Post Office - another gov't boondoggle

[cj's dad]

The USPS announced losses in excess of $3.8 billion for the year 2009. It also plans to lay off 40,000 employees.

snip> The post office (http://www.wral.com/business/story/7907862/) wants to increase the price of a stamp by 2 cents to 46 cents.The agency has been battered by massive losses and declining mail volume and faces a financial (http://www.wral.com/business/story/7907862/) crisis. <snip

Link:

http://www.wral.com/business/story/7907862/

And:


snip>LAKE WATEREE, South Carolina (CNN) – At a time when the U.S. Postal Service says it is experiencing a financial crisis, it purchased a $1.2 million home from an employee so he could relocate, a CNN investigation has found. snip> Postal Service spokesman Greg Frey said the home will be resold, as others have been.

“It’s not like we threw away a million dollars,” Frey told CNN. “We are hoping it’s going to go for the appraised value.”

But a real estate agent in the area said the home could be a tough sell in a depressed housing market — and the USPS said it lost an average of more than $58,000 on the 500-plus homes its relocation program bought and sold in 2008. < snip

Gee, a paltry $29 million !


Link:

http://pumabydesign001.wordpress.com/2009/03/06/postal-service-draws-criticism-for-12-million-home-buy/

[boxcar]

Our government doing what it does best: Screwing up everything it touches.

Boxcar

[cj's dad]

Working well for the 40,000 facing layoffs.

Must be W's fault :lol:

[prospector]

i'd like to lay off (or worse) the mailman who delivers my mail..
i have 770 in big numbers on my house and mailbox...my mail comes addressed to 770..this idiot still gives my netflix to different neighbors..

[ArlJim78]

So they are cutting out Saturday service, "plan" to layoff 40,000, yet they still need to increase postage by 4.5%? I'm thinking that this plan to lay off 40,000 is only a plan, and will never happen.

[boxcar]

So they are cutting out Saturday service, "plan" to layoff 40,000, yet they still need to increase postage by 4.5%? I'm thinking that this plan to lay off 40,000 is only a plan, and will never happen.

Right! People the public sector are virtually immune to unemployment. It won't happen. They are the privileged class.

Boxcar

[Bettowin]

Once they can tax e-mails and give it to the USPS they will become profitable. At least for a little while:)

[mostpost]

Right! People the public sector are virtually immune to unemployment. It won't happen. They are the privileged class.

Boxcar
Except it did happen. Read the story more carefully. The 40,000 were laid off during the last fiscal year.
The agency lost $3.8 billion last fiscal year despite cutting 40,000 full-time positions and making other reductions. It has continued to face significant losses this year.

[cj's dad]

Except it did happen. Read the story more carefully. The 40,000 were laid off during the last fiscal year.

That would certainly be a plus in your convoluted liberal mind. Most likely they are running out of benefits by now !

[mostpost]

That would certainly be a plus in your convoluted liberal mind. Most likely they are running out of benefits by now !
My only point was that the layoffs had occurred, in spite of Boxcar's statement they would never happen. My statement had nothing to do with who was in the White House.

[WinterTriangle]

I must've mailed over 100,000 pieces of mail in my life.

I just mailed my brother in CA a letter. He will have it and be reading it soon.

I think I've had 2 pieces of mail lost in my entire life. We had an ice storm, and snow, and tornados and floods........I still have mail.

Find me a private company who can do that for 42 cents.

A private corporation will also want to make a PROFIT. 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.

Some people don't seem to realize that it receives very little $ from taxes...the little bit it does receive is 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.
Therefore, this means that the customer probably needs to pay more. If it were run by a corporation, believe me, you WOULD be paying more.

What was GM and Chrysler's debt? About double what the USPS is facing?

[newtothegame]

I must've mailed over 100,000 pieces of mail in my life.

I just mailed my brother in CA a letter. He will have it and be reading it soon.

