Oboma .. another term

[ButtermilkBuoy]

[idamtnboy]

Greedy, greedy, greedy government employees!!!!

The USPS net loss last year was $15.9 billion, more than the $15 billion that had been projected, as Bloomberg News reports. As the USPS racked up losses, the volume of mail it carried dropped 5 percent. It costs some $250 million a day to run the USPS, which by the end of the fiscal year will have less than four days of cash on hand. The USPS is expected to lose $7.6 billion in the year that started October 1

I would have posted this last night but the forum wasn't working1

And I suppose you won't hesitate to espouse how well UPS and Fedex are operated since they make billions in profit? Well consider this. If delivering packages to residences was so profitable why would Fedex contract with the USPS to deliver packages for them instead of doing it themselves? It called the Smartpost service by Fedex.

What's the minimum revenue the USPS may receive when they stop at your mailbox? It's about 17 cents for one piece of junk mail. What's the minimum revenue UPS realizes when they stop at your door? About $5. Hell of a big difference. It doesn't take a genius to recognize it's a lot easier to run a profitable business with a minimum income of $5 per delivery vs. 17 cents.

[The Choker]

If delivering packages to residences was so profitable why would Fedex contract with the USPS to deliver packages for them instead of doing it themselves?

The government maintains its monopoly by a statute which makes it a federal crime, punishable by a fine of $5000 to $10000 for each incident, for a private company to put a package in a mailbox.

[Boyce]

There is a higher concentration of criminals in government than in licensed gun owners.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2006 organized Mayors Against Illegal Guns to enhance gun restrictions on citizens city by city.

But the Second Amendment Foundation says perhaps he should be focusing on the mayors themselves, not the residents of their cities.

“Michael Bloomberg created this group to further his personal agenda of public disarmament,” explained SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “But within the ranks of his organization, our research has found several politicians who have been convicted of various serious crimes, thus making it impossible for them to finish their terms.

“We discovered,” he said, “one mayor convicted of perjury and embezzlement, another who was convicted of attempted child molestation, and yet another who was convicted of assault and racketeering. There was one who was convicted on bribery, fraud and money laundering, and another who was convicted of domestic violence.

“In short,” Gottlieb said, “many of these elitist politicians can no longer own firearms. The crimes they were convicted of suggest they are public enemies rather than public servants. No wonder they want to take guns from law-abiding citizens!

“Perhaps Bloomberg should worry about background checks on his colleagues, rather than law-abiding gun owners,” he suggested.

On April 25, 2006, 15 mayors worked with Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino to set up the organization to restrict guns.

The group said it wanted to make cities safer by cracking down on illegal guns, because mayors “have a responsibility to protect their communities by holding gun offenders and irresponsible gun dealers accountable.”

They say they want trace data for law enforcement efforts, and they want lawmakers to fix gaps and loopholes in laws “that make it far too easy for criminals and other prohibited purchasers to get guns.”

The group boasts that it has grown to more than 725 mayors in 40 states.

But SAF is publicizing mayors who have run into their own troubles.

It is launching its campaign in newspapers, magazines and on the Internet, revealing the criminal and ethical wrongdoings of many of the mayors themselves.

Gottlieb reported the research conducted by the foundation found “a far higher rate of criminal activity within the ranks of the MAIG than among the ranks of more than eight million citizens who are licensed to carry concealed firearms in 49 states.”

“While Michael Bloomberg has been campaigning to turn gun owners into criminals,” Gottlieb said, “the criminals in his own ranks were engaged in such activities as tax evasion , extortion, accepting bribes, child pornography, trademark counterfeiting and perjury. One was even convicted of assaulting a police officer.

“And these people have the audacity to smear law-abiding gun owners as potential criminals, simply because they exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” he concluded. “He should pay more attention to what his friends are up to than worry about the gun owners he’s been trying to demonize.”



New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2006 organized Mayors Against Illegal Guns to enhance gun restrictions on citizens city by city.

But the Second Amendment Foundation says perhaps he should be focusing on the mayors themselves, not the residents of their cities.

“Michael Bloomberg created this group to further his personal agenda of public disarmament,” explained SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “But within the ranks of his organization, our research has found several politicians who have been convicted of various serious crimes, thus making it impossible for them to finish their terms.

“We discovered,” he said, “one mayor convicted of perjury and embezzlement, another who was convicted of attempted child molestation, and yet another who was convicted of assault and racketeering. There was one who was convicted on bribery, fraud and money laundering, and another who was convicted of domestic violence.

