The Bailout Of The US Postal Service Begins........... [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : The Bailout Of The US Postal Service Begins...........


snerd
04-26-2012, 12:37
............ cost To Taxpayers - $110,000 Per Union Vote "Saved Or Gained"
....... Yeah, yeah. In the meantime all that matters is that about 100,000 votes have been secured for the incumbent candidate. The cost? Only $11 billion, or $110,000 per vote. To all taxpayers.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/bailout-postal-service-begins-cost-taxpayers-110000-vote-saved-or-gained

Brucev
04-26-2012, 16:45
............ cost To Taxpayers - $110,000 Per Union Vote "Saved Or Gained"

Well, well, well, it looks like the republicans effort to reward ups and fedex by putting the USPS out of business is running into trouble. Excellent. This is the precise sort of government interference to which no business should be subjected. In this case, the requirement that the USPS fully fund pension requirements 70 years into the future even for persons not yet even born who the USPS will one day employ is simply stupid. It is required of no other business. It only reflects efforts of the republicans to destroy the USPS because it is one of if not the largest union memberships in the U.S. Another factor would have to be the large number of African-Americans who are members of the postal workers union. It's just stupid politics. Removing this completely unjustified legislation designed only to damage the interest of postal workers and the public is a idea whose time has come.

syntaxerrorsix
04-26-2012, 19:43
We won't be putting the USPS out of business anytime soon, not unless there is a constitutional convention in the works. It's mandated by Art 1 Sec 8 Clause 7.

It's also allowed to run at a defict if I remember correctly.

bobthellama42
04-26-2012, 19:54
We won't be putting the USPS out of business anytime soon, not unless there is a constitutional convention in the works. It's mandated by Art 1 Sec 8 Clause 7.

It's also allowed to run at a defict if I remember correctly.

All true, but the Constitution does not define how it is to be run. It could be reduced to a agency that subcontracts all of its work to FEDEX/UPS.

syntaxerrorsix
04-26-2012, 19:57
All true, but the Constitution does not define how it is to be run. It could be reduced to a agency that subcontracts all of its work to FEDEX/UPS.

Very true.

rhikdavis
04-26-2012, 20:03
............ cost To Taxpayers - $110,000 Per Union Vote "Saved Or Gained"

That's an expensive stamp.

Brucev
04-26-2012, 20:25
All true, but the Constitution does not define how it is to be run. It could be reduced to a agency that subcontracts all of its work to FEDEX/UPS.

Why?

rpadgett2
04-27-2012, 06:13
They should let them downsize. Let the people that still use the Post Office pay more for the service. I don't want to subsidize a service I don't use.

aircarver
04-27-2012, 06:52
They should let them downsize. Let the people that still use the Post Office pay more for the service. I don't want to subsidize a service I don't use.

Where would government be if everyone felt like that ? .....:whistling:

.

rpadgett2
04-27-2012, 07:02
Where would government be if everyone felt like that ? .....:whistling:

.

Better off??


We're not talking about an essential service here like SS or medicare. It's the post office. This is a political move because no one want people to lose jobs in their state.

Flying-Dutchman
04-27-2012, 07:10
A government agency is the closest thing to eternal life.

It is a shame it has been run into the ground as I like the USPS and it is one government agency I can personally see accomplish something useful.

mj9mm
04-27-2012, 07:16
Unions and libs are the ones messing with capitalism, if they are a failing buisiness let them figure it out or turn the lights out. as for pensions, tax dollars don't belong there

pipedreams
04-27-2012, 08:04
They should let them downsize. Let the people that still use the Post Office pay more for the service. I don't want to subsidize a service I don't use.
If that the case should we get rid of your local PD or since you don't use them? I agree there is a lot of bloat in the PO to trim but they do provide a service the nation overall needs.

Syclone538
04-27-2012, 10:03
We won't be putting the USPS out of business anytime soon, not unless there is a constitutional convention in the works. It's mandated by Art 1 Sec 8 Clause 7.

It's also allowed to run at a defict if I remember correctly.

"The Congress shall have power to ... To establish post offices and post roads; ... "

It does not say Congress shall establish post offices and post roads. It says they have the power to, not that they have to use that power.