I think I've had 2 pieces of mail lost in my entire life. We had an ice storm, and snow, and tornados and floods........I still have mail.

Find me a private company who can do that for 42 cents.

A private corporation will also want to make a PROFIT. 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.

Some people don't seem to realize that it receives very little $ from taxes...the little bit it does receive is 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.
Therefore, this means that the customer probably needs to pay more. If it were run by a corporation, believe me, you WOULD be paying more.

What was GM and Chrysler's debt? About double what the USPS is facing?

I must've mailed over 100,000 pieces of mail in my life.

I just mailed my brother in CA a letter. He will have it and be reading it soon.

I think I've had 2 pieces of mail lost in my entire life. We had an ice storm, and snow, and tornados and floods........I still have mail.

So what are you saying here winter?? That you expected less then what a company commits to doing or that you're happy you got a service from a company that was expected???

Find me a private company who can do that for 42 cents.

Who said a private company could do it for that?? Here's a clue...THAT'S ONE REASON THE USPS IS LOSING MONEY HAND OVER FIST!

A private corporation will also want to make a PROFIT. 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 a capitalistic economy, private companies are SUPPOSED to make profits. It's called creating shareholder value!
Revenue nuetral...that's a joke! I understand you said "supposed" too break even but, that has not been remotely close for some time with the USPS.


I could copy and paste more of your above post...but let's just say that YOU chose to use the USPS. I do NOT! All of my bills are paid electronically and rarely do I recieve much in the way of mail. ( I recieve more "junk" mail then anything that I don't want!!).

Next you talk about where it gets its funding from...you can say its not "taxes" or whatever you like. But the bottom line is the USPS loses MILLIONS yearly. Hmmmm I wonder how many postal workers did NOT get paid over that time?? I wonder how many vehicles were taken away forcing carriers to hand carry?? Bottom line is the money came from somewhere. Ultimately, whether you agree or not, it came from tax paying citizens. And I personally am tired of paying for FAILING businesses whether they are GM or AIG or THE USPS!

Either they figure out how to charge the people who use their service appropriately and get to "revenue nuetral" or they go away!!! It's not a hard concept!

[Robert Goren]

I have used UPS ( the people in brown) maybe 20 times in my life. They lost 10 of them and dealing with them is a nightmare when it happens. The post office looks really good to me. I have never had them lose anything.

[ArlJim78]

Find me a private company who can do that for 42 cents.

A private corporation will also want to make a PROFIT.
how about we let the private sector give it a go and we'll see if you're right.
profit and competition are good things, things that would help keep the price of a stamp in check. The private sector has done just fine with priority mail and packages, why do you think they would not be able to handle letters? Do you think the USPS has some efficiency edge over private companies?

Granted, this isn't the biggest issue we face. Fannie and Freddie are bleeding a billion or so in red ink every other day. But the point is that without competition the cost of mail will always rise higher than it should.

[newtothegame]

I have used UPS ( the people in brown) maybe 20 times in my life. They lost 10 of them and dealing with them is a nightmare when it happens. The post office looks really good to me. I have never had them lose anything.

except YOUR money which is constantly poured in!!!!

[boxcar]

My only point was that the layoffs had occurred, in spite of Boxcar's statement they would never happen. My statement had nothing to do with who was in the White House.

Well, there's a huge silver lining behind that cloud, according to Pelosi. All those unemployment benefits are stimulating the economy. I think everyone should stop working. Just imagine (if you can) how stimulated then the economy would be! :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[newtothegame]

Well, there's a huge silver lining behind that cloud, according to Pelosi. All those unemployment benefits are stimulating the economy. I think everyone should stop working. Just imagine (if you can) how stimulated then the economy would be! :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

He won't get it Box.....your arguement is falling on deaf ears! He is still yet to reply to my "sharing wealth" that I posed to him in another thread. Remember where I asked him about sharing his wealth till everyone was even?? lol

The silence from him was deafening!

