Elizabeth Warren wants to turn Post Office into a bank (1 Viewer)

[njherdfan]

This has worked very well in Europe. There is no reason to believe they couldn't provide these services and make a nice profit. Of course they would be profitable now if not for the stupid retirement thing Congress put on them.

Ever heard the phrase "F--- up a wet dream"? That's what our government does. Like clockwork. I like the idea a lot, but have zero faith in our government to pull it off especially given their love affair with big business.

Exactly. On the surface it seems to make sense to try and provide as many services as possible - this is part of what Walmart does. Then you realize that you're talking about an entity that has found its way into the red by failing to operate even remotely efficiently in the face of changing technology and you have to think twice.

The Post Office is only in the red due to a ridiculous rule that says they must have their pensions funded for 70 years. If not for that provision the Post Office would have turned at least a billion dollar profit in 2012.

I think the guaranteed service obligation doesn't help them make a profit either; if they had certain remote areas they wouldn't deliver to, that would save a ton of money.

 

[Juxtatarot]

I think you are underestimating the difficulty of making payday lending profitable (or, at least, breaking even) on only 10% the typical revenue.

This is certainly possible, as I have never attempted to run a payday lending business. But the Post Office does have big advantages that other payday lenders don't -- they already have the infrastructure and employees and security, etc. If OIG says it could be done for 10%, I'm inclined to believe them.

Wait... I'll read the report later but I think with that statistic they are just talking about getting 10% market share -- not charging less.

 

[Doubtingthomas]

Yeah Obama loans!

 

[Spanky267]

I think you are underestimating the difficulty of making payday lending profitable (or, at least, breaking even) on only 10% the typical revenue.

This is certainly possible, as I have never attempted to run a payday lending business. But the Post Office does have big advantages that other payday lenders don't -- they already have the infrastructure and employees and security, etc. If OIG says it could be done for 10%, I'm inclined to believe them.

Are you referring to the 10% as mentioned in the OP?

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

These are my concerns as well. This appears more about getting a chunk of the $89 Billion that the "poor" spend on pay-day loans and check cashing than actually helping them. Its made clear in the fact that OIG hopes that USPS could get 10% of that business or $8.9 Billion dollars. In the end the "poor" will still be paying out the same amount its just that Uncle Sam will be collecting it. Instead of the check cashers and pay day loan establishments. It seems that Sen. Warren is more concerned with the USPS making money than she is with the "poor" getting shafted.

None of that is in the Warren op-ed. Her expressed concern is that the poor are getting shafted.

Her op-ed expressly talks about helping the USPS shore up its financial footing. The OIG says that if 10% of the check cashing and pay-day loan business shifted to USPS it would be worth $8.9B. She wants to help the poor by turning the USPS into a pay-day loan and check cashing establishment. There are already a ton of those in poor communities. Will the USPS charge lower fees than the established competitors? While this might trigger a race to the bottom on fees, which could be of benefit to the poor, I dont see it really happening. The USPS isnt as ubiquitous in the inner city as they used to be. Will a poor person be willing to walk past 2 or 3 other check cashing/bill paying establishments to get to the neighborhood post office? Nearly every corner convenience store, liquor store of neighborhood grocery in the inner cities offer check cashing and bill pay services of some sort. This seems more like an attempt to prop up the USPS than it is to help the poor.

In the entire op-ed, there is half a sentence about USPS shoring up its financial footing. It isn't the emphasis of the article at all. Warren's expressed motivation is to help the poor.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Hey, ya know what else poor people spend a lot of their money on? Food. And you know how much profit is being made? Let's make this a convenience store too. Government could probably turn some profit. You know what else the poor spend a lot of money on? Clothes. We need an aisle for those here. Government could probably turn some profit. You know what else poor people spend a lot of money on...

lottery tickets.

 

[KCitons]

Government needs to decide what the want the Post Office to be. The spent decades ham stringing it through regulation and limiting profitability. Funding 70 years of retirement is ridiculous. But it isn't the only answer. They need to streamline their management team and get a firm hold on bookkeeping. All too often, they spend dimes to save nickels.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I think you are underestimating the difficulty of making payday lending profitable (or, at least, breaking even) on only 10% the typical revenue.