Brucev
04-27-2012, 10:04
They should let them downsize. Let the people that still use the Post Office pay more for the service. I don't want to subsidize a service I don't use.

Hum... let me fix this for you.... "I don't use the Coast Guard. I don't use the National Park Service. I don't use the Veterans Hospitals. I don't use the National Weather Service. I don't use NASA. I don't use the U.S. Geological Survey or its products. I don't use the various farm programs. I don't use any of the nuclear programs of the fed. govt. All of these and many other fed. govt. agencies/institutions do absolutely nothing for me. So... let's close them all down. Those that use them or need them... let them pay the full cost. I don't want to subsidize a service I don't use." Now... that's much better!!!

Brucev
04-27-2012, 10:07
If that the case should we get rid of your local PD or since you don't use them? I agree there is a lot of bloat in the PO to trim but they do provide a service the nation overall needs.

Hold on there! The PD is "different." You've got to compare programs that are mutually disliked... not these and other ones that provide income, employment, etc. to the ones who want to do away with the USPS because of their fear of the Postal Workers union.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 10:08
"The Congress shall have power to ... To establish post offices and post roads; ... "

It does not say Congress shall establish post offices and post roads. It says they have the power to, not that they have to use that power.

That's probably the worst argument I've heard so far.

Brucev
04-27-2012, 10:12
Better off??

We're not talking about an essential service here like SS or medicare. It's the post office. This is a political move because no one want people to lose jobs in their state.

Essential? It is Constitutionally mandated in the same way the armed forces are mandated. To pretend otherwise is simply a exercise in fantasy. If the USPS is not needed, then exactly the same case can be made for the military... etc. After all, if everything is to be done at the cheapest possible cost, and with an eye to doing whatever will destroy a legitimate postal workers union, then exactly the very same logic would say to eliminate the various military services along with all of the obviously unneeded based, equipment, etc. Why any need for such armed services could be much cheaper provided by hiring mercenaries. Of course... some would protest... at the potential lak of effectiveness... and of course the loss of jobs, etc.

Brucev
04-27-2012, 10:17
Unions and libs are the ones messing with capitalism, if they are a failing buisiness let them figure it out for turn the lights out. as for pensions, tax dollars don't belong there

Capitalism is only a economic system. That is all. It is one of several. I personally think that it is the most effective. But, unrestrained capitalism ... no. If that fries someone's grits, they'll just have to develop a new taste.

The USPS is entirely self-supporting. It is not funded with tax dollars. Those who think otherwise are simply ignorant of the facts.

As to pensions... let all the little boys who think requiring a business to fully fund generations of payments in a 10 year period just trot over to their own little business (if they run one) and implement that system. What? You think that would damage your business? Hum? Well, maybe that's the reason republicans in a lame-duck session jammed this through... to damage the USPS and attack the Postal Workers Union. After all... the republicans needed to pay off those campaign contributions from UPS, FedEx, etc. And... the republicans likely don't expect to drive off to many votes since union members stereotypically are expected to vote demokrat.

Brucev
04-27-2012, 10:19
"The Congress shall have power to ... To establish post offices and post roads; ... "

It does not say Congress shall establish post offices and post roads. It says they have the power to, not that they have to use that power.

Guess this is about like the military. The fed. govt. has the power to establish it? But they don't necessarily have to use that power? Or... maybe the founding fathers wrote these little bits into the Constitution with the natural expectation that these little bits would be actually put into place. Yep! That rational sure does make sense. In fact, it makes very good sense.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 10:20
Having any stand alone post offices is really a dumb idea.

Sell stamps at stores through machines and co-locate with post office box.
Postal worker picks up mail when he delivers the mail to that store.

If a person is required co-locate that post office at a UPS/Fed Express/Office Depot/Bank/Supermarket/etc store.

Do we really need 6 day a week deliveries?

US Post Office another make work program.

Naelbis
04-27-2012, 10:36
Having any stand alone post offices is really a dumb idea.

Sell stamps at stores through machines and co-locate with post office box.
Postal worker picks up mail when he delivers the mail to that store.

If a person is required co-locate that post office at a UPS/Fed Express/Office Depot/Bank/Supermarket/etc store.

Do we really need 6 day a week deliveries?