[mostpost]

He won't get it Box.....your arguement is falling on deaf ears! He is still yet to reply to my "sharing wealth" that I posed to him in another thread. Remember where I asked him about sharing his wealth till everyone was even?? lol

The silence from him was deafening!
It would help if you provided a link. I vaguely rememmber some such comment but I am sure I considered it too dumb to reply to.

[newtothegame]

It would help if you provided a link. I vaguely rememmber some such comment but I am sure I considered it too dumb to reply to.

Lol...your almost funny there mosty lol. But I took the time to reply to you then, I am certainly not going to do all the work for you and go find it again.

Seems you union guys always have a habit of wanting other people to do your work.:lol:

Not too mention, this is another thread and you have more then ample opportunity to reply to BOX with his above statement.

Those union habits die hard huh mosty?? lol
:lol:

[Greyfox]

The PO has done well to stay afloat this long.
e mail has taken a lot of business away. Parcel service has moved elsewhere.
It's a tough business.
I like receiving hand written letters or cards. Unfortunately those are things of the past. Today my mail is basically bills.

[mostpost]

Lol...your almost funny there mosty lol. But I took the time to reply to you then, I am certainly not going to do all the work for you and go find it again.

Seems you union guys always have a habit of wanting other people to do your work.:lol:

Not too mention, this is another thread and you have more then ample opportunity to reply to BOX with his above statement.

Those union habits die hard huh mosty?? lol
:lol:

I spent quite a bit of time looking for your remark and could not find it. Let's just agree that I am not going to respond. As for Boxcar, the purpose of unemployeement is not to stimulate the economy it is to provide a means to get by until you find a job. I don't know what Pelosi said or the context in which she said it, but I know that his statement is just ridiculous.
A person receiving unemployment is unlikely to spend it on anything but necesities. Stimulus money on the other hand goes to funding projects. Those projects are contracted out to private businesses. Those businesses hire people to work on those projects. People with jobs do spend money on things other than the bare necesities. When they start doing that, businesses start making more things; they start hiring workers; the cycle continues. Giving businesses tax breaks when no one is buying does nothing. The owners will just pocket the money as a fall back against continued bad times.
I have explained this to you and Boxcar several times. I have no more hope that you will get it this time than I had before.

[cj's dad]

.


A person receiving unemployment is unlikely to spend it on anything but necesities.



Mostie - you really are living in a Utopian world. Have you ever heard of daily lottery tickets. drugs, beer, wine, liquor, carry out, a handout to the baby daddy etc....

Really man, you are living in a dream world.

[newtothegame]

I spent quite a bit of time looking for your remark and could not find it. Let's just agree that I am not going to respond. As for Boxcar, the purpose of unemployeement is not to stimulate the economy it is to provide a means to get by until you find a job. I don't know what Pelosi said or the context in which she said it, but I know that his statement is just ridiculous.
A person receiving unemployment is unlikely to spend it on anything but necesities. Stimulus money on the other hand goes to funding projects. Those projects are contracted out to private businesses. Those businesses hire people to work on those projects. People with jobs do spend money on things other than the bare necesities. When they start doing that, businesses start making more things; they start hiring workers; the cycle continues. Giving businesses tax breaks when no one is buying does nothing. The owners will just pocket the money as a fall back against continued bad times.
I have explained this to you and Boxcar several times. I have no more hope that you will get it this time than I had before.

Mosty...if your gonna continue to come down here in O.T and play, at least bring some substance. You continue to post propoganda..(worse then anything i've seen from the USSR in the 80,s).

Ok, lets look at your stimulus....
you say jobs are contracted out to private sectors....(in some cases thats true but there are also some in which GOVERNMENT entities recieve those jobs like DOT). But, to stay on point, lets say a private construction job recieves a contract to build a bridge. Employees are hired as you said. Money is earned as you said. Money is spent as you said. But, and here's the kicker...what happens once the bridge is built and the job is fulfilled???
LAYOFFS!!!!!

