rcd@opus.UUCP (03/15/84)
I think that the USPS has been going absolutely the wrong direction with
junk mail vs. real mail. Maybe we can start making suggestions to Congress
(which is where the pressure must come from, probably) to get things turned
around.
My basic contention is that the USPS should be geared to handling real
communication, not broadcast advertising. I include in the desirable
category:
- personal correspondence
- business correspondence (billing, invoices, etc.)
- meaningful, selective advertisement
- periodicals (and bulletins, newsletters, etc.)
I'm ignoring the parcel-delivery business; I think that's separate.
The ever-increasing problem that I see is that, based on volume, USPS is
developing its mechanisms for handling very-high-quantity bulk mailing. As
they develop the capability, it gets cheaper - then more advertisers can
use it, USPS goes off to find still better ways to handle it, and it cycles
again. In short, USPS is acting as if it is a business trying to grow in a
free market rather than trying to serve some specific purposes.
Here are some of my suggestions; I'd like to hear others (mail please; I'll
summarize if there's interest):
1. Mail addressed to "Resident", "Occupant", etc. should not be allowed.
If they don't know who you are, they can hardly have anything much to say
to you.
2. Similarly, "or current resident" should not be allowed. This business
of getting someone else's junk mail is absurd. Why do I have to sort
through someone else's trash?
3. Undeliverable mail should always be returned to the sender. Bulk
mailers should be charged for this return. Rationale: Why should the USPS
provide free trash disposal for indiscriminate mailers? There's a matter
of economics here: If there's no penalty for incorrectly addressed mail,
there's no incentive to clean up your mail lists.
4. Just maybe, a company should be restricted from using your name/address
UNLESS you give them permission to do so. That is, pass a law to change
the default from "you can use my name" to "you may not use my name".
I really don't mind getting the occasional out-of-the-blue ad for a company
that makes something I might be interested in. If I buy tools mail-order,
I might be interested in catalogs from other tool manufacturers - but I
damn well don't want catalogs of women's work clothing, self-hypnosis tape
cassettes, or boat supplies. If both laws and USPS rates/regulations were
structured appropriately, responsible mail advertising could exist while
the broadcast crap could be weeded out.
--
Cerebus for Dictator!
{hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcdlmg@houxb.UUCP (L.M.Geary) (03/15/84)
# The first thing that should be done along these lines is to reverse the rate structure that causes us to pay 20 cents (or more, soon) to send a first class letter while junk mail costs something like 9 cents/item. I get something like 3 - 4 pieces of junk mail for each legitimate letter, and I object to having to subsidize this garbage. Larry Geary AT&T Information Systems Holmdel, NJ ...houxb!lmg
pag@hao.UUCP (Peter Gross) (03/16/84)
> The first thing that should be done along these lines is > to reverse the rate structure that causes us to pay 20 cents (or > more, soon) to send a first class letter while junk mail costs > something like 9 cents/item. I get something like 3 - 4 pieces > of junk mail for each legitimate letter, and I object to having > to subsidize this garbage. > > Larry Geary While I would love to see junk mail and first class swap rates, it will never happen for economic considerations. The reason that junk mail (bulk rate) is cheaper derives from the quality of service guaranteed: almost none. There is no forwarding, returning to sender, or preferred delivery time with bulk rate. These are the services that make first class cost more. --peter (former mailman) gross hao!pag