Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Attack on the USPS, Another View

Posted 1 year ago on Feb. 10, 2013, 8:50 p.m. EST by shooz (17816)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Last night, Rep. Elijah Cummings told Melissa Harris-Perry that the announced cuts to the United States Postal Service would put the screws to women and minorities. Of course Republicans don’t care:

http://angryblackladychronicles.com/2013/02/09/u-s-postal-service-cuts-will-screw-women-and-minorities/

59 Comments

59 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (586) 1 year ago

I would prefer six days to drop off mail, and then deliveries on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

After 9-11, there was a push for Privatizing more parts of the government and military ... this was because the corporate powers had some much influence ...and had the money to lobby. This is a conspiracy Fact.

Part of the reason the US Post office was targeted by corporations and Congress was because the use of the US Military to ship parts for guns, trucks, tanks, vehicles etc.... through express Air to foreign countries. Not sure the CIA or anyone had control over Air Carriers or Express Shippers at all... that could be something to look at. Remember Air America?

Anyway, the Military spends huge dollars to ship by Express Air. You have to also know that the military doesn't have enough ships to move military equipment to war zones. The military doesn't have enough air planes to ship soldiers to war zones... so in the FIrst Gulf War ... many big contracts were written for merchant marine ships and for charter air flights. This was modern Logistics.

Anyway... doesn't matter who in givernment or in contracting spotted the trend of money going to Air Express Package Shipping.... Money spend by gobernment is always targeted by Private Industry. And I hate the process of Privitazation as I feel that drives costs higher and passes power and control to corporations. As Usual.....

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

It’s probably for the best. After all, you know how we colored- and lady-folk love our free stuff. Who did we think we were expecting to get our mail delivered on the Saturday for free? I mean, according to Republicans, most of us don’t even pay taxes! We’re a bunch of moochers who should invest in some carrier pigeons and quit complaining.

As for the job loss hitting women harder? Meh. Women should get to work birthing some babies. That’s what we were put here for anyway, right?

Priceless.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

I came across her site just today. I like her a lot already.........:)

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

She does that with style.

[-] -1 points by alldone (32) 1 year ago

Technological unemployment is inevitable, no use denying it. But it is coming at a terrible human cost.

[-] 1 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

Yeah, they were going to do that, until the (R)epelican'ts got a hold of them.

[-] 0 points by alldone (32) 1 year ago

(R)epelicans?

[-] 1 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

(R)epelicant's.

In the inimitable words of Rumsfeld himself.

They're not very nice people.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

This is not a case of technological unemployment. The reality is that these are the repercussions of FedEX lobbyists and this right here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407

[-] -2 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

So the tax payers should just continue to throw money down the black hole? There's no mail volume to support the current levels of service. Even the article states this fact. It's a result of progress. It happens. It unfortunate that it will result in job loss, etc. but what would be your solution? Email and online banking and bill pay will continue to erode the volume. People just do not want the "paper" anymore. Actually the article is basically racist and offensive, and just a irrelative rant.

[-] 3 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

The USPS is independent of ALL taxes.

You got nothing.

Bush kicked it hard as he left office, "right" after the economy crashed on his watch.

Yep, he still found time and energy to kick the family dog for his "controllers", even as the economy came down around them.

You didn't find that offensive?

[-] -1 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Engineer4 is correct. Outside of shipping packages the USPS is completely obsolete. Bills, letters, catalogs, periodicals, etc are all easier, cheaper, and greener when delivered electronically. And when it comes to packages, both FedEx and UPS are more efficient and reliable than the USPS.

As a proud member of the APCU it saddens me to say it but the USPS is on its way out and it probably should be. I mean I bought 10 forever stamps about 4 years ago and I STILL have 4 left and I only check my mail once or twice a week. Most people, especially younger people, are most likely in the same boat.

Politics aside, the USPS has a dying business model and that should be painfully obvious to everyone.

[-] 3 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

He's totally wrong, as are you.

The USPS is being destroyed to privatize it and further crush unions.

Nothing else.

It was solvent until Bush kicked it on his way out the door, with the economy crashing all around.

You keep missing that part.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I think that we did this very same topic last year and I believe that engineer4 was a participant then. I don't care how many times that you bring the facts---it operates in complete denial.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

Maybe he's got preferred stock in FedEx?

He's using the same libe(R)tarian thinking that's been used against OWS since the site went live.

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

More than likely.

[-] -1 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Like I said, politics aside, they have an outdated, dying business model.

Do you really think the demand for their services is the same as it was 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago for that matter?

More and more people, especially young people, have close to no need for the USPS and as the population turns off the demand for their services will be less and less.

The USPS THEMSELVES project a decline of 37-47% between 2000 and 2020 in 1st class mail, as well as similar declines in all other types of volume.

I realize Bush fucked them over. I am not talking R vs D or union vs anti-union. I am talking about facts. No business can survive with that kind of decline in demand.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

My mailbox has stuff in it every day, so I have to wonder what you're talking about.

It's union busting, plain and simple.

It's what (R)epelican'ts do.

So yeah, Bush fucked them all "right".

How about YOU demand every pension fund be paid in advance in a similar manner?

If it wasn't about union busting, then why else would he do that?

In the face of that, what you are saying makes no sense.

[-] 0 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Again, all politics while ignoring the data supplied by the USPS themselves.

I have no doubt it was a union-busting move. It is obvious.

That being said, you can't deny that a business with an average annual decline of 4% over 20 years (right from the USPS itself) is a business that is on the way out.

You honestly can't see how the demand for the product is rapidly declining? The USPS can see it. What happens to businesses whose product is no longer in demand?

[-] 1 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

So union busting is just fine with you?

