Hello, All!

It is probably OT for this group but I had to look at the new
postal rates this morning since I had some heavier letters to
send. The US Post Office seems to have done a wonderful job of
complicating things with no simple formula applicable over a
large range. Have a careful look at letter post rates if you
have to go from 3 oz to 4 oz.

Fortunately, most things I mail to Europe and Canada are under 2
oz but the 1 oz increments are really erratic!

A rationale for the new rates is that they will increase
efficiency but it seems to me that they will increase business
at the actual post offices!


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

James Silverton said...

> Hello, All!
>
> It is probably OT for this group but I had to look at the new
> postal rates this morning since I had some heavier letters to
> send. The US Post Office seems to have done a wonderful job of
> complicating things with no simple formula applicable over a
> large range. Have a careful look at letter post rates if you
> have to go from 3 oz to 4 oz.
>
> Fortunately, most things I mail to Europe and Canada are under 2
> oz but the 1 oz increments are really erratic!
>
> A rationale for the new rates is that they will increase
> efficiency but it seems to me that they will increase business
> at the actual post offices!
>
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not


I saw a report about the "one stamp fits all" first-class stamp on the news
this morning.

Seems they're leaning more towards size/shape rather than weight, or so the
talking heads reported.

Andy

James Silverton wrote:
> Hello, All!
>
> It is probably OT for this group but I had to look at the new
> postal rates this morning since I had some heavier letters to
> send. The US Post Office seems to have done a wonderful job of
> complicating things with no simple formula applicable over a
> large range. Have a careful look at letter post rates if you
> have to go from 3 oz to 4 oz.
>
> Fortunately, most things I mail to Europe and Canada are under 2
> oz but the 1 oz increments are really erratic!
>
> A rationale for the new rates is that they will increase
> efficiency but it seems to me that they will increase business
> at the actual post offices!
>
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
> not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

For anything other than a standard letter I use the USPS web site and do the
click & ship mail option to print postage (shipping labels) on my printer.
Of course, you have to know the size of the package and the weight, but it
saves a trip to to the post office.

Jill

jmcquown said...

> James Silverton wrote:
>> Hello, All!
>>
>> It is probably OT for this group but I had to look at the new
>> postal rates this morning since I had some heavier letters to
>> send. The US Post Office seems to have done a wonderful job of
>> complicating things with no simple formula applicable over a
>> large range. Have a careful look at letter post rates if you
>> have to go from 3 oz to 4 oz.
>>
>> Fortunately, most things I mail to Europe and Canada are under 2
>> oz but the 1 oz increments are really erratic!
>>
>> A rationale for the new rates is that they will increase
>> efficiency but it seems to me that they will increase business
>> at the actual post offices!
>>
>>
>> James Silverton
>> Potomac, Maryland
>>
>> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
>> not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not
>
> For anything other than a standard letter I use the USPS web site and do
> the click & ship mail option to print postage (shipping labels) on my
> printer. Of course, you have to know the size of the package and the
> weight, but it saves a trip to to the post office.
>
> Jill


But... but... how are you supposed to meet women???

Standing between the velvet ropes has its advantages.

Andy
Mail Me to Maui
Comoniwannalaia
\ooo/

Have a careful look at letter post rates if you
> have to go from 3 oz to 4 oz.
>>

boy, no kidding. How many people (including me) are going to remember that
there is a 3.5 oz. break point? Jeez!

jmcquown > wrote:

>For anything other than a standard letter I use the USPS web site and do the
>click & ship mail option to print postage (shipping labels) on my printer.
>Of course, you have to know the size of the package and the weight, but it
>saves a trip to to the post office.

I'm curious whether you have done this since the rate change
on anything weighing over 3 ounces. The rates and categories are
indeed wacky now.

My own approach is to keep a supply of $0.75 and $0.84 stamps
on hand, use a kitchen scale to weigh the letter/package,
and put on the approximately correct postage.