Stimulus is now, and always will be just a "prop" or temporary fix. There are ways to truly stimulate the economy and its NOT by creating jobs that only last for a FIXED period of time. You need not look further then the census if you doubt what I am saying. "Thousands of jobs created" was the cries from the left when all those people were hired (at ridiculous wages I might add). And now where are they??? UNEMPLOYED again!!!

So do tell us mosty...what was created in that debacle besides temporarily propping up something that would ineviteably go right back to where it was???

All those home owners who were spared and given extensions on their mortgages....have you seen the latest numbers?? Yep...defaulting again....!!!

But no worries there mosty, I am sure you Obama maniacs will just print more of money, increase the national debt, until......you guessed it .."POP" goes the bubble.

[JustRalph]

All those home owners who were spared and given extensions on their mortgages....have you seen the latest numbers?? Yep...defaulting again....!!!


and something like 70% were thrown out of the program for refusing to go along with the rules after receiving deferments and rebates........ :bang:

[boxcar]

I spent quite a bit of time looking for your remark and could not find it. Let's just agree that I am not going to respond. As for Boxcar, the purpose of unemployeement is not to stimulate the economy it is to provide a means to get by until you find a job. I don't know what Pelosi said or the context in which she said it, but I know that his statement is just ridiculous.
A person receiving unemployment is unlikely to spend it on anything but necesities. Stimulus money on the other hand goes to funding projects. Those projects are contracted out to private businesses. Those businesses hire people to work on those projects. People with jobs do spend money on things other than the bare necesities. When they start doing that, businesses start making more things; they start hiring workers; the cycle continues. Giving businesses tax breaks when no one is buying does nothing. The owners will just pocket the money as a fall back against continued bad times.
I have explained this to you and Boxcar several times. I have no more hope that you will get it this time than I had before.

Why is my statement ridiculous? It's Pelosi who expressed those sentiments. She's your queen. This is the same moron who is in favor of passing legislation before it's read. Live with her. :lol: :lol:

As NTG pointed out, you have flown your true public employee slacker colors by not even wanting to research my comments to see if they're true (which would be so easy to do). Of course, they are! I recently heard the Pelosi soundbites on the El Rushbo show -- you know America's Master Truth Detector. Try extricating your head out from whichever orifice it's stuck in at the moment and listen to the Number One Talk Show in America sometime. You'd appreciate the breath of fresh air. Here is the link to Pelosi's "brilliant" remarks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAhmYKlsWW4

She also said that unemployment benefits create jobs. :lol: :lol: :lol: You liberals are sooooo pathetic.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

and something like 70% were thrown out of the program for refusing to go along with the rules after receiving deferments and rebates........ :bang:

Well, obviously the government hasn't thrown enough money at them. Maybe a third time will be a charm? After all...those poor folks are entitled to own their own homes, according to Chris Dodd -- another genius! :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Why is my statement ridiculous? It's Pelosi who expressed those sentiments. She's your queen. This is the same moron who is in favor of passing legislation before it's read. Live with her. :lol: :lol:

As NTG pointed out, you have flown your true public employee slacker colors by not even wanting to research my comments to see if they're true (which would be so easy to do). Of course, they are! I recently heard the Pelosi soundbites on the El Rushbo show -- you know America's Master Truth Detector. Try extricating your head out from whichever orifice it's stuck in at the moment and listen to the Number One Talk Show in America sometime. You'd appreciate the breath of fresh air. Here is the link to Pelosi's "brilliant" remarks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAhmYKlsWW4

She also said that unemployment benefits create jobs. :lol: :lol: :lol: You liberals are sooooo pathetic.

Boxcar
Being on the El Rushbo show does the opposite of convincing me something is true. However, after viewing your Youtube link I must concede that Pelosi did indeed say unemployment benefits are job stimulating. I would disagree with her. My opinion is that the purpose of unemployment benefits is to provide something to allow a person to survive until he finds a job. Perhaps in a very limited way unemployment benefits keep a bad economy from getting worse.
But I strongly disagree with your oft repeated contention that anyone receiving benefits is just lazy and not interested in working.

