Possible USPS Forever Stamp Price Rollback?

Hey All,
This news just came over from the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...court-rules/

It's not finalized by any stretch, but maybe a possible rollback in the first class stamp rates. Maybe the Forever stamps will drop from 49 cents to 46 cents. Hope no one invested too heavily in Forever stamps. What goes up can come down.

For some strange reason, I'll not be holding my breath for that rollback.

The ruling will be appealed, so don't expect a rollback any time soon.

Just my opinion is if there is a rollback back to 46 cents it will be a trigger of sorts to institute no more Saturday mail. What do you think?

This is a decision of the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. The next level of appeal is the Supreme Court, but it accepts so few DC Circuit cases on administrative questions that the DC Circuit effectively is the court of last resort. A petition to the Supreme Court may well be filed, but this result is very likely to stand.

At the time of the last rate increase in 2014, the postage went up from 46c to 49c based on a 1.6% CPI normal rate increase (representing an additional 1-cent, bringing the rate to 47c) and an "exigent" rate increase of 4.3% (representing an additional rate increase of 2-cents), bringing the overall cost up to 49c.

Assuming the aforementioned ruling stands, would we see a reduction in costs of 4.3% (the "exigent" rate) from the present 49c postage cost (which figures out to be a reduction of 3-cents) or would we see it reduced by only 2-cents, given that the "exigent" rate increase was based on the lower 46c rate? I would think the USPS would find a way to base it on the latter.

The USPS could use the rate reduction for advertising... think of all the tricky reworking of meters though

Since when is 4.3% of 49c equal to 3c? Its only 2.1c.

Thanks for pointing that out (my calculator was incorrectly set for "round up"). So bottom line is that to remove the "exigent" rate of 4.3% would only reduce the value of the first class stamp by 2-cents, or down to 47-cents (not 46-cents as suggested in an earlier post).

Somehow I don't think so. With the phone technology as it is today it can do what mail can do for the most part except for packages. Our mail system is going to go the way of cameras even digital. Most people use their phone for that too. As a stamp collector I'm different and so are the majority of you but other than the older generation, 80+, we just don't use the mail anymore.

If I weren't a stamp collector who buys and/or sells something through the mail almost every day, I'd be OK with mail delivery once or twice a week. It's just rare that I use the mail for much of anything these days, with the exception of buying and selling stamps. A book of 20 stamps would probably last me a year or more for non-philatelic mailings, not counting Christmas cards if I send them.

[font=Century Gothic]Not being privy to all the financial details, just what we hear in the press, it is evident the model they are using is not working - net loss of $5 Billion in 2013, $5.5 Billion in 2014, while possibly having to default on their healthcare retirement benefits.

With the price reduction, it would seem they are taking a page from private industry and trying to be competitive with UPS, FedEx, DHL, and the others.

Hard to see how reducing the cost of Forever stamps will help the cash flow UNLESS it resulted in massive increase of mail using those stamps, something that seems very unlikely.

They must get costs under control or we (the taxpayers) will need to continue 'footing the bill' or perhaps we will see privatization of the USPS.

Mike/font=Century Gothic]

It's a declining market that will only continue to go down.

At the very least the USPS needs to have a free hand to set their own rates and services. They're kind of stuck with the worst of both worlds - they're a gov't agency subject to oversight and regulation, but they get no taxpayer money, at least not as a regular course of business. Personally I'd kind of like to see the USPS remain as a quasi-government agency, but free to make their own day-to-day business decisions regarding rates and services.

For both the USPS and the National Rail Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), in my opinion, the media and Congress for years have been far too focused on "losses" and "returning to profitability." The USPS and Amtrak are elements of national infrastructure. Government long ago decided that these are akin to natural monopolies--because only one entity can efficiently deliver to every door in the country, or because of the capital costs of rail networks, we have decided we will permit only one of each. We don't ask the interstate highway system to turn a profit. We simply sink costs into it, use it and move on, because it's essential to build and maintain. Yes, we can debate the magnitude and propriety of various cost items, such as the USPS's pension burden or whether there is a local, regional or national interest in maintaining rail service to a particular hamlet. We can also debate whether the USPS ought to operate in competition with other carriers who are permitted to access the front-door mailbox--that is a different question. But to decide on the one hand that only one entity will be allowed, to impose upon it naturally costly constraints (deliver to every home in the nation, run interstate trains over thousands of miles), yet insist that it find a way to profit, is an impossible demand.