This is certainly possible, as I have never attempted to run a payday lending business. But the Post Office does have big advantages that other payday lenders don't -- they already have the infrastructure and employees and security, etc. If OIG says it could be done for 10%, I'm inclined to believe them.

Are you referring to the 10% as mentioned in the OP?

The OIG white paper says the Post office could eventually realize revenues of 8.9 billion a year from providing these services, which happens to be exactly 10% of the amount that non-traditional lenders charge annually in interest and fees. I still haven't read through the OIG paper but it looks pretty comprehensive, and it details how much a comparable loan would cost a consumer from the Post Office vs. a payday lender. Here's the link: http://www.uspsoig.gov/sites/default/files/document-library-files/2014/rarc-wp-14-007.pdf

 

[DrJ]

This has worked very well in Europe. There is no reason to believe they couldn't provide these services and make a nice profit. Of course they would be profitable now if not for the stupid retirement thing Congress put on them.

Ever heard the phrase "F--- up a wet dream"? That's what our government does. Like clockwork. I like the idea a lot, but have zero faith in our government to pull it off especially given their love affair with big business.

Exactly. On the surface it seems to make sense to try and provide as many services as possible - this is part of what Walmart does. Then you realize that you're talking about an entity that has found its way into the red by failing to operate even remotely efficiently in the face of changing technology and you have to think twice.

The Post Office is only in the red due to a ridiculous rule that says they must have their pensions funded for 70 years. If not for that provision the Post Office would have turned at least a billion dollar profit in 2012.

Plenty of companies do pre fund their retirement benefits. It's really the only way to accurately account for those costs in the present day. Part of the problem is that the government wasn't doing this and as a result was severely under reporting their liabilities. So now when you suggest an entity as important as the post office should use sound fiscal practices, it becomes "impossible".

I'll give you $1 for every company the size of the USPS or larger that funds their retirement accounts 70 years out because that's what they choose to do.

I don't know about size, but in 2011 it seems 25% were pre funding in some capacity. And there's even been some recent government actions in regards to pensions as well. My employer is one of the few that still offers pensions (partly because of government policy apparently) and they sent me a whiney letter about costs going up because of one of Obama's transportation bills. It had to be revenue neutral, so they went after pensions and started charging higher premiums among other things.

Moving Ahead For Progress in the 21st Century Act (yeah, they have to fluff up the names to make you smile while you bend over): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_Ahead_for_Progress_in_the_21st_Century_Act

 

[StrikeS2k]

So now Post Offices are going to have armed guards and metal detectors like courts? Nice.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So the idea is:

1. We entrust a government agency that most do not trust to deliver anything over $20 with our savings and property; and

2. We have a US Senator with presidential aspirations who would like to see the US government take control over your personal property.

Well, what could possibly go wrong.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

So the idea is:

1. We entrust a government agency that most do not trust to deliver anything over $20 with our savings and property; and

2. We have a US Senator with presidential aspirations who would like to see the US government take control over your personal property.

Well, what could possibly go wrong.

Neither of your two statements bears even a slight resemblance to what we're actually talking about.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Just thinking about where I live and have lived, banks/check cashing places were a lot more convenient location wise than the post office. They don't have a post office in every strip mall like they do banking facilities. And yes, that applies to poor areas too.

 

[Politician Spock]

I think Starbucks should get into the postal business. Would save a lot of time for millions of Americans.

 

[Juxtatarot]

I think you are underestimating the difficulty of making payday lending profitable (or, at least, breaking even) on only 10% the typical revenue.

This is certainly possible, as I have never attempted to run a payday lending business. But the Post Office does have big advantages that other payday lenders don't -- they already have the infrastructure and employees and security, etc. If OIG says it could be done for 10%, I'm inclined to believe them.

Are you referring to the 10% as mentioned in the OP?

