To the forum,

I've had a few differences in my own opinion on the USPS. After reading this short article, I've concluded that it's hard to form a true opinion when the MSM doesn't give all the actual facts.

Should it be privately run ? I want to say yes. But, I'm not to comfortable with the unknown answers of who and how?

Appreciate some different views on this billion dollar question.

Thank You
Earl

Don't Let Business Lobbyists Kill the Post Office

POSTED: April 23, 9:37 AM E

Read more: www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taib...120423#ixzz1tMF620z4
by Matt Taibbi

The Times has an editorial today about the future of the U.S. Postal Service:

Postal officials say they must close about 3,700 underused post offices (there are 32,000 nationally) while offering alternative services through local businesses. They also want to consolidate hundreds of regional processing centers and eliminate Saturday mail deliveries.

An aide to Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont was warning me about this last week. There are organic reasons for all of this: The U.S. Postal Service is staring down the same barrel trained at our magazine and newspaper businesses, i.e. its revenue model is being wiped out by the internet.

But politics also plays a huge part in this. In 2006, in what looks like an attempt to bust the Postal Workers' Union, George Bush signed into law the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006. This law required the Postal Service to pre-fund 100 percent of its entire future obligations for 75 years of health benefits to its employees – and not only do it, but do it within ten years. No other organization, public or private, has to pre-fund 100 percent of its future health benefits.

"No one prefunds at more than 30 percent," Anthony Vegliante, the U.S. Postal Service's executive vice president, told reporters last year.

The new law forced the postal service to come up with about $5.5 billion a year for the ten years following the bill's passage. In 2006, before those payments kicked in, the USPS generated a small profit. Not surprisingly, the USPS is now basically broke.

The 2006 law also bars the Postal Service from offering "nonpostal services," which means the USPS can't, say, open up a bank, or an internet cafe, or come up with any new entrepreneurial ideas to generate new income, as postal services do in other countries.

The transparent purpose of this law, which was pushed heavily by industry lobbyists, was to break a public sector union and privatize the mail industry. Before the 2006 act, the postal service did one thing, did it well, and, minus the need to generate profits and bonuses for executives, did it cheaply. It paid for itself and was not a burden to taxpayers.

Post offices also have a huge non-financial impact: In a lot of small towns, the post office is the town, and shutting them down will basically remove the only casual meeting place for people in mountain areas and remote farming villages and so on. Of course, there's always one Wal-Mart for every dozen or so post offices, so people I guess can drive the extra twenty miles and meet there ...

This is a classic example of private-sector lobbyists using the government to protect its profits and keep prices inflated. Sen. Sanders is pushing a bill that would delay the end of Saturday delivery for two years, and prevent a number of post-office closings, but the writing is on the wall, unless there's a public outcry. So definitely write your congressman and ask him to roll back Bush's idiotic law, and at least give the Post Office a chance to sink or swim on its

Read more: www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taib...120423#ixzz1tMEq8N7m

Earl wrote:
To the forum,

I've had a few differences in my own opinion on the USPS. After reading this short article, I've concluded that it's hard to form a true opinion when the MSM doesn't give all the actual facts.

Should it be privately run ? I want to say yes. But, I'm not to comfortable with the unknown answers of who and how?

Appreciate some different views on this billion dollar question.

Thank You
Earl

Don't Let Business Lobbyists Kill the Post Office

POSTED: April 23, 9:37 AM E

Read more: www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taib...120423#ixzz1tMF620z4
by Matt Taibbi

The Times has an editorial today about the future of the U.S. Postal Service:

Postal officials say they must close about 3,700 underused post offices (there are 32,000 nationally) while offering alternative services through local businesses. They also want to consolidate hundreds of regional processing centers and eliminate Saturday mail deliveries.

An aide to Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont was warning me about this last week. There are organic reasons for all of this: The U.S. Postal Service is staring down the same barrel trained at our magazine and newspaper businesses, i.e. its revenue model is being wiped out by the internet.