Steve

Steve Pope wrote:
> jmcquown > wrote:
>
>> For anything other than a standard letter I use the USPS web site
>> and do the click & ship mail option to print postage (shipping
>> labels) on my printer. Of course, you have to know the size of the
>> package and the weight, but it saves a trip to to the post office.
>
> I'm curious whether you have done this since the rate change
> on anything weighing over 3 ounces. The rates and categories are
> indeed wacky now.
>
> My own approach is to keep a supply of $0.75 and $0.84 stamps
> on hand, use a kitchen scale to weigh the letter/package,
> and put on the approximately correct postage.
>
> Steve

No, Steve, I haven't used this service in about 4 months (I don't often send
anything more than a letter). I did always find it to be useful. If the
new rates have made it difficult then I guess when I need to mail a package
I'll just go to the post office. (sigh)

Jill

James Silverton wrote:

> Hello, All!
>
> It is probably OT for this group but I had to look at the new postal
> rates this morning since I had some heavier letters to send. The US
> Post Office seems to have done a wonderful job of complicating things
> with no simple formula applicable over a large range. Have a careful
> look at letter post rates if you have to go from 3 oz to 4 oz.
>
> Fortunately, most things I mail to Europe and Canada are under 2 oz
> but the 1 oz increments are really erratic!
>
> A rationale for the new rates is that they will increase efficiency
> but it seems to me that they will increase business at the actual
> post offices!
>

Potentially the biggest gotcha is the thickness regulations. Envelopes
over 1/4" thick cost more. Companies are pretty unhappy, because it's
much tougher to measure accurately beforehand, unlike weight.




Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

jmcquown > wrote:

>Steve Pope wrote:

>> My own approach is to keep a supply of $0.75 and $0.84 stamps
>> on hand, use a kitchen scale to weigh the letter/package,
>> and put on the approximately correct postage.
>>
>> Steve

>No, Steve, I haven't used this service in about 4 months (I don't often send
>anything more than a letter). I did always find it to be useful. If the
>new rates have made it difficult then I guess when I need to mail a package
>I'll just go to the post office. (sigh)

I'm not sure it will be more difficult for you... once the
USPS site un-wedges (I'm finding it impossible to download or
view first-class rate information today.)

I do miss the days, a few years ago, when $0.60, $0.70 and $0.80
were all standard postage rates and they issued stamps of these
three values. Then I could just compute the postage, round up
to the nearest 10 cents, apply a few stamps and be done with it.

Steve

jmcquown wrote on Mon, 14 May 2007 10:44:42 -0500:

j> Steve Pope wrote:

j> No, Steve, I haven't used this service in about 4 months (I
j> don't often send anything more than a letter). I did always
j> find it to be useful. If the new rates have made it
j> difficult then I guess when I need to mail a package I'll
j> just go to the post office. (sigh)

I've been a liberal for a long time and normally, I am favor of
unions.
If I were paranoid, I would suspect make-work for the Postal
Workers Union by making people come to an actual Post Office,
not inept supervision by the arithmetically challenged Postal
Commissioners! I wonder if any of them have ever mailed a
letter personally, recently?

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

James Silverton <not.jim.siverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:

> jmcquown wrote on Mon, 14 May 2007 10:44:42 -0500:
>
> j> Steve Pope wrote:
>
> j> No, Steve, I haven't used this service in about 4 months (I
> j> don't often send anything more than a letter). I did always
> j> find it to be useful. If the new rates have made it
> j> difficult then I guess when I need to mail a package I'll
> j> just go to the post office. (sigh)

>I've been a liberal for a long time and normally, I am favor of
>unions.
>If I were paranoid, I would suspect make-work for the Postal
>Workers Union by making people come to an actual Post Office,
>not inept supervision by the arithmetically challenged Postal
>Commissioners! I wonder if any of them have ever mailed a
>letter personally, recently?

That's one theory. The weird thing is that the USPS made a
lot of press out of the forever stamp, and the one-cent
rate increase for the first first-class ounce, but they
do not say jill about the totally weird changes for multiounce
first-class mailings. You have to dig into their website to
find it -- yet it is the most radical change they've come
up with in memory.