The OIG white paper says the Post office could eventually realize revenues of 8.9 billion a year from providing these services, which happens to be exactly 10% of the amount that non-traditional lenders charge annually in interest and fees. I still haven't read through the OIG paper but it looks pretty comprehensive, and it details how much a comparable loan would cost a consumer from the Post Office vs. a payday lender. Here's the link: http://www.uspsoig.gov/sites/default/files/document-library-files/2014/rarc-wp-14-007.pdf

Here's the hypothetical:

Here is a purely hypothetical example of how a "Postal Loan" could work. Postal Loans would be available to people who have their paychecks directly loaded onto their Postal Service prepaid card (this also could be for government payments, such as Social Security or disability benefits) and have received at least two straight payments. For those whose employers do not offer electronic transfer, they could be eligible for a loan if they load at least two consecutive paychecks onto a Postal Service prepaid card

People could borrow up to 50 percent of their gross paycheck. For a person who earns $18,000 per year and gets paid twice a month, that is $375. Every borrower could be required to pay a minimum of 5 percent of their gross pay from each paycheck until the loan is paid off. In this scenario, that would be $38 from each paycheck.

The Postal Service would automatically withhold loan payments from borrowers’ paychecks before putting the difference on their Postal Card. If the Postal Service charged a $25 upfront loan fee and a 25 percent interest rate, the borrower would pay off the loan in 5 ½ months, paying a total of $48 in interest and fees across the life of the loan.

I think this model would work OK assuming people are comfortable having their incomes loaded on the card this way. One of the problems, though, is what's next? The person maxes out on the postal loan and then their car breaks down. They need to get it fixed or they can't get to work and lose their job. Where do they turn? Some of their options have even been limited because they don't have a checking account (probably) just this card. So they go back to the pawn shop, or where ever.

 

[The Commish]

This has worked very well in Europe. There is no reason to believe they couldn't provide these services and make a nice profit. Of course they would be profitable now if not for the stupid retirement thing Congress put on them.

Ever heard the phrase "F--- up a wet dream"? That's what our government does. Like clockwork. I like the idea a lot, but have zero faith in our government to pull it off especially given their love affair with big business.

Exactly. On the surface it seems to make sense to try and provide as many services as possible - this is part of what Walmart does. Then you realize that you're talking about an entity that has found its way into the red by failing to operate even remotely efficiently in the face of changing technology and you have to think twice.

The Post Office is only in the red due to a ridiculous rule that says they must have their pensions funded for 70 years. If not for that provision the Post Office would have turned at least a billion dollar profit in 2012.

Plenty of companies do pre fund their retirement benefits. It's really the only way to accurately account for those costs in the present day. Part of the problem is that the government wasn't doing this and as a result was severely under reporting their liabilities. So now when you suggest an entity as important as the post office should use sound fiscal practices, it becomes "impossible".

I'll give you $1 for every company the size of the USPS or larger that funds their retirement accounts 70 years out because that's what they choose to do.

I don't know about size, but in 2011 it seems 25% were pre funding in some capacity.And there's even been some recent government actions in regards to pensions as well. My employer is one of the few that still offers pensions (partly because of government policy apparently) and they sent me a whiney letter about costs going up because of one of Obama's transportation bills. It had to be revenue neutral, so they went after pensions and started charging higher premiums among other things.

Moving Ahead For Progress in the 21st Century Act (yeah, they have to fluff up the names to make you smile while you bend over): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_Ahead_for_Progress_in_the_21st_Century_Act

Pre-funding is a common practice. Pre-funding 70 years out is not. It's a ridiculous burden to place on anyone. That's why private companies don't do it. But the USPS has to do it.

 

[Black Box]

I think this model would work OK assuming people are comfortable having their incomes loaded on the card this way. One of the problems, though, is what's next? The person maxes out on the postal loan and then their car breaks down. They need to get it fixed or they can't get to work and lose their job. Where do they turn? Some of their options have even been limited because they don't have a checking account (probably) just this card. So they go back to the pawn shop, or where ever.

