[runesoerensen]

I remember reading about this mess shortly after moving to the U.S. (and visiting Vegas for the first time). One thing that struck me about Vegas was an immense and everpresent feeling of fakeness. Seeing that fakeness reproduced on official stamps felt somewhat telling, and I've since entertained quite a few people with the story due to the sheer ridiculousness of it.

I had no idea that they'd continue to use and sell stamps with that design for years after discovering it was a picture of a fake Statue of Liberty.

Learning that this embarrassing saga has now also resulted in a lawsuit awarding a ridiculously large sum for damages kinda feels like the whole thing has come full circle.

[briandear]

How is $3.5 million against a $70 million profit “ridiculous?”

[tehlike]

Probably because if the original statue of liberty was used, it'd have made the same profit.

[joering2]

USPS does not make profit; they are bleeding for many years now (almost $6B in 2016 by GAAP standards)

https://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2017/pr17_069....

Not that it matters anyways; USPS is a private company.

[runesoerensen]

> USPS does not make profit;

That's besides the point with respect to the comment you're responding, which is clearly about the profits from making and selling this stamp (rather than the USPS as a whole) -- and importantly, how the substance of this discussion (whether the stamp has a picture of the real or the fake Statue of Liberty) influence profits. Which I agree with grandparent that it probably doesn't, and why I think debating profits for the entire USPS isn't responsive to grandparent's comment (and why I find the awarded damages ridiculous in the first place).

In any case, for the sake of that argument, I think it's possible to discuss potential profits/losses from a single business activity/product without considering the gross profit for the entire company, organization or, in this case, government agency. Which leads to

> USPS is a private company.

No, it's not. "The United States Postal Service (USPS; also known as the Post Office, U.S. Mail, or Postal Service) is an independent agency of the United States federal government responsible for providing postal service in the United States, including its insular areas and associated states. It is one of the few government agencies explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service

> Not that it matters anyways

Really? Just because a business is private doesn't mean that it doesn't matter if it turns a profit or not. Sure from some extreme and strictly capitalist (and even then, very narrow) viewpoint this might be the case.

Personally I think it matters quite a bit what companies make a profit (and can continue to exist), whether they be private, public, government-owned, and whether or not I own part of it. We live in a world dominated by capitalism where the success or failure of companies influences societies tremendously. I hope that the companies that conduct business in a way I support will turn a profit, and I hope that companies doing the opposite will loose and die.

Equifax would be a perfect example of the latter: In the absence of some sort of government action to administratively dissolve the corporation (which is rare but in their case, as one of few I can think of, would be entirely appropriate), Equifax is a company I sincerely hope will never again turn a profit.

[robbrown451]

The profit they make by selling stamps that go unused, though, really can't be separated from the rest of their activities. They make that particular profit in a way other organizations can't really, but it helps balance out their losses elsewhere. And they certainly aren't making the profit based on the image on the stamp.

It's almost like talking about the profit that a grocery store's checkout line makes, independent of the losses of their other business activities, such as stocking the shelves with groceries.

[runesoerensen]

Sure, but it really sounds like we agree on the substance here - "they certainly aren't making the profit based on the image on the stamp", as also pointed out by https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17477124.

I agree, which is why I wrote that I think it's besides the point to discuss USPS overall profits in response to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17477257. This concerns a particular stamp, and we all pretty much agree that the image is irrelevant to USPS profits. Considering that, the interesting aspect is probably more related to the USPS' decision to use an image that didn't actually depict the Statue of Liberty, as well as knowingly and intentionally continue that after being made aware of it.

I guess it's somewhat like a postal service equivalent of turning a bug into a feature, but they have to consider what the bug was in the first place as well as what it signals when they make it a feature.

I've updated my comment in an attempt to make that a bit clearer, but realize it's not perfectly worded -- it's getting late around here, approximately 4 miles from the real Statue of Liberty :)

[zenexer]

No, it's not a private company. It's not even a government-owned corporation. According to US law[1], it's a part of the executive branch of the US government. If you're in the US, USPS debt is your debt.

[1]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/39/201

[Maybestring]

There is the assumption that those stamps won't be used. I have a few, I'm not collecting them, I just don't go through stamps very fast.