Why does the 'US MINT' need to make a profit?

Yes, the mint seems to be a better run business than the post office. The post office would probably be better run if they were able to set their own prices for services, stop delivering on Saturday, and close down small post offices in one horse towns. We don't seem to want them to be profitable though. Thus, we keep subsidizing them from mint earnings.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The USPS is considering adding banking services:

http://www.npr.org/2014/02/07/27265...d-rack-up-billions-by-offering-money-services

What's next? Maybe they will start selling numismatic products and bullion. TC

 

Guess which company operates (resulting from a tender) the Numismatic Office here in Germany ...

Christian

 

The American Postal Workers Union and the National Association of Letter Carriers (APWU & NALC) used to be significantly stronger than they are right now. It will be interesting to see what happens with this opposition.

 

Wow. I'll bet they are not happy with that. Maybe we will start seeing wanted posters at Staples next. TC

 

Well - I'd be happy if they simply broke even, consistently...being a dept of the govt. - Honestly profitable ? Then I love'em.

I'd also heard they made profits by providing minting services for other small countries (don't know if this is true or not.....but it seemed like a sensible use of otherwise idle machine time).

 

Interesting thread thanks for starting it. A couple of questions, so when the U.S. Mint gives money back to the Treasury Department, where does it go? Is it just distributed around the government? Also I thought USPS turned a profit? Maybe not a lot but something.

 

Neither the Mint nor the Postal Service is properly thought of as a "business."

I don't especially need the post office to be profitable, no more than I need the National Park Service, or the Coast Guard, to be profitable. Rather, I want them to serve their public mission, effectively and efficiently.

To that end, I don't want to lose Saturday delivery, or small-town service. The country is just better off with good, standardized, moderately-priced postal service, in large and small towns alike. Like preserving our great natural landmarks, or rescuing sailors in a storm, this may not be a strictly profitable endeavor, which is exactly why it must be done by a public agency.

All that said, the post office actually doesn't do too bad at the bottom line, if you compare it on fair terms. What you've seen in recent years about them facing a crisis is based on a deliberately skewed accounting, imposed for political reasons in 2006. This accounting reckons their theoretical, long-term future benefit liabilities in a manner that NO other public or private entity faces. Don't fall for it.

 

The USPS has been losing money precipitously since the late 1990s:

1. Mail volume is down significantly, people don't send letters or mail bills.
2. Postage costs have been regulated by a commission and kept low.
3. Most importantly the letter carriers pension funds have needed significant funding which is eating up all the revenue being drawn in.
4. The Post Office was spun off of the government in the early 1970s - has to be self supporting. It was until mail volume dropped off a cliff.

 

I was just watching the 1947 miracle on 34th street movie and I laughed when a line came out about the US post office was making a profit and all government agencies should learn from them, or something like that. Found it funny when comparing it to 60yrs later but I guess there was no FedEx and ups back then and of course no Internet

 

Wow, I should have read more than the first page before replying. Looks like you guys are already going down the post office road lol

 

Balancing the books The Mint sometimes likes to call those revenues a profit, but they aren’t, really. Still, they do make running the government cheaper.

The Mint does not distribute coins into the monetary system. That’s the job of the Federal Reserve, which has to buy them at full price.

Even though a quarter costs the Mint only about 6 cents to make, Fore said, the Fed buys it for 25 cents. The difference — called seigniorage (pronounced SEEN-your-ij) — goes straight into the general fund, where it substitutes for borrowing from the public and lowers the government’s interest costs.

It’s not really a profit because, in theory, it should all even out in the long run. Eventually, the excess is supposed to be spent down as the Mint redeems old coins and destroys them. But most old coins are never redeemed, thanks to collectors and forgetful spenders.

“Very few coins are turned in,” Fore said. “There is an attrition whether they are in washing machines or in dresser drawers or lost on the beach.”

Moreover, coins are “an interest-free loan to the government, a loan that never gets called,” John P. Mitchell, the Mint’s then-deputy director, testified before a House subcommittee in 2000. “Because coins generally last 30 years, the government gets to use the minted billions for a long time.”

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6620800/ns/us_news/t/making-mint-us-mint/

 

They shouldn't on the backs of the general public (read coin collectors.). At least not the obscene amounts they are now. Just my two "PENNIES".

 

When the United States Mint was first established, in the late 1700's, and for most of its existence up until the 1910's, the philosophy of the people was that it was a public service that should not make a profit. Its purpose was to turn random bullion owned by citizens into coins. As its mojo changed to that of a maker of collectible baubles and trinkets, the attitude of the general public became, "why should I pay for this stuff?"

 

USPS is only losing money because Congress forced them to fully fund their pension plan into the future, unlike every other pension plan in the US. That's costing them nearly $6 Billion a year.

 

"Unlike every other pension plan in the US"? That simply is not true. All private pensions need to be "fully funded" actuarially, which is what is being required of the USPS. The fact governments refuse to do this do not mean the USPS is being treated any differently than any other private business, they just are not being treated like a government where they can lie about their obligations.

Regarding the mint and seignorage, the profit really is one of the two main purposes of the mint. From the beginning of coinage, seignorage has been a huge source of governmental income. The second requirement of a mint is to produce coinage that facilitates commerce. This is where our mint has failed, due to the politicians. We need $1, 2, and 5 coins, and discontinue all notes, as well as discontinuing cents and nickels. Does anyone here really believe anything can be bought for anything less than a dime anymore? Why even mess with such coins? Make $.10, .25, 1, 2, and 5 coins and just be done with it. Remember when vending machines could actually be used with coins? I haven't used coins in a vending machine in a very long time now. That is proof our coinage system is simply broken.

 

You're secretly a Swiss agent of influence, aren't you? With the exception that their coin above 10 rappen is a 20, not a 25, and they use a dime-sized half Franc, you basically described the coinage of Switzerland. And it's close to par with the U.S. dollar, too.

 

Too simple. Too accurate. Stop that.

I'm spoiled because I work for the people for whom "because the law says so" is not a sufficient excuse.