US Post Office another make work program.
Once upon a time I might have agreed with you...but that was before the boom. The post office is literally the only address that thousands of people in my area have and they would be unable to get mail otherwise. In fact our local office is running out of space to put postal boxes due to the massive demand, it wouldn't fit inside another business. Are there issues with the Postal Service? Of course! But that doesn't mean that they don't provide a useful service that is constitutional...

Javelin
04-27-2012, 10:37
Hum... let me fix this for you.... "I don't use the Coast Guard. I don't use the National Park Service. I don't use the Veterans Hospitals. I don't use the National Weather Service. I don't use NASA. I don't use the U.S. Geological Survey or its products. I don't use the various farm programs. I don't use any of the nuclear programs of the fed. govt. All of these and many other fed. govt. agencies/institutions do absolutely nothing for me. So... let's close them all down. Those that use them or need them... let them pay the full cost. I don't want to subsidize a service I don't use." Now... that's much better!!!

Yeah **** those Soldiers that go to war to protect your worthless existence and get wounded in the process. Let them pay for their own injuries. They volunteered right?

Who the **** are you?

Naelbis
04-27-2012, 10:42
Yeah **** those Soldiers that go to war to protect your worthless existence and get wounded in the process. Let them pay for their own injuries. They volunteered right?

Who the **** are you?
I think you missed the inherent sarcasm in his post because he didn't quote the one he was responding to.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 10:43
Once upon a time I might have agreed with you...but that was before the boom. The post office is literally the only address that thousands of people in my area have and they would be unable to get mail otherwise. In fact our local office is running out of space to put postal boxes due to the massive demand, it wouldn't fit inside another business. Are there issues with the Postal Service? Of course! But that doesn't mean that they don't provide a useful service that is constitutional...

Are you telling me you can not think of a solution for that? Really, with today's advanced technology?

Give it a shot, I think you most here could do it.

Naelbis
04-27-2012, 10:50
Are you telling me you can not think of a solution for that? Really, with today's advanced technology?

Give it a shot, I think you most here could do it.
I am saying that we have a solution that works for us, the Post Office. Why reinvent the wheel? :tongueout:

Brucev
04-27-2012, 10:58
Having any stand alone post offices is really a dumb idea.

Sell stamps at stores through machines and co-locate with post office box.
Postal worker picks up mail when he delivers the mail to that store.

If a person is required co-locate that post office at a UPS/Fed Express/Office Depot/Bank/Supermarket/etc store.

Do we really need 6 day a week deliveries?

US Post Office another make work program.
Your ignorance is palpable. The easiest answer is to allow the USPS to establish other revenue streams. For instance, banking, etc. After all... it's made the wingtippers on Wall Street rich! The USPS could do banking services, etc. and offer a competitive service to the customer serves the bank operations that so far have stole other people's money in retirement programs, etc.... all without a single one of the suit and tie folks going to jail. Why? Because they own and operate the house/senate that writes the laws.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 11:00
I am saying that we have a solution that works for us, the Post Office. Why reinvent the wheel? :tongueout:

Because of the cost of the Post Office.

But, the takers , such as yourself, in this society really don't care that some one else is paying for what they are taking.

Brucev
04-27-2012, 11:04
Yeah **** those Soldiers that go to war to protect your worthless existence and get wounded in the process. Let them pay for their own injuries. They volunteered right?

Who the **** are you?

I make a point by using a extreme example. Apparently you got the point. Cool. Communication is a beautiful thing.

Now specifically... there is a legitimate need for an adequate military. In exactly the same way there is a need for an adequate postal service. Thus the Constitution provides for both along with other services that are needed. The USPS has a majority of employees who are unionized. In the same way both active and retired service persons constitute a block of voters that, like the postal union, are identified by some as a positive support for their policies and by others as opposing their policies. So... these politicians use legislation to strike at those various groups to reward their own supporters and damage their opponents. Neither the military nor the postal service are sacred. They are necessary. There are those whose knees jerk when anything untoward is done toward the military. The same is true of the USPS. Let the DOD be required to fully fund it's pension obligations for the next 70 years in a term of 10 years. Then we can talk about problems with the USPS.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 11:06
Your ignorance is palpable. The easiest answer is to allow the USPS to establish other revenue streams. For instance, banking, etc. After all... it's made the wingtippers on Wall Street rich! The USPS could do banking services, etc. and offer a competitive service to the customer serves the bank operations that so far have stole other people's money in retirement programs, etc.... all without a single one of the suit and tie folks going to jail. Why? Because they own and operate the house/senate that writes the laws.

