<i>“The whole post office thing, that's very much a perception he has,” another source said. “It's been explained to him in multiple meetings that his perception is inaccurate and that the post office actually makes a ton of money from Amazon." </i><p><a href="https://www.axios.com/trump-regulation-amazon-facebook-646c642c-a2d7-454b-a9a9-cdc6e4eaef2c.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.axios.com/trump-regulation-amazon-facebook-646c6...</a>
I'm much more worried about the China subsidy and how it allows crap goods sellers to unfairly compete with Americans.<p>For example: <a href="https://mobile.twitter.com/PollySpin/status/955554343956221953" rel="nofollow">https://mobile.twitter.com/PollySpin/status/9555543439562219...</a>
Citation?<p>Follow up questions:<p>1. How much of that is fixed cost that has to be paid (if not by Amazon then by other customers)<p>2. How does -$1.5/package for Amazon compare to other shippers? E.g. how much does USPS lose on Walmart?<p>My understanding is the USPS is structurally designed to lose money as a subsidy to society for communication/interaction over long distances. I'm fully in favor of revisiting whether that subsidy is necessary in the modern internet driven age in which border expansion is not a goal. But, picking on Amazon for using the subsidy as intended doesn't make sense.
One thing that has always been a worry is the budget deficit the postal service runs. I think more should be done to examine where costs are going, where profits could be made, or expanded. Quoting from their 2017 financial report: "The Postal Service reported a net loss for the year of $2.7 billion" [0] That use to be $8 billion ten years ago, so perhaps things are getting better...<p>[0.] <a href="https://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2017/pr17_069.htm" rel="nofollow">https://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2017/pr17_069....</a>