You are not logged in. Join Free! | Log In Thank you!    

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error


Poll Question : Do you care if the mail carrier skips Saturdays?
Choice Votes Statistics
  Yes
1
20 %
  No
3
60 %
  I want to wait and see
0
0 %
  I don't care
1
20 %
  Idunno
0
0 %
  Total 5 100%
Guests can't vote. Try login or register.
Share
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline wpr  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, February 6, 2013 8:09:57 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Posts: 11,874
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,405
Applause Received: 1,195

Quote:
It's been debated for months and months, but on Wednesday the United States Postal Service finally will announce it's not going to deliver first-class mail on Saturdays anymore.

The postal service's announcement, planned for about 10 a.m. EST, is expected to say that packages, mail-order medicine, and express mail will continue to be delivered on Saturday, but not letters, bills, cards, and catalogs. Post offices which are now open on Saturdays will continue to be open on Saturdays.

The move is meant to save the financially struggling agency about $2 billion annually as it wrestles with the rising popularity of email and social media eating away at its core business of delivering mail, and with the climbing costs of providing health benefits to its workers.

rest of story


I don't mind the loss of of delivery on Saturdays at all. I would be interested to hear about England and the other countries postal service.

Actually I wouldn't mind it if the post office ended all delivery to the home. Get a PO box and go get it yourself. Then again I know it is helpful to the elderly. Not everyone will have a neighbor who is willing to go and pick it up for them. Perhaps the senior service centers could come into play for these people.

"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

Sponsor
Offline Wade  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, February 6, 2013 2:24:24 PM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Posts: 5,649
Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 560
Applause Received: 587

I have never understood business models that try to solve their red ink problems by reducing the services they provide.

I wouldn't invest in any of them.

Well, not voluntarily anyway. Of course you "Americans are undertaxed" folk will say I'm just not in the spirit of doing the right thing for America.

Even though the post office (and my PO Box) is right across the street from my house, and even though I really like the people who work at it, I think this sort of "cut services" approach is inevitable when those who make the decisions are divorced from the consequences of the choices.

I'd simply close the entire thing down. Maybe offer current USPS employees an opportunity to buy assets if they think they can make a profit with whichever part of the USPS stuff that uses those particular assets. If you're losing that many billions every year as a business enterprise, your enterprise ought to die.

1. How many $$billions is the USPS annual budget?

2. How many $billions could all those post offices and postage meters and letter sorting machines get, even at a bankruptcy liquidation fire sale?

How would the sum of 1 and 2, plus the tax revenues from the successful enterprises said buyers put into practice, compare to...say, the chicken-feed approaches both major parties see as "solutions" to the national debt?

None of the above. It wouldn't have been a wasted vote. Obama and Romney -- Those were the wasted votes.
Offline DakotaT  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, February 6, 2013 5:36:52 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Posts: 6,971
Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 570
Applause Received: 1,190

Didn't the Neocons give the Post Office a big shitburger with their budget? I don't recall the piece of legislation but it was the funding for their pensions. Do you remember anthing about that Wade?
UserPostedImage
Offline Wade  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, February 6, 2013 6:49:40 PM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Posts: 5,649
Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 560
Applause Received: 587

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Didn't the Neocons give the Post Office a big shitburger with their budget? I don't recall the piece of legislation but it was the funding for their pensions. Do you remember anthing about that Wade?


No clue. I haven't been a neo-con since...actually, i don't think I was ever a neo-con. I used to stand with Wm F Buckley, Barry Goldwater, and those more traditional pre-Reagan type conservatives. I suppose the closest to a neo-con that I've liked was the elder Bush. Or maybe Charles Krauthammer -- is he a neo-con? If i had to choose between a neocon and a Kennedy/Obama/Pelosi type lib, I might go with the former -- at least back when I bought into the "lesser of two evils" voting philosophy. But most of those people leave me as cold as one of those fancy freezers.

Are you saying its a refusal to fund them (with yet more tax dollars) that is the explanation for why they lose billions every year?

My opinion is that the Post Office loses money because they are providing services that people don't value enough to pay for and because they don't provide enough of the services that people are willing to pay for.





None of the above. It wouldn't have been a wasted vote. Obama and Romney -- Those were the wasted votes.
Offline Wade  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, February 6, 2013 6:51:38 PM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Posts: 5,649
Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 560
Applause Received: 587

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Didn't the Neocons give the Post Office a big shitburger with their budget? I don't recall the piece of legislation but it was the funding for their pensions. Do you remember anthing about that Wade?



Oh, okay, I admit to liking P J O'Rourke. But surely anyone who has written for Rolling Stone can't be a neo-con, can he?
None of the above. It wouldn't have been a wasted vote. Obama and Romney -- Those were the wasted votes.
Offline DakotaT  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, February 6, 2013 7:11:26 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Posts: 6,971
Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 570
Applause Received: 1,190

Originally Posted by: Wade Go to Quoted Post
Oh, okay, I admit to liking P J O'Rourke. But surely anyone who has written for Rolling Stone can't be a neo-con, can he?


You didn't answer my question, but that's okay, I remember now. The lame duck Republicans passed a law in 2006 to make the post office's pension fund solvent for 75 years in a 10 year window. It was a cheap shot to try to slowly close them down. What's funny is that the PO is not dependent on taxpayer dollars, they are self sufficient on their own revenue. I suppose the thinking among the evil ones was that all that business would one day go to the private sector.



http://www.google.com/ur...mp;bvm=bv.42080656,d.b2I


UserPostedImage
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 2.1.0 | YAF © 2003-2014, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.