The next logical step is to turn the USPS into a pawn shop as well. Just throw all the "lost" mail onto the shelves and $$profit.

 

[Dippa]

I think you are underestimating the difficulty of making payday lending profitable (or, at least, breaking even) on only 10% the typical revenue.

This is certainly possible, as I have never attempted to run a payday lending business. But the Post Office does have big advantages that other payday lenders don't -- they already have the infrastructure and employees and security, etc. If OIG says it could be done for 10%, I'm inclined to believe them.

Are you referring to the 10% as mentioned in the OP?

The OIG white paper says the Post office could eventually realize revenues of 8.9 billion a year from providing these services, which happens to be exactly 10% of the amount that non-traditional lenders charge annually in interest and fees. I still haven't read through the OIG paper but it looks pretty comprehensive, and it details how much a comparable loan would cost a consumer from the Post Office vs. a payday lender. Here's the link: http://www.uspsoig.gov/sites/default/files/document-library-files/2014/rarc-wp-14-007.pdf

Here's the hypothetical:

Here is a purely hypothetical example of how a "Postal Loan" could work. Postal Loans would be available to people who have their paychecks directly loaded onto their Postal Service prepaid card (this also could be for government payments, such as Social Security or disability benefits) and have received at least two straight payments. For those whose employers do not offer electronic transfer, they could be eligible for a loan if they load at least two consecutive paychecks onto a Postal Service prepaid card

People could borrow up to 50 percent of their gross paycheck. For a person who earns $18,000 per year and gets paid twice a month, that is $375. Every borrower could be required to pay a minimum of 5 percent of their gross pay from each paycheck until the loan is paid off. In this scenario, that would be $38 from each paycheck.

The Postal Service would automatically withhold loan payments from borrowers paychecks before putting the difference on their Postal Card. If the Postal Service charged a $25 upfront loan fee and a 25 percent interest rate, the borrower would pay off the loan in 5 ½ months, paying a total of $48 in interest and fees across the life of the loan.

I think this model would work OK assuming people are comfortable having their incomes loaded on the card this way. One of the problems, though, is what's next? The person maxes out on the postal loan and then their car breaks down. They need to get it fixed or they can't get to work and lose their job. Where do they turn? Some of their options have even been limited because they don't have a checking account (probably) just this card. So they go back to the pawn shop, or where ever.

Well, they would be paying far less in fees and interest on the first loan in the above example. In the study you referenced, it shows fees/interest of $48 for a $375 loan at the post office, yet fees/interest at a payday loan center would be $520...that's insane.

In that hypothetical, they're paying $472 less in interest and fees at the post office. Then maybe they don't need another loan because they were able to get a reasonable loan in the first place.

I am skeptical that the post office could pull it off as effectively as proposed, but low income folks are getting seriously ripped off at these places as it is now.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I think this model would work OK assuming people are comfortable having their incomes loaded on the card this way. One of the problems, though, is what's next? The person maxes out on the postal loan and then their car breaks down. They need to get it fixed or they can't get to work and lose their job. Where do they turn? Some of their options have even been limited because they don't have a checking account (probably) just this card. So they go back to the pawn shop, or where ever.

Doesn't this same problem exist now? I don't see how the post office thing would make it worse.

 

[urbanhack]

So now Post Offices are going to have armed guards and metal detectors like courts? Nice.

I GET WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO SAY WITHOUT ACTUALLY SAYING IT.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

1. I certainly tend toward small government and private solutions in general, but can we at least give this an honest look before we have a knee-jerk GOVERNMENT SUCKS AT EVERYTHING reaction?

2. Most of us live in suburbia or middle and upper class urban areas. Please try to view the proposal through the lens of people who live in poor areas who don't have a nice Kroger, Wegman's, Piggly Wiggly, Walgreens, etc... on every other block that provide all these wonderful services already.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Slapdash]

Hey, ya know what else poor people spend a lot of their money on? Food. And you know how much profit is being made? Let's make this a convenience store too. Government could probably turn some profit. You know what else the poor spend a lot of money on? Clothes. We need an aisle for those here. Government could probably turn some profit. You know what else poor people spend a lot of money on...

