improvements in productivity and corporate profits, which are at all time highs, while incomes are at all time lows for the common worker. The thing is that when Unions are strong EVERYONE sees improved pay and working conditions.

The US Social Safety Net is not a ponzi scheme and it's not going to go away. If we had listened the Privatization proponents, did away with Social Security and everyone was invested in the Banks and stock market no one would have anything at all right now. The IRA/401k system is a farce for the vast majority of people here.

The USPS doesn't receive any tax dollars. They are 100% funded by their own sales. Where does this hatred for the USPS come from anyway. Just because many people no longer see a reason for the USPS doesn't mean they are right. If you live in rural areas the USPS is a lifeline. If you take away the stupid Republican requirement to prefund the benefits for 75 years the financial issues for USPS are much smaller and they could modernize to get back to being a profitable service.

The USPS hires the most Veterans and many minorities as well, since they don't have the problems with racial injustice that private companies have. All of these things may seems small to some, but they are systematic problems that don't have easy solutions. The USPS is not a problem in the US fiscal picture.

@Aria

Can you find charts I asked? As I feel that you want to substitute actual result to your own interpretation and expectations.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev, Here is a chart that shows the decrease in Union Worker participation over the years in the private-sector.

http://www.publicpurpose.com/lm-unn2003.htm

Remember that the process of shipping US Manufacturing jobs overseas has been going on for a long time. The Public-Sector attack by the Republicans has simultaneously been going on but has recently been gaining steam with new laws they've been passing.

Can you show me on this charts data that back your points.

@Aria

The Democrats are not trying to kill Unions or block people from being able to vote. The Republicans have been systematically destroying Unions for decades.

but overall the main thrust of their policies are not aimed at making Big Business even more dispropotionatly richer, while making the average person poorer.

I mean this points.

@Aria

All I asked is to illistrate your points on this charts.
May be I am looking bad, but I do not see anything what back your points.

We have a combination of factors here that have come together to fight Unions. Starting in the 1900's we have NAM (National Association of Manufacturers), CUE (Council on Union Free Environment) who fought against Prez. J. Carter's labor law reform bill that was designed to make union-organizing efforts more successful by, among other provisions, allowing for elections to occur within 15 days of filing a petition. Now over the last years we have ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) Funded by big Corporations, they've been successfully pushing "Right To Work" laws that strip Union Rights.

"Jan. 2013 - Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Darryl Metcalfe has introduced so-called "right to work" legislation that would cripple state labor unions by allowing non-union members to free-ride -- benefiting from union representation, including higher wages and benefits, without paying the costs of that representation. For decades, right to work laws were used in southern states to bust unions and keep wages low."

"Jan 28, 2013 - Michigan Republican Governor Rick Snyder did an end-around on any potential for unions to win a lower-court injunction against the state's new right-to-work laws."

"Dec 2012 - Wisconsin Republicans went all out. Conservatives around the country salivated with envy as Gov. Scott Walker, with dizzying speed, pushed through seemingly every policy that the national conservative movement holds dear. The conservative appetite is far from sated, however. Many Republicans, as well as their allies in the business community, yearn for more. They want steeper tax cuts for businesses and individuals; they want a "right to work" law that would weaken unions in the private sector; they want further expansion of voucher schools -- even if it means cutting more funding from public schools."

I can pull out many more similar instances. Over the last few years Republicans have been pushing these laws thru wherever they have state control.

All of this stuff really started 30 years ago.

Prez Ronald Reagan - 1981 More than any other labor dispute of the past three decades, Reagan’s confrontation with the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization, or Patco, undermined the bargaining power of American workers and their labor unions. It also polarized our politics in ways that prevent us from addressing the root of our economic troubles: the continuing stagnation of incomes despite rising corporate profits and worker productivity. Workers in the private sector had used the strike as a tool of leverage in labor-management conflicts between World War II and 1981, repeatedly withholding their work to win fairer treatment from recalcitrant employers. But after Patco, that weapon was largely lost. Reagan’s unprecedented dismissal of skilled strikers encouraged private employers to do likewise. Phelps Dodge and International Paper were among the companies that imitated Reagan by replacing strikers rather than negotiating with them. Many other employers followed suit. By 2010, the number of workers participating in walkouts was less than 2 percent of what it had been when Reagan led the actors’ strike in 1952. Lacking the leverage that strikes once provided, unions have been unable to pressure employers to increase wages as productivity rises. Inequality has ballooned to a level not seen since Reagan’s boyhood in the 1920s.

As I said it was the Reagan, Bush and to a lesser extent Clinton policies that set the stage for the financial problems we have now.

Economic plans, taxes, and deficit Reagan implemented policies based on supply-side economics and advocated a laissez-faire philosophy,[13] seeking to stimulate the economy with large, across-the-board tax cuts.[14][15] Reagan pointed to improvements in certain key economic indicators as evidence of success.[3] The policies proposed that economic growth would occur when marginal tax rates were low enough to spur investment,[16] which would then lead to increased economic growth, higher employment and wages. Reagan was ardently opposed to raising income taxes. During his presidential tenure, the top federal income tax rates were lowered from 70% to 28%.[17] In order to cover the growing federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion.[18] Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.[18] [edit] Free trade Reagan was a supporter of free trade.[19] When running for president in 1979, Reagan proposed a "North American accord", in which goods could move freely throughout Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.[20] Largely dismissed at the time, Reagan was serious in his proposal. Once in office, he signed an agreement with Canada to that effect.[19] His "North American accord" later became the official North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), signed by President George H. W. Bush and ratified by President Bill Clinton.[20]

If you look at the history of the US financial situation it tracks downward almost precisely with the policies from the Reagan, Clinton and Bush years. Clinton tried to act like a Republican in many ways as he made deals with the Republican controlled House that eventually ended up hurting the country after Bush got thru with continuing the Reagan blueprint. All the deregulation, shipping jobs out of the country caused a massive decrease in the Union membership.