Banking, Freddie & Fannie Mae (those last two are Fed Agencies, in case you didn't know it)- you mean like the ones bailed out recently? Good idea.

Naelbis
04-27-2012, 11:07
Because of the cost of the Post Office.

But, the takers , such as yourself, in this society really don't care that some one else is paying for what they are taking.
Actually my local Post Office is a net revenue generator, but hey lets scrap constitutional activitities while keeping unconstitutional ones around because of the cost...and for the record, unless you happen to be one of the few that pay more in taxes than whatever number it was that certifiedfunds came up with you are also a net taker of services. But then I am a local gov employee so I am actually a double taker!!!! I will remember your disdain when I am collecting my pay from you at gunpoint...oh wait, I get paid with local property taxes and you don't live here..nm. :tongueout::whistling:

Brucev
04-27-2012, 11:08
Because of the cost of the Post Office.

But, the takers , such as yourself, in this society really don't care that some one else is paying for what they are taking.

Last time anyone took a minute to look, the USPS was not run on tax payer money. If you don't want to use it, don't use it. It doesn't affect you one way or the other. Or... perhaps it does. Perhaps your big beef is that there are those who find the USPS to be a very good service which they use and which they find very cost effective. Why... it must be a good business with real profit potential. Otherwise why would UPS and Fedex be contributing to the campaigns of their bought and paid for senators and representatives so that legislation could be forwarded to destroy the USPS... so that they can pick up all the nice profitable scraps? Hum?

Dexters
04-27-2012, 11:11
Last time anyone took a minute to look, the USPS was not run on tax payer money. If you don't want to use it, don't use it. It doesn't affect you one way or the other. Or... perhaps it does. Perhaps your big beef is that there are those who find the USPS to be a very good service which they use and which they find very cost effective. Why... it must be a good business with real profit potential. Otherwise why would UPS and Fedex be contributing to the campaigns of their bought and paid for senators and representatives so that legislation could be forwarded to destroy the USPS... so that they can pick up all the nice profitable scraps? Hum?

Look again - who is paying for the annual losses?

Brucev
04-27-2012, 11:12
Banking, Freddie & Fannie Mae (those last two are Fed Agencies, in case you didn't know it)- you mean like the ones bailed out recently? Good idea.

Why not? The wall street gansters have been sucking at the fed. govt. tit all at the expense of the tax payer. The USPS is funded by receipts from sales. You know! Like any other business! How cool is that. So yep! Let the USPS run banking operations. After all... the financial institutions have wreaked the economy after being allowed to become speculators rather than stodgy banks. Can't see how the USPS could do a worse job. And... their ceo's don't get paid bonuses for destroying their company and needing to go beg for a bail out from the tax payer.

Brucev
04-27-2012, 11:14
Look again - who is paying for the annual losses?

What a wonderful question! Now what to do... what to do! After all, inquiring minds want to know! But never fear... the answer is near! Your a bright boy. Why don't you answer your own question. Be sure to provide actual references.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 11:25
What a wonderful question! Now what to do... what to do! After all, inquiring minds want to know! But never fear... the answer is near! Your a bright boy. Why don't you answer your own question. Be sure to provide actual references.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question

Javelin
04-27-2012, 12:43
I think you missed the inherent sarcasm in his post because he didn't quote the one he was responding to.

Awh ok. I guess I missed it. How our government treats wounded veterans is a hot button topic with me is all.

Naelbis
04-27-2012, 13:08
Awh ok. I guess I missed it. How our government treats wounded veterans is a hot button topic with me is all.
Understandable...but it is the same for everyone when it comes to something that directly affects them or they feel strongly about.

Javelin
04-27-2012, 13:36
Understandable...but it is the same for everyone when it comes to something that directly affects them or they feel strongly about.

I guess. If someone were to expect to live in this country & the government is going to send troops overseas to fight & die then the troops should be taken care of when they come home.