But politics also plays a huge part in this. In 2006, in what looks like an attempt to bust the Postal Workers' Union, George Bush signed into law the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006. This law required the Postal Service to pre-fund 100 percent of its entire future obligations for 75 years of health benefits to its employees – and not only do it, but do it within ten years. No other organization, public or private, has to pre-fund 100 percent of its future health benefits.

"No one prefunds at more than 30 percent," Anthony Vegliante, the U.S. Postal Service's executive vice president, told reporters last year.

The new law forced the postal service to come up with about $5.5 billion a year for the ten years following the bill's passage. In 2006, before those payments kicked in, the USPS generated a small profit. Not surprisingly, the USPS is now basically broke.

The 2006 law also bars the Postal Service from offering "nonpostal services," which means the USPS can't, say, open up a bank, or an internet cafe, or come up with any new entrepreneurial ideas to generate new income, as postal services do in other countries.

The transparent purpose of this law, which was pushed heavily by industry lobbyists, was to break a public sector union and privatize the mail industry. Before the 2006 act, the postal service did one thing, did it well, and, minus the need to generate profits and bonuses for executives, did it cheaply. It paid for itself and was not a burden to taxpayers.

Post offices also have a huge non-financial impact: In a lot of small towns, the post office is the town, and shutting them down will basically remove the only casual meeting place for people in mountain areas and remote farming villages and so on. Of course, there's always one Wal-Mart for every dozen or so post offices, so people I guess can drive the extra twenty miles and meet there ...

This is a classic example of private-sector lobbyists using the government to protect its profits and keep prices inflated. Sen. Sanders is pushing a bill that would delay the end of Saturday delivery for two years, and prevent a number of post-office closings, but the writing is on the wall, unless there's a public outcry. So definitely write your congressman and ask him to roll back Bush's idiotic law, and at least give the Post Office a chance to sink or swim on its

Read more: www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taib...120423#ixzz1tMEq8N7m

Earl, a couple days ago it was Rroush who kept me busy most of the day with topics with lots of interesting angles. It looks like it's YOUR turn today.



Here are a few which LEAP to mind:

1) Another MONOPOLY takes shape
2) Another avenue of communication is withering and dying
3) The dichotomy between rich and poor continues to widen

1) Another monopoly takes shape. In the RISE of any monopoly we see the "honeymoon period" where the things the monopoly did RIGHT (which allow it to rise) are all hailed by the public, and its ever more-dangerous degree of CONTROL is ignored.

"Isn't Microsoft WONDERFUL for giving us PC's and Windows?" Today Microsoft is a MONSTER.

"Isn't Google WONDERFUL for making it so very, very easy to FIND things?" Today Google is a MONSTER.

"Isn't the Internet WONDERFUL for being so much faster/cheaper/more efficient than snail-mail?"

But will we still think that the Internet is so wonderful AFTER the Post Office is dead-and-buried and the Internet (AND companies like Microsoft and Google) have an even TIGHTER stranglehold on what is the ONLY means of communication???

2) Another avenue of communication is withering and dying. "Good riddance!" a large percentage of the public says. The Post Office can't pay its own way, so WHO NEEDS IT?

That's FINE when the Internet is RELATIVELY cheap and RELATIVELY free/open. But what happens IF (after the Post Office is gone) that - by remarkable COINCIDENCE - the Internet suddenly got much, much more expensive? Can anyone envision a monopoly/oligopoly doing such a thing? (Hint: think "bank service charges").

And what happens IF (when?) the Internet is not only more closely monitored (as already happens in the U.S.) but in the interests of "national security" all sorts of China-like "filters" suddenly appear...and ANYTHING you mention that the government doesn't like is censored, not delivered, AND you are not even TOLD that the e-mail isn't being sent...?

And what happens if AFTER the Post Office is closed that the government simply tells us its SHUTTING DOWN the Internet (in the interests of "national security") because the "threat of cyber-terrorism is too great"?