“In short,” Gottlieb said, “many of these elitist politicians can no longer own firearms. The crimes they were convicted of suggest they are public enemies rather than public servants. No wonder they want to take guns from law-abiding citizens!

“Perhaps Bloomberg should worry about background checks on his colleagues, rather than law-abiding gun owners,” he suggested.

On April 25, 2006, 15 mayors worked with Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino to set up the organization to restrict guns.

The group said it wanted to make cities safer by cracking down on illegal guns, because mayors “have a responsibility to protect their communities by holding gun offenders and irresponsible gun dealers accountable.”

They say they want trace data for law enforcement efforts, and they want lawmakers to fix gaps and loopholes in laws “that make it far too easy for criminals and other prohibited purchasers to get guns.”

The group boasts that it has grown to more than 725 mayors in 40 states.

But SAF is publicizing mayors who have run into their own troubles.

It is launching its campaign in newspapers, magazines and on the Internet, revealing the criminal and ethical wrongdoings of many of the mayors themselves.

Gottlieb reported the research conducted by the foundation found “a far higher rate of criminal activity within the ranks of the MAIG than among the ranks of more than eight million citizens who are licensed to carry concealed firearms in 49 states.”

“While Michael Bloomberg has been campaigning to turn gun owners into criminals,” Gottlieb said, “the criminals in his own ranks were engaged in such activities as tax evasion , extortion, accepting bribes, child pornography, trademark counterfeiting and perjury. One was even convicted of assaulting a police officer.

“And these people have the audacity to smear law-abiding gun owners as potential criminals, simply because they exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” he concluded. “He should pay more attention to what his friends are up to than worry about the gun owners he’s been trying to demonize.”

Have a look at all the mayors involved in criminal activity - http://saf.org/images/maig.pdf

[Boyce]

Definitely greedy to the point of committing criminal acts.

[Lizistired]

On the P.O., they really need to cut delivery to every other day. Cutting Sat delivery is moot. I don't need junk mail every day. They went to crap when they sponsered Disney and Lance Armstrong. I also don't know when they put mail boxes on both sides of the road in rural areas. Duh. I don't use it much but my street address is the only REAL address I have. I don't even know who owns my internet addresses. I still get my bills delivered but pay them online. Maybe I should pay for this service or it is a cost of doing business... if my utility company wants to get paid. I think I bought my forever stamps 5 years ago and wonder why I have envelopes.

[woodworkerjunkie]

And I suppose you won't hesitate to espouse how well UPS and Fedex are operated since they make billions in profit? Well consider this. If delivering packages to residences was so profitable why would Fedex contract with the USPS to deliver packages for them instead of doing it themselves? It called the Smartpost service by Fedex.

What's the minimum revenue the USPS may receive when they stop at your mailbox? It's about 17 cents for one piece of junk mail. What's the minimum revenue UPS realizes when they stop at your door? About $5. Hell of a big difference. It doesn't take a genius to recognize it's a lot easier to run a profitable business with a minimum income of $5 per delivery vs. 17 cents.

why do you think the post office started to offer priority mail? More profits! Smartpost by Fedex is not just for postal service, it is also an alternative for economy shipping through Fedex. Several businesses and individuals want to save money on their shipping and go through smartpost. You also realize that smartpost will usually add 5 to 10 days to your shipment. The reason is, that it has to set at the terminal until the trailer is fully loaded, before it moves, and that is at each and every terminal. So, if the move goes through 3 terminals, it has to set until fully loaded at all 3 terminals. Whereas, Ground service will send trailers with as little as 5 or 10 packages on it. Do they like sending trailers with 5 or 10 packages on them? No! But, if there is not enough room on another trailer and the driver is having to drive that direction anyway, they will move that trailer! If Fedex couldn't move the postal service packages cheaper, why would they contract with FedEx to do it? It's called to much overhead and over paid salaries and benefits!

The .17 cents you quote is for that junk mail! What about those insured certified letters? You won't send those for under $3.50 or more. Priority packages by the post office, is not much cheaper than Fedex or UPS. By the time you pay for the extra insurance on your priority mail package that is included with a FedEx or UPS package(up to $100), there is very little cost difference. Let's make sure we compare apples to apples! Would you rather track a package through the post office or through FedEx and UPS websites? The Post office tracking is a joke!

The Modern Postal Service: Agency or Business?
Until adoption of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, the U.S. Postal Service functioned as a regular, tax-supported, agency of the federal government.