Maybe we can get the government to open a store selling bad shtick since you need a new one.

Could they turn a profit on that?

With repeat customers like yourself? Maybe.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Hey, ya know what else poor people spend a lot of their money on? Food. And you know how much profit is being made? Let's make this a convenience store too. Government could probably turn some profit. You know what else the poor spend a lot of money on? Clothes. We need an aisle for those here. Government could probably turn some profit. You know what else poor people spend a lot of money on...

Maybe we can get the government to open a store selling bad shtick since you need a new one.

Could they turn a profit on that?

With repeat customers like yourself? Maybe.

This is veering into "jerk store" territory.

 

[T Bell]

After thinking about this for a whole ten seconds, seems like a great idea. Probably some stuff I haven't considered though.

That's where I am. The problem here is that you have an industry built around these very services that's already out there but isn't competing with the advantage of the federal government subsidizing it.

As long as the USPS is offering market rates for its services rather than artificially lowered rates, then I guess I'm fine with it.

 

[Slapdash]

Just thinking about where I live and have lived, banks/check cashing places were a lot more convenient location wise than the post office. They don't have a post office in every strip mall like they do banking facilities. And yes, that applies to poor areas too.

Banking facilities don't really serve the unbanked population and one of the goals of Warren is , hopefully, to lessen the market share of check cashing facilities.

 

[The Z Machine]

Haven't read the full thread, but I know that many European countries offer retail banking services at their post offices.

 

[Juxtatarot]

I think this model would work OK assuming people are comfortable having their incomes loaded on the card this way. One of the problems, though, is what's next? The person maxes out on the postal loan and then their car breaks down. They need to get it fixed or they can't get to work and lose their job. Where do they turn? Some of their options have even been limited because they don't have a checking account (probably) just this card. So they go back to the pawn shop, or where ever.

Doesn't this same problem exist now? I don't see how the post office thing would make it worse.

Yes, true. I'm just making the point that it won't helped the underserved as much as it will be made out to.

 

[Slapdash]

Hey, ya know what else poor people spend a lot of their money on? Food. And you know how much profit is being made? Let's make this a convenience store too. Government could probably turn some profit. You know what else the poor spend a lot of money on? Clothes. We need an aisle for those here. Government could probably turn some profit. You know what else poor people spend a lot of money on...

Maybe we can get the government to open a store selling bad shtick since you need a new one.

Could they turn a profit on that?

With repeat customers like yourself? Maybe.

This is veering into "jerk store" territory.

####, is the government going to take that over too? :(

 

[culdeus]

Japan has had great success with a similar system. We discussed this in the retirement thread a few weeks ago as a hypothetical. I think she's stealing our idea.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Just for the record, I don't think this is Elizabeth Warren's idea, she just supporting it.

 

[Rayderr]

1. I certainly tend toward small government and private solutions in general, but can we at least give this an honest look before we have a knee-jerk GOVERNMENT SUCKS AT EVERYTHING reaction?

2. Most of us live in suburbia or middle and upper class urban areas. Please try to view the proposal through the lens of people who live in poor areas who don't have a nice Kroger, Wegman's, Piggly Wiggly, Walgreens, etc... on every other block that provide all these wonderful services already.

Thanks in advance.

#2 has the same issue. There aren't post offices on every block either.

 

[tommyGunZ]

This is an absolute no brainer, and of course no one should be surprised that the resident anti-govt FFAers are siding with payday loan scammers over the USPO.

 

[culdeus]

Just for the record, I don't think this is Elizabeth Warren's idea, she just supporting it.

So you are saying the FFA-plan being cribbed is plausible?

 

[tommyGunZ]

This has worked very well in Europe. There is no reason to believe they couldn't provide these services and make a nice profit. Of course they would be profitable now if not for the stupid retirement thing Congress put on them.