Steve

"jmcquown" wrote:
> James Silverton wrote:
>
> > It is probably OT for this group but I had to look at the new
> > postal rates this morning since I had some heavier letters to
> > send. The US Post Office seems to have done a wonderful job of
> > complicating things with no simple formula applicable over a
> > large range. Have a careful look at letter post rates if you
> > have to go from 3 oz to 4 oz.
>
> > Fortunately, most things I mail to Europe and Canada are under 2
> > oz but the 1 oz increments are really erratic!
>
> > A rationale for the new rates is that they will increase
> > efficiency but it seems to me that they will increase business
> > at the actual post offices!
>
> For anything other than a standard letter I use the USPS web site and do the
> click & ship mail option to print postage (shipping labels) on my printer.
> Of course, you have to know the size of the package and the weight, but it
> saves a trip to to the post office.

I get my mail at my PO Box, so I go to the PO once or twice a week
anyway, so no problem for me. And the majority of the mail I send is
letters less than an ounce or packages more than a pound, it's very
rare I have something inbetween. I seem to over buy postage stamps...
I'm still working on using up my 37 cent stamps, haven't even gotten
to all the 39 cent stamps I bought, and now it's already 41 cents.
I'll just have to buy a few more sheets of penny stamps. At the rate
they keep upping the price I'll probably never need to buy 41 cent
stamps. I still remember when for quite a few years 1st class letters
cost 3 cents... and there are no more Air Mail stamps. Postage hasn't
really increased much over so many years, it's still the best bargain
on the planet. I really don't mind all these inconsequential changes,
makes life a bit more interesting... I think anyone who finds time to
carp about the cost of a postage stamp hasn't much of a life.

My only complaint is that now all the stamps are self-stick/no-lick...
killed stamp collecting... not that the stamps produced in recent
years are of a quality worth collecting... cheapo paper and they all
look like they came off a bubble jet printer, newsprint is better
quality.

Sheldon Fatalist Philatelist

James Silverton said...

> A rationale for the new rates is that they will increase
> efficiency but it seems to me that they will increase business
> at the actual post offices!


I have a couple sheets of 37 cent stamps from a year or so ago that I hardly
use, thanks to online bill pay and e-mail.

If I do send snail mail, I have to go to the post office and buy the extra 2
cent postage. Now the sad thing is, the mailman behind the counter takes
about a minute (probably 25 cents of his hourly wage) to "check" the correct
added postage required then charges me two cents and THEN prints out a 2 cent
postage receipt for my records!!!

What's wrong with THAT picture?!!!

Andy

> The weird thing is that the USPS made a
> lot of press out of the forever stamp, and the one-cent
> rateincreasefor the first first-class ounce, but they
> do not say jill about the totally weird changes for multiounce
> first-class mailings. You have to dig into their website to
> find it -- yet it is the most radical change they've come
> up with in memory.
>
> Steve

With the new rates effective today most rates have gone up but,
believe it or not, the rate for the second and subsequent ounce of a
first class letter has been reduced.

Specifically, the rate for the second and subsequent ounce of first
call mail has been reduced from 24 cents to 17 cents. This means that
if you had been in the habit affixing two 39 cents stamps to two-
ounce letters under the old rates that would have only required 63
cents (.39 + .24) postage, you were only throwing away 15 cents (.78-.
63 = .15).

With the new rates however, you will be throwing away more money. The
new rate for the second and subsequent ounce of first call mail is now
17 cents. This means that if you affix two 41 cent stamps to two ounce
letters that require only 58 cents (.41+ .17) postage, you will now
be throwing away 24 cents (.82-.58 = .24) for each of those letters.

In addition to the new Forever Stamp, the post office will be issuing
a 17- cent Big Horn Sheep stamp May 21 for the second and subsequent
ounces of first class mail. It will pay you to buy some of these. And,
if you were smart enough to be using the 24-cent stamps under the old
rates for the second and subsequent ounce of first class mail, you can
now use these leftovers 24-cent stamps with the new 17 cent stamp for
your 41 cent total. Additionally, It is not prudent to stock up on
the Forever Stamps at this time. You will want to do this just prior
to the next postal increase.