According to the laws under which it now operates, the U.S. Postal Service is a semi-independent federal agency, mandated to be revenue-neutral. That is, it is supposed to break even, not make a profit.

In 1982, U.S. postage stamps became "postal products," rather than a form of taxation. Since then, The bulk of the cost of operating the postal system has been paid for by customers through the sale of "postal products" and services rather than taxes.

Each class of mail is also expected to cover its share of the costs, a requirement that causes the percentage rate adjustments to vary in different classes of mail, according the costs associated with the processing and delivery characteristics of each class.

Under paragraph (d) of Title 39, Section 101.1, "Postal rates shall be established to apportion the costs of all postal operations to all users of the mail on a fair and equitable basis."

No, the USPS is a Business!
the Postal Service takes on some several very non-governmental attributes via the powers granted to it under Title 39, Section 401, which include:

power to sue (and be sued) under its own name;
power to adopt, amend and repeal its own regulations;
power to "enter into and perform contracts, execute instruments, and determine the character of, and necessity for, its expenditures";
power to buy, sell and lease private property; and,
power to build, operate, lease and maintain buildings and facilities.
All of which are typical functions and powers of a private business. However, unlike other private businesses, the Postal Service is exempt from paying federal taxes. USPS can borrow money at discounted rates, and can condemn and acquire private property under governmental rights of eminent domain.

The USPS does get some taxpayer support. Around $96 million is budgeted annually by Congress for the "Postal Service Fund." These funds are used to compensate USPS for postage-free mailing for all legally blind persons and for mail-in election ballots sent from US citizens living overseas. A portion of the funds also pays USPS for providing address information to state and local child support enforcement agencies.

Under federal law, only the Postal Service can handle or charge postage for handling letters. Despite this virtual monopoly worth some $45 billion a year, the law does not require that the Postal Service make a profit -- only break even. Still, the US Postal Service has averaged a profit of over $1 billion per year in each of the last five years. Yet, Postal Service officials argue that they must continue to raise postage at regular intervals in order make up for the increased use of email.
*About.com US Government Info

What you don't think about is the mail service doesn't pay federal taxes, FedEx and UPS does. The mail service can borrow money at discount rates from the government and take land by eminent domain, FedEx and UPS cannot! Who would you say has the advantage to give discounts on shipping? I can promise you that workers for FedEx and UPS do not make the kind of money that USPS workers make. As you read above, only the Postal Service can handle or charge postage for handling letters. If the postal service was not protected under that law, they would have been out of business years ago! How many times has the government had to step in to bail them out over the years?

Yes, UPS and FedEx makes Billions in profit each year, they also invest billions into their businesses each year also! They employ hundreds of thousands of workers, they buy thousands of new trucks,trailers and dollies and planes each year (which provide jobs). They build new terminals (which puts people to work) and hire people to work at those terminals each year! And, if something was to happen that their business dropped and they started losing billions each year, the government is not standing their with their purse wide open to save them, like with the postal service! It's the free enterprise that our country was founded upon (that some despise) vs. the government!

[Lizistired]

The only problem with the PO is how to dump all of there employees. Otherwise, it's easy. Cut delivery days. But do they dump half of there carriers? Yes. Do it and be done. Cut delivery days in half. I don't care if I only get mail once a week as long as the billing/payment due, cycles accomodate it.

[NateS]

This story came out today from one source, based on anonymous leaks, claiming that Senator Leahy was going to support the version described by CNET. As far as I can see, every source repeating the story relies on the same CNET report. Senator Leahy has denied it. (http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valle ... l-searches) Other reporters have doubted the story from the start, and think that the draft is actually something proposed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). (http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill ... is-flawed/) I don't think that it is very significant that the President, who happens to be at an East Asian summit in Cambodia, hasn't spoken out against a rumor that emerged only today. I should add that most liberals in this day and age worry about security as well as civil liberties. Like most important and difficult issues, there are substantial considerations on both sides and uncomfortable choices to be made. I thought the CNET reporter was trying for maximum inflammatory effect rather than helping readers understand the issues.

Well if you are right, that is a good thing. I will check the story in a couple of weeks and see where it stands. I am not familiar with CNET and will start watching what comes out of them. Maybe after some checking they get put on my "bad boy" list.

No need to wait any longer:

Leahy scuttles his warrantless e-mail surveillance bill
After public criticism of proposal that lets government agencies warrantlessly access Americans' e-mail, Sen. Patrick Leahy says he will "not support" such an idea at next week's vote.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552 ... ance-bill/

Regards,

Nate

[Slinky]

Keep in mind the USPS delivers to each individual mailbox in this country.