Ever heard the phrase "F--- up a wet dream"? That's what our government does. Like clockwork. I like the idea a lot, but have zero faith in our government to pull it off especially given their love affair with big business.

Exactly. On the surface it seems to make sense to try and provide as many services as possible - this is part of what Walmart does. Then you realize that you're talking about an entity that has found its way into the red by failing to operate even remotely efficiently in the face of changing technology and you have to think twice.

The Post Office is only in the red due to a ridiculous rule that says they must have their pensions funded for 70 years. If not for that provision the Post Office would have turned at least a billion dollar profit in 2012.

Plenty of companies do pre fund their retirement benefits. It's really the only way to accurately account for those costs in the present day. Part of the problem is that the government wasn't doing this and as a result was severely under reporting their liabilities. So now when you suggest an entity as important as the post office should use sound fiscal practices, it becomes "impossible".

I'll give you $1 for every company the size of the USPS or larger that funds their retirement accounts 70 years out because that's what they choose to do.

I don't know about size, but in 2011 it seems 25% were pre funding in some capacity.And there's even been some recent government actions in regards to pensions as well. My employer is one of the few that still offers pensions (partly because of government policy apparently) and they sent me a whiney letter about costs going up because of one of Obama's transportation bills. It had to be revenue neutral, so they went after pensions and started charging higher premiums among other things.

Moving Ahead For Progress in the 21st Century Act (yeah, they have to fluff up the names to make you smile while you bend over): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_Ahead_for_Progress_in_the_21st_Century_Act

Pre-funding is a common practice. Pre-funding 70 years out is not. It's a ridiculous burden to place on anyone. That's why private companies don't do it. But the USPS has to do it.

Please stop feeding the trolls. When you quote and respond to clowns like Dr J who most of us have on ignore, we have to see his diarrhea.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Just for the record, I don't think this is Elizabeth Warren's idea, she just supporting it.

This is correct.

 

[tom22406]

Found this little tidbit

The inspector general’s office said loans could be made available to people who have their paycheck directly deposited onto a Postal Service prepaid card. Consumers could borrow up to 50 percent of their paycheck at an effective annual interest rate of 28 percent, a fraction of the triple-digit interest rates that payday lenders typically charge, according to the report.

So whoever taking out these type of loans still gets screwed,just not nearly as bad as before.

 

[Rayderr]

This is an absolute no brainer, and of course no one should be surprised that the resident anti-govt FFAers are siding with payday loan scammers over the USPO.

What if we';re against payday loans in general?

 

[tommyGunZ]

1. I certainly tend toward small government and private solutions in general, but can we at least give this an honest look before we have a knee-jerk GOVERNMENT SUCKS AT EVERYTHING reaction?

2. Most of us live in suburbia or middle and upper class urban areas. Please try to view the proposal through the lens of people who live in poor areas who don't have a nice Kroger, Wegman's, Piggly Wiggly, Walgreens, etc... on every other block that provide all these wonderful services already.

Thanks in advance.

Exactly.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Found this little tidbit

The inspector general’s office said loans could be made available to people who have their paycheck directly deposited onto a Postal Service prepaid card. Consumers could borrow up to 50 percent of their paycheck at an effective annual interest rate of 28 percent, a fraction of the triple-digit interest rates that payday lenders typically charge, according to the report.

So whoever taking out these type of loans still gets screwed,just not nearly as bad as before.

These loans obviously carry a high degree of risk, so the rates are going to be higher than anything any of us on his board deal with. But as the piece says, it's a "fraction" of what the average rate currently is, with the added benefit that the USPO strengthens it's financials.

Absolutely a no brainer.

 

[tommyGunZ]

This is an absolute no brainer, and of course no one should be surprised that the resident anti-govt FFAers are siding with payday loan scammers over the USPO.

What if we';re against payday loans in general?

Huh?

 

[Politician Spock]

This is an absolute no brainer, and of course no one should be surprised that the resident anti-govt FFAers are siding with payday loan scammers over the USPO.