Mark Z.

Mark Z. > wrote:

>Specifically, the rate for the second and subsequent ounce of first
>call mail has been reduced from 24 cents to 17 cents.

Not so fast. What had been first-class postage has triforcated (sp?)
into three different rate classes, based on whether it's a letter,
small package, envelope containing "rigid object", and various
other factors which I haven't entirely figured out yet.
The first-class retail postage for a 3 ounce item might be
either $0.75, $1.14, or $1.47 depending on its shape and
rigidity.

Check out, if you can get it to load:

http://pe.usps.gov/text/dmm300/rates....htm#wp1008795

Steve

Sheldon wrote:

> "jmcquown" wrote:
> > James Silverton wrote:
> >
> > > It is probably OT for this group but I had to look at the new
> > > postal rates this morning since I had some heavier letters to
> > > send. The US Post Office seems to have done a wonderful job of
> > > complicating things with no simple formula applicable over a
> > > large range. Have a careful look at letter post rates if you
> > > have to go from 3 oz to 4 oz.
> >
> > > Fortunately, most things I mail to Europe and Canada are under 2
> > > oz but the 1 oz increments are really erratic!
> >
> > > A rationale for the new rates is that they will increase
> > > efficiency but it seems to me that they will increase business
> > > at the actual post offices!
> >
> > For anything other than a standard letter I use the USPS web site and do
the
> > click & ship mail option to print postage (shipping labels) on my
printer.
> > Of course, you have to know the size of the package and the weight, but
it
> > saves a trip to to the post office.
>
> I get my mail at my PO Box, so I go to the PO once or twice a week
> anyway, so no problem for me. And the majority of the mail I send is
> letters less than an ounce or packages more than a pound, it's very
> rare I have something inbetween. I seem to over buy postage stamps...
> I'm still working on using up my 37 cent stamps, haven't even gotten
> to all the 39 cent stamps I bought, and now it's already 41 cents.
> I'll just have to buy a few more sheets of penny stamps. At the rate
> they keep upping the price I'll probably never need to buy 41 cent
> stamps. I still remember when for quite a few years 1st class letters
> cost 3 cents... and there are no more Air Mail stamps. Postage hasn't
> really increased much over so many years, it's still the best bargain
> on the planet. I really don't mind all these inconsequential changes,
> makes life a bit more interesting... I think anyone who finds time to
> carp about the cost of a postage stamp hasn't much of a life.
>


Adjusted for inflation, the cost of a First Class stamp has changed very
little over the past century, it's indeed a great bargain. And when you say
"planet", you are correct, the cost of a First Class stamp in other
developed industrial nations is *much* higher than here in the States, IIRC
the rate in the UK is almost now 70 cents, other countries are similarly
high...


> My only complaint is that now all the stamps are self-stick/no-lick...
> killed stamp collecting... not that the stamps produced in recent
> years are of a quality worth collecting... cheapo paper and they all
> look like they came off a bubble jet printer, newsprint is better
> quality.


My mom was a postmaster, I collected stamps back when I was a kid in the
mid - 60's. I remember the glue had a distinct (and rather pleasant,
actually) smell, it's one of those childhood "scent memories" that I
retain...where did all those nice plate blocks go? The US had some
beautiful philatelic releases in the 1960 - 70 decade...

Stamp collecting was a good hobby, learned all about geography. I had
penpals all over the world, too, that was another good hobby for a kid.
Both, sadly, seem to have fallen somewhat by the wayside. It was a big
thrill to get a letter from India or West Germany or Australia or Japan or
Czechoslovakia or wherever, the stamps and the stationery were all different
and interesting...especially to me, I grew up totally surrounded by
cornfields in an isolated rural area. For better or worse, the internet has
changed most everything...

--
Best
Greg

In article >,
"James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:

> Hello, All!
>
> It is probably OT for this group

PROBABLY?

On May 14, 6:20 pm, Melba's Jammin' >
wrote:
> In article >,
> "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:
>
> > Hello, All!
>
> > It is probably OT for this group
>
> PROBABLY?