[Greyfox]

My opinion is that the purpose of unemployment benefits is to provide something to allow a person to survive until he finds a job..

I agree. Most of the Unemployed that I know want to work.
It is one of the worst feelings in the world to lose a job.
I don't begrudge anyone who goes on Unemployment Benefits.

[boxcar]

Being on the El Rushbo show does the opposite of convincing me something is true. However, after viewing your Youtube link I must concede that Pelosi did indeed say unemployment benefits are job stimulating. I would disagree with her. My opinion is that the purpose of unemployment benefits is to provide something to allow a person to survive until he finds a job. Perhaps in a very limited way unemployment benefits keep a bad economy from getting worse.
But I strongly disagree with your oft repeated contention that anyone receiving benefits is just lazy and not interested in working.

And...don't forget my other 'oft repeated statements to the effect that people on the public dole can become addicted to that free and easy money (a/k/a ObamaBucks) for a whole of host of psychological reasons alone. The U.S. government doesn't do a thing to encourage or promote people's self-esteem,,self-worth, sense of self-sufficiency, sense of pride in productivity or accomplishments, etc.. All of these are highly important to how a person sees himself and feels about himself. The statists do nothing to stimulate or engender those qualities in a human being. In fact, the socialist state does just the opposite because it's only mission is to redistribute wealth to the down and out with the hopes of perpetuating those entitlements for purposes of buying their votes at the next election. After all, most people are smart enough to not bite the hand that feeds them, right?

Boxcar

[cj's dad]

Even El Dumbo can spot a loser.

snip> WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama says the U.S. Postal Service should be allowed to reduce mail delivery to five days a week to help cut its massive losses. <snip


link:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POSTAL_PROBLEMS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-09-19-17-10-05

[horses4courses]

Our government doing what it does best: Screwing up everything it touches.

Boxcar

One thing is certain.....the problems at the USPS started long before the current administration took office in DC.
But you guys always love pointing the finger....

The funding of pensions and benefits for retirees, etc, is the root of the problem.
Local government throughout the nation is up against the same thing.
The only way to control it is to cut it way back....

[Robert Goren]

Here the post office is asking some house owners to put mail boxes out on curb instead of on the house. There is a huge outcry.

[RaceBookJoe]

Didn't feel like starting a new thread, so I did a search and decided to add to this one.

Here is my current post office aggrevation. Last week our mailbox ( its a box with 15 other homeowners boxes ) got broken into. Mail Carrier told me that I had to go to the local Post Office to pick up my mail, which I understand. Now here's the kicker. I go today to pick up my mail, and miraculously neither my wife, her business nor I have mail the past 4 days. Somehow in the last combined 60yrs of our adult lives, neither one of us has gone more than 1 day without some kind of mail, and now beyond all odds, we both have gone 4 days with no mail...the exact same 4 days?? Just gotta love it :bang: ps : this last quarter, the USPS racked up a healthy $1.9B loss. rant over.

[HUSKER55]

what will your parakeet do now????? :confused: :D :D

[tucker6]

this last quarter, the USPS racked up a healthy $1.9B loss. rant over.
So the moral of the story is that when CurtisOnTheBay complained about 2009 showing a loss of $3.8B, he should have been more complimentary of the USPS. :lol:

[RaceBookJoe]

So the moral of the story is that when CurtisOnTheBay complained about 2009 showing a loss of $3.8B, he should have been more complimentary of the USPS. :lol:

I almost through that zinger in, but was saving it for Tom , but you beat him to the punch hahaha

[Tom]

Snooze, ya lose! :D

[HUSKER55]

privatize the postal service. I like it.

I am betting junk mail becomes extinct.

[tucker6]

privatize the postal service. I like it.

I am betting junk mail becomes extinct.
I don't know. Junk mail is like roaches.