If the payday loan scammers were losing billions a year, would you become a fan of them?

I couldn't care less about payday loan scammers, but giving people who run an operation losing billions, keys to a banking operation is like saying "Hey, we'd like to experience 2008 again. How soon can you make it happen?"

 

[Yankee23Fan]

This is an absolute no brainer, and of course no one should be surprised that the resident anti-govt FFAers are siding with payday loan scammers over the USPO.

I see a lot of potential in this idea. All I've read on it is this thread though, but I think I like it.

 

[T Bell]

This is an absolute no brainer, and of course no one should be surprised that the resident anti-govt FFAers are siding with payday loan scammers over the USPO.

Always nice to see you elevating political discourse.

The funny thing is that if you ideologically "flip" your statement, it reads perfectly the other way. Observe:

This is an absolute idiotic idea, and of course no one should be surprised that the resident pro-govt FFAers are siding with the horrendously inefficient USPS over the private payday loan companies.

So congrats on so ably becoming that which you supposedly hate and ridicule.

 

[HellToupee]

Granny Warren isn't breaking anything new here

the ship be sinking , OT is through the roof ,not enough bodies doing the jobs that are needed to serve the public properly

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

1. I certainly tend toward small government and private solutions in general, but can we at least give this an honest look before we have a knee-

jerk GOVERNMENT SUCKS AT EVERYTHING reaction?

2. Most of us live in suburbia or middle and upper class urban areas. Please try to view the

proposal through the lens of people who live in poor areas who don't have a nice Kroger, Wegman's, Piggly Wiggly, Walgreens, etc... on every other block that provide all these

wonderful services already.

Thanks in advance.

Very well said, while I'm not a big government person this seems like an idea that is well worth exploring.

 

[oso diablo]

i would be more interested in the USPO selling kiosk space to a private provider for these services, with a government-determined max interest rate / fee structure. More similar to a Wal-Mart model. At least allows some form of competition, as the various lenders compete for the opportunity to be the vendor.

The post office has the real estate locations, their chief asset. They do not have management/worker expertise for these services.

 

[humpback]

Found this little tidbit

The inspector general’s office said loans could be made available to people who have their paycheck directly deposited onto a Postal Service prepaid card. Consumers could borrow up to 50 percent of their paycheck at an effective annual interest rate of 28 percent, a fraction of the triple-digit interest rates that payday lenders typically charge, according to the report.

So whoever taking out these type of loans still gets screwed,just not nearly as bad as before.

These loans obviously carry a high degree of risk, so the rates are going to be higher than anything any of us on his board deal with. But as the piece says, it's a "fraction" of what the average rate currently is, with the added benefit that the USPO strengthens it's financials.

Absolutely a no brainer.

Right up your alley.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Isn't this idea (and the idea above to sell space inside the post office) almost identical to what the general store in the 19th century west was? A one stop shop for private market purchases as well as the place where mail was delivered? Now I grant, this idea only popped into my head because I played Red Dead Redemption last night for a little bit, so as a result the base of my knowledge for this topic has now been exposed as a video game - but still. How wrong am I?

New idea - they need to get Kevin Costner to be the spokeman on this. The Postman 2 - Cashing your Checks.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So the idea is:

1. We entrust a government agency that most do not trust to deliver anything over $20 with our savings and property; and

2. We have a US Senator with presidential aspirations who would like to see the US government take control over your personal property.

Well, what could possibly go wrong.

Neither of your two statements bears even a slight resemblance to what we're actually talking about.

I admit my reading comprehension can be awful.

So we're not talking about private citizens handing their money over as deposits to post offices across the country?

 

[culdeus]

i would be more interested in the USPO selling kiosk space to a private provider for these services, with a government-determined max interest rate / fee structure. More similar to a Wal-Mart model. At least allows some form of competition, as the various lenders compete for the opportunity to be the vendor.

The post office has the real estate locations, their chief asset. They do not have management/worker expertise for these services.

Oh come on, how hard is it to 5-key information into a terminal with all the app work on the backend?