Imagine a world with NO POST OFFICE and NO INTERNET...

3) The dichotomy between rich and poor widens further. One of the characteristics of the REMAINING postal traffic is that it is disproportionately relied upon by the POOR, who often can't afford BOTH a computer AND an internet connection - but they CAN still afford a stamp and an envelope.

Shutting down the Post Office would be yet ANOTHER significant example of SLAMMING the standard of living of those on the bottom yet further - and exclusively cater to the more affluent majority. That philosophy REEKS of fascism!

And (again) think about a world where the Post Office is gone AND the Internet is suddenly much, much more expensive.

Owning a home is rapidly becoming a "luxury for the wealthy".
Post-secondary education is rapidly becoming a "luxury for the wealthy".
Owning/operating a vehicle is rapidly becoming a "luxury for the wealthy".

What kind of Orwellian society will we have degenerated into if/when COMMUNICATING with each other (over distance) becomes another "luxury for the wealthy"???







SUPPORT THE POST OFFICE !!!

Jeff,

There's something to be said about keeping your mind open. This topic is quite an issue, especially when the TV and radio get on it. In Florida, a very non union state (though many residents are retired union), the USPS is a symbol of government waste, over paid workers, ect.

What really troubles me at times is when (for example) the Wisconsin teachers union. The "bust 'em up" attitude from these same comfortably retired union workers (talk about a FOX news drone).

A "rural" postal worker here, drives there own vehicle and there union is about as strong and supportive as a dis-engaged step parent. The cuts start at the bottom.
Doing "mail count" (amount of mail delivered) at the lowest time (summer- no winter residents, no holiday) in short its manipulated to cut the time a carrier is paid for the route. I'd think you'd count the busiest (Christmas) and the slowest (summer), to come up with a accurate average.

When you see a government institution being purposely manipulated (the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006). The press painting a designed and negative image. Then you talk to these people and yes, these "over paid union workers" are your neighbors. You begin to question your own philosophy.

"Thank You", for the concise 1,2,3, punch.

Supporting the USPS
Earl

Earl wrote:
Jeff,

There's something to be said about keeping your mind open. This topic is quite an issue, especially when the TV and radio get on it. In Florida, a very non union state (though many residents are retired union), the USPS is a symbol of government waste, over paid workers, ect.

What really troubles me at times is when (for example) the Wisconsin teachers union. The "bust 'em up" attitude from these same comfortably retired union workers (talk about a FOX news drone).

A "rural" postal worker here, drives there own vehicle and there union is about as strong and supportive as a dis-engaged step parent. The cuts start at the bottom.
Doing "mail count" (amount of mail delivered) at the lowest time (summer- no winter residents, no holiday) in short its manipulated to cut the time a carrier is paid for the route. I'd think you'd count the busiest (Christmas) and the slowest (summer), to come up with a accurate average.

When you see a government institution being purposely manipulated (the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006). The press painting a designed and negative image. Then you talk to these people and yes, these "over paid union workers" are your neighbors. You begin to question your own philosophy.

"Thank You", for the concise 1,2,3, punch.

Supporting the USPS
Earl

Earl, it's very hard to generalize about bureaucracies. Some ARE truly bloated/wasteful, but in many cases this is just more media mythology.

Recall the basic premise: the wages of ALL workers (in the bottom-80%) have been going down (including government workers) - by an average of more than 50% over the last 40 years. Private sector wages have simply been falling FASTER.

This is yet ANOTHER "dividend" of the inflation lie: creating the DERIVATIVE lie that public sector workers are getting FAT, while only private sector workers are suffering. Public sector workers have ALSO suffered a large wage-loss (in real dollars). However, still having UNIONS they took some of their compensation in BENEFITS instead of wages.

What do we see today? U.S. state governments RETROACTIVELY clawing back the benefits. It's NO DIFFERENT then a retroactive pay-cut. Imagine if your employer comes up to you and says "We're cutting your pay - as of January 1, 2008. You owe us $10,000."