Merely stating that the folks who fight for our country should deal with their own medical bills is not even on the same level as discounting mailbox routes. It is really an ******* statement to say otherwise.

Naelbis
04-27-2012, 14:48
I guess. If someone were to expect to live in this country & the government is going to send troops overseas to fight & die then the troops should be taken care of when they come home.

Merely stating that the folks who fight for our country should deal with their own medical bills is not even on the same level as discounting mailbox routes. It is really an ******* statement to say otherwise.
This is true, but not everyone feels that way. Everyone has a vested interest in seeing what they care about recieve priority but not everyone will manage to get it. That is the underlying nature of social conflict theory and it is very real.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 14:52
merely stating that the folks who fight for our country should deal with their own medical bills is not even on the same level as discounting mailbox routes. It is really an ******* statement to say otherwise.

+1 ...

CAcop
04-27-2012, 15:58
I was just reading an article where they were talking about closing smaller post offices.

Then they pointed out various politicians were trying to stop that because they were popular in their distrcits. Small town politicians don't want to have to explain to their voters why they have to drive 100 miles to get their mail or send a package for a low cost.

They are going to have to repeat the base closing commission if they want to get anything done.

Ruble Noon
04-27-2012, 16:09
Your ignorance is palpable. The easiest answer is to allow the USPS to establish other revenue streams. For instance, banking, etc. After all... it's made the wingtippers on Wall Street rich! The USPS could do banking services, etc. and offer a competitive service to the customer serves the bank operations that so far have stole other people's money in retirement programs, etc.... all without a single one of the suit and tie folks going to jail. Why? Because they own and operate the house/senate that writes the laws.


:rofl:

Yes they have such a stellar record with managing money. :upeyes:

Dexters
04-27-2012, 17:42
I was just reading an article where they were talking about closing smaller post offices.



This is one reason why the total US Deficit will not be address - politicians are afraid of offending anyone.

PS - no one better touch my social security - I'm planning on collecting it in about 5-6 years.

PPS - we're all screwed

Brucev
04-27-2012, 18:27
:rofl:

Yes they have such a stellar record with managing money. :upeyes:

Yes they do. Compared to the profoundly screwed up failure of the wall street wingtippers, you are exactly and precisely right... "They have such a stellar record." Yes. You are entirely correct. Good for you!

Syclone538
04-27-2012, 22:41
That's probably the worst argument I've heard so far.

:dunno:

Ok, show me where it says they have to.

Brucev
04-28-2012, 06:09
:dunno:

Ok, show me where it says they have to.

The basis for the current structure of the USPS is the same for the current structure of the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marines and Coast Guard, neither of which was existent when the Constitution was drafted, yet each of which is structured and run in the same way as the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, which were existent and in view when the Constitution was drafted... signed... and ratified by the states.

robertoh
04-28-2012, 08:02
The past month we got two pieces of official mail(bills) the rest was junk mail. The USPS's salad days are over.

Syclone538
04-28-2012, 09:14
The basis for the current structure of the USPS is the same for the current structure of the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marines and Coast Guard, neither of which was existent when the Constitution was drafted, yet each of which is structured and run in the same way as the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, which were existent and in view when the Constitution was drafted... signed... and ratified by the states.

You do understand that I'm specifically not saying it's unconstitutional, right? Only that it's not a requirement. You just made my case stronger by saying there was a time when fed gov did not operate USPS.

Brucev
04-28-2012, 14:17
You do understand that I'm specifically not saying it's unconstitutional, right? Only that it's not a requirement. You just made my case stronger by saying there was a time when fed gov did not operate USPS.

Case? Wasn't aware that this was a court of law.

The postal system has from the beginning been a part of the fed. govt. The First and Second Continental Congresses recognized the need for a postal service. The postal system was authorized in the Articles of Confederation and mandated in the subsequent Constitution. It was one of the first departments of the early fed. govt. The postal service is a requirement of the Constitution in exactly the same way that need for and provision for military forces are recognized in the Constitution.

Javelin
04-28-2012, 14:19
Who will deliver my supersaver coupons, junk-mail magazines and Publisher's Clearinghouse offers?

:dunno:

G23Gen4.40
04-28-2012, 18:44
Triple the price for companies to send out junk mail. Either they make more money or I get less junk mail. WIN/WIN