WHY do some roads get delivery in mailboxes on both sides and other roads only have mailbox delivery on one side? That relies on how the mail route is set up. In some situations it is necessary for the letter carrier to "back track" along the same road in which case delivery is made on each side, one side as he/she goes out and another as he/she later comes back that way. Most routes are set up in a series of "loops". The letter carrier has to deliver mail to every mailbox along his/her route that has mail that day. The routes are set up w/safety in mind as much as possible thus trying to avoid the carrier having to backup to turn around and to avoid as many left turns as possible at busy unmarked intersections and crossings.

[Slinky]

Is it against the forum rules to quote myself?

As the Washington Times noted, the overall compensation of Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe rose from $384,229 in 2011 to $512,093 in 2012 on account of a $186,536 increase in his retirement account.

There are many problems and this is one of them -> You cannot get a good CEO (Postmaster General) capable of running an organization of this size for a measly $512,093!

Snort!!! Money, perks and pensions "ain't" no guarantee of good management either - by any stretch!!! Lets take a look at some of these big companies and banks .... Exon, etc.

[makezmuzic]

Wow, there sure are a lot of whiners on this thread. I had no idea there were so many Flea Farty members up in here. Which is their right - even though they want to take my rights away. Please , Please, Please secede. Anyone notice how the Bible Belt red states are the same states that seceded last time? The slave states? They were most of the states where people were too morally corrupt to do their own work? Like the first invaders in Jamestown that no one celebrates? Well, they still aren't working. They suck up most of the countries resources. Please join the WAR and secede. Please, please, please! Now I personally am going back to the reason this site was set up for?

[idamtnboy]

If Fedex couldn't move the postal service packages cheaper, why would they contract with FedEx to do it? It's called to much overhead and over paid salaries and benefits!

I don't know the numbers but I'm going to guess that 90%+ of all intercity USPS mail is carried by contract carriers. Haven't you ever seen those plain white trailers with something like SLC-Portland in big letters on the back, and on the tractor door something about US Mail contract carrier? Smartpost is aimed at Fedex saving money on the last mile of the delivery process. Since a USPS carrier is most likely going to stop at a person's house anyway, let them carry the package to that house.

The .17 cents you quote is for that junk mail! What about those insured certified letters? You won't send those for under $3.50 or more. Priority packages by the post office, is not much cheaper than Fedex or UPS. By the time you pay for the extra insurance on your priority mail package that is included with a FedEx or UPS package(up to $100), there is very little cost difference. Let's make sure we compare apples to apples! Would you rather track a package through the post office or through FedEx and UPS websites? The Post office tracking is a joke!

I agree. The cost of shipping a package is similar between UPS, Fedex, and USPS. What I'm saying is UPS does not stop anywhere to make any kind of a delivery for less than about $5, while the postal carrier makes many, many, stops for an income to the PO of only pennies per stop. That is a big difference.

Yes, UPS and FedEx makes Billions in profit each year, they also invest billions into their businesses each year also! They employ hundreds of thousands of workers, they buy thousands of new trucks,trailers and dollies and planes each year (which provide jobs). They build new terminals (which puts people to work) and hire people to work at those terminals each year! And, if something was to happen that their business dropped and they started losing billions each year, the government is not standing their with their purse wide open to save them, like with the postal service! It's the free enterprise that our country was founded upon (that some despise) vs. the government!

I dare say you forget. Assuring free and open communication among citizens was a primary concern of the founding fathers. That's why they established a government operated postal system. The only people who really, really, want to see the Post Office done away with, because it costs money to keep it alive, are the plutocrats who want to control the communications shared among all citizens. Do away with a system of free (or near-free in terms of cost) communications and you can control the population!

[Mr PR]

Since I am an employee of a pretty big Medical Device Manufacturer which happens to make CPAPS, I'm a bit disappointed about the re-election because part of the Affordable Care Act "ObamaCare" is a job killer. About 7 people so far have lost their jobs because of the Medical Device Excise Tax which starts January 1 of 2013. I'm certain more people will lose their jobs very soon.

[2 B Sleeping Soundly]

Is it against the forum rules to quote myself?

No, but it is against the forum rules to argue in multiple posts with yourself and then spam delete your own posts because you don't like what you said in response! Fortunately, you have done neither of those things so you are doing fine.