Well the glue is likely eatable !

"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:
>
>> Hello, All!
>>
>> It is probably OT for this group
>
> PROBABLY?

I have seen posts pertaining to mail ordering items pertaining to the
newsgroup topic. close enough?

In article >,
"Gil Faver" > wrote:

> "Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello, All!
> >>
> >> It is probably OT for this group
> >
> > PROBABLY?
>
> I have seen posts pertaining to mail ordering items pertaining to the
> newsgroup topic. close enough?


Nope.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.mac.com/barbschaller - blahblahblog - Orange Honey
Garlic Chicken, 3-29-2007
jamlady.eboard.com
http:/http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/amytaylor/

In article .com>,
John Kane > wrote:

> On May 14, 6:20 pm, Melba's Jammin' >
> wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello, All!
> >
> > > It is probably OT for this group
> >
> > PROBABLY?
>
> Well the glue is likely eatable !


Nope. All the stamps are self-stick. Nice try, though.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.mac.com/barbschaller - blahblahblog - Orange Honey
Garlic Chicken, 3-29-2007
jamlady.eboard.com
http:/http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/amytaylor/

"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:
>
>> Hello, All!
>>
>> It is probably OT for this group
>
> PROBABLY?

The responses have been interesting however! A later response
pointed out that one does not lick US stamps anymore so even
that's that's no justification. Just to be a little more OT, I
collect cancelled stamps for a young friend and it is still
possible to remove self-stick stamps by soaking in water since
the underlying envelope softens even if the glue doesn't.



--
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

James Silverton <not.jim.siverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:

>"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message

>> "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:

>>> Hello, All!

>>> It is probably OT for this group

>> PROBABLY?

>The responses have been interesting however!

Seems to me foodies send (or order) foodstuffs (or kitchen
equipment) through the mail quite often. This screwball
re-do of the first-class rates throws a primate wrench into
the mailorder business. Just think about this -- you can no
longer just set your package onto the scale sitting in the
post office lobby and read off the first class mail amount.
Heck, I bet the postal workers will not be able to figure it
out for the next little while. And the mail sorters who have
to flag and remove packages with underpostage? I don't even
want to think about it. Somebody give me a pill.

Steve

Sheldon wrote:
> "jmcquown" wrote:
>> James Silverton wrote:
>>
>>> It is probably OT for this group but I had to look at the new
>>> postal rates this morning since I had some heavier letters to
>>> send. The US Post Office seems to have done a wonderful job of
>>> complicating things with no simple formula applicable over a
>>> large range.
>>
>> For anything other than a standard letter I use the USPS web site
>> and do the click & ship mail option to print postage
>
> I still remember when for quite a few years 1st class letters
> cost 3 cents... and there are no more Air Mail stamps.
>
> Sheldon Fatalist Philatelist

Sheldon, I have 53 panes of uncancelled 2 and 3 cent airmail stamps my
father sent me, thinking they are valuable. (Of course he thinks everything
old that he owns is valuable.) After consulting with a number of appraisers
I'm told they are of no value for resale. Want them?

Jill

Steve wrote on Tue, 15 May 2007 04:30:27 +0000 (UTC):

??>> "Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in
??>> message

??>>> "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not>
wrote:

??>>>> Hello, All!

??>>>> It is probably OT for this group

??>>> PROBABLY?

??>> The responses have been interesting however!

SP> Seems to me foodies send (or order) foodstuffs (or kitchen
SP> equipment) through the mail quite often. This screwball
SP> re-do of the first-class rates throws a primate wrench into
SP> the mailorder business. Just think about this -- you can
SP> no longer just set your package onto the scale sitting in
SP> the post office lobby and read off the first class mail
SP> amount. Heck, I bet the postal workers will not be able to
SP> figure it out for the next little while. And the mail
SP> sorters who have to flag and remove packages with
SP> underpostage? I don't even want to think about it.
SP> Somebody give me a pill.

This could help tho' I'd much rather have simple formulas that
did not require me to log on the Internet and they could easily
have given dimension ranges on the page.

http://postcalc.usps.gov/


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not