Once upon a time there was an expression in our society "Lead by example." Even IF some of these postal workers are slightly over-compensated, the time to reduce that compensation is AFTER the historic wage-ratio of 3:1 to 10:1 between employees and management has been restored.

The idea that the brain-dead serfs are STILL allowing their wages and benefits to be cut further when we have a wage-ratio between 10:1 and 50:1 in small corporations and 100:1 to 500:1 in large, U.S. corporations. If people insist on ACTING like serfs then they have no one to blame but themselves if their MASTERS treat them like serfs...

I seem to be having a problem with this thread.

You might find this interesting.

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-20693...al-British-post.html

Seb,

Thanks for the post/link. FYI- I saw your original post on my "profile" (were it list the current topics).

Jeff,

"If people insist on ACTING like serfs then they have no one to blame but themselves if their MASTERS treat them like serfs..."

For myself, I'd been saying USPS should be let go to private business for nearly twenty years, before I truly started to look and listen. It became a real hot ticket around 2000. But, I couldn't figure out a completely, positive "point A to point B" scenario.

Then there's a complete professional life time of anti union propaganda. When hired by a company you sign papers, orientation is at least a 15 minute dialogue, not mention the "free" press.

Now, I feel the pendulum has swung way to far to the "Oligarchs". They have the press like never before. A true "divide and conquer" dynamic is alive in the USA.

In 2002-4, here in Florida we (labor) started to see wages go up and employers started to compete for labor. Not to the ratio 10 to one or 50 to one ratios (ect.) but improved wages.

Now, wages seem lost, benefits lost, CEO's packages are larger. I know we discuss this everyday. There are many issues. I feel a portion of people feel the answers are political, some feel (as I do), the solutions start with who controls the politicians and smash the "Oligarchs/Monopolies" (not give them more freedom so "free markets can prevail").

As Ace Ventura once said something like "denial is a terrible thing", makes being a "serf" lonely.

OWS is a positive, but what else needs to or can be done?

Thank You
Earl

Earl wrote:
OWS is a positive, but what else needs to or can be done?

Thank You
Earl

Earl,

I decided to boil-down your reply to that final thought as it's easier to craft an answer to it.

The short/cynical answer is that what it will take for the ATTITUDES of the serfs to change enough that (positive) reforms are possible are for things to get MUCH, MUCH WORSE. I frankly admit to being shaken at the world DayOwl presented via those clips featuring John Taylor Gatto.

I had always (somewhat smugly) assumed that it was an ACCIDENT that our educational systems (including post-secondary) churned out virtually nothing but drones. I chalked it up to the inherent bureaucratic impulse to always discourage independent thought.

However, to not only find out that this is DELIBERATE, but that it is even more deeply-rooted than I imagined in my worst nightmare is (to put it mildly) cause for concern. Brainwashing-from-birth (which is essentially what we are now talking about) implies something fairly close to a life-or-death struggle for there to be any serious hope of freeing most of these minds.

The case is ESPECIALLY bleak when it concerns the elderly. I'm EXTREMELY alarmed at the horrendous mind-control that these "seniors advocacy groups" have over the elderly cattle themselves.

Tell them what to think. Tell them what to buy. Tell them who to vote for. How long until it tells them what to wear, and when they're allowed to go for a bathroom-break?



Obviously I'm talking about the AARP in the U.S., and its Canadian imitator "CARP" (have to chuckle at that acronym - lol).

I hold out little hope for the seniors, as there are precious few who retain any significant degree of "free will". The young (and some of the middle-aged) CAN still be deprogrammed. But without some ORGANIZED campaign to break the brainwashing then nothing short of severe trauma can allow the victims to free their own minds.

So I'll continue to WARN people as loudly as possible. However, we may still be several years away from the time when significant numbers are prepared to listen...then again, given how rapidly our economies are deteriorating maybe it will only be a matter of weeks???