I'm going to say this one more time, and if you don't accept it, and fold it into your thinking, I'm done with you.

Before BUSH put that burden on the USPS, it was running efficiently, making a reasonable profit and dealing with that 4%....

Everything else you are saying is BULLSHIT.

Call UPS and ask how much to send a package to Asia, then call the USPS and ask what they are charging.

Get back to me when you know the difference.

[-] 0 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

What is the difference in cost? I really don't feel like dealing with either of them. I ship a lot of concert tickets within the US and Canada and the USPS is by far the cheapest but also the last reliable and by the worst to have to deal with customer service when something does go wrong. Insurance is also very expsensive with USPS so if it is something that needs to be insured USPS loses its price advantage. I usually go with FedEx Express because it is easy to use at home.

I honestly have no idea about something to Asia though.

Union busting certainly isn't helping them but with those kinds of declines in demand they will naturally also have to make cuts to compensate. Union busting may have made the cuts deeper but they were going to happen, and will likely continue, to happen no matter what.

[-] 1 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

Instead of me repeating myself yet again, just read this stuff.

And thanks for proving to me that the more lurid the thread title, the more attention it gets.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/usps-some-facts-and-why-you-should-be-outraged/

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 1 year ago

You right. the post office is probably as obsolete at delivering information as a simi automatic weapon is at defending ones life from tyranny, but because they are both constitutionally mandated, neither one should be on the chopping block, but here we are.

[-] -3 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

Ok, then who will make up the continuing budget shortfall? Do you agree that the Internet has lead to the loss of mail volume ( revenue) for the post office? What are you arguing? The fact is that the USPS can no support the service level without the volume. How can you ignore that. What is your solution? You can not keep jobs if there is no work for the employees.

[-] 4 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

The budget shortfall was created by Bush legislation, until he did that it was solvent and profitable within itself.

The volume is in my mailbox, each and every day, including Saturday, so WTF are you talking about?

Something you heard on the radio?

[-] 4 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

I agree the US Post office has been targeted by the US Congress for Elimination based on Legislation passed to force them into riddiculus financial strain.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

You'll notice that those defending this move are completely ignoring what Bush did to them.

Nor the fact that they've been paying for almost 5 years now.

Was the design for it to collapse just before the next election so the (R)epelican'ts can blame it on the Dems, while the libe(R)tarains drool over privatizing the left over pieces??

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

You just shocked me a little. I knew that Libetarians wanted privatization .... but somehow I didn't put the pieces together or integrate this into my understanding.

I can see Libertarians demanding contracts. I can see them as preditors of taxpayer dollars, and government programs. I knew that. I just think I was ignoring it or denying it. As I say I thinking I was avoiding this fact.

I'm not sure who is defending the scuttling of the US Post Office.... I guess from the videos ... I just assumed it was corruption. you are right. I need to go back and look at the Players in this Power Play.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

They are not as stupid, nor focused only on the next quarter as they would have you believe.

Small pieces of legislation can add up to BIG results years down the line. Sometimes with irrefutable precision.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

I figure most people don't use mail like they used to

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Congress passed some looney requirement that the USPS Pre-Fund like projected Health Benefit Costs for Retirees for like 75 years out. This is un-heard of in business or government. Yes, there is a mantra that mail use is down and stamp costs/mail costs keep going up. Emails are free and replacing physical mail. But I get mail all the time and the US population keeps going up, so demand for mail might be more steady than we first think. There is a video out there that looks like there is a conspiracy by Lobbyist to close down the Post Office.

Postal Accountability Enhancement Act 2006 (Prefund Health Care Benefits for Postal Retirees 75 years into the future - for workers that haven't been born yet)

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=9478 (This was the Video, 2 minutes into it you get the gist)

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

people don't live 73 years past retirement

this postal employee retirement miscalculation

was deliberate to make a government agency look bad

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

That lady in the video said it pretty good... They require the post office to pre-fund for people not even born yet. Total Example of Bad Power. Total Corruption. Totally says you are small people without power and we are putting you in your place.

[-] -1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

I think there is no doubt they would like to close em down, why else would they lobby over three million and donate over two million, right?

The thing about the post office, and UPS and FedEx, is that they arent alone in being confronted with a changing of the informational landscape.

The prefunding thing, in my opinion, was simply to put their demise in a time warp, speeding it up.

Newspapers are in crisis mode because of the internet. Same for magazines. Books are doing better, but still in decline. Once this current generation is in the 35-55 age range, its all gone.

Its going to take some serious innovation to keep everything going, which is a shame, Im not a big fan of all the online publications and whatnot. I like books. I like reading my magazines (just got my copy of Fast Company today).

If we are issuing executive orders to invade Libya, one would think one to remove this insane requirement would be in order. I guess not.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

I'm thinking that power players in media don't mind the collapse of the industry if it brings more prominance to those that remain after. Also It could be that bribes and Advertising Dollars take the place of circulation. For instance if a big new editor or new paper editor gets to write off his company provided Limo, his office with the big bathroom, cloak room, wetbar, refrigerator, view of the hudson or view of Wall Street.... if he has a company provided house or vacation home, gets convention trips to the Carribean, Las Vegas, hawaii, Florida, Bilderberger Meetings, CFR Meetings,.... Gets to attend Washington Social Functions, .... gets to write off most of his life expenses on taxes ... gets cheap health care .... What else does he need as an Executive.

There can only be a few Executives and they live like 50 years on the Job. Like Media Executives become Institutions like Congressmen. 50 years on the Job.

But the Post Office already had a reputation as a Weak Institution... raising postal rates ... Industry changes brought on by the Internet. It is just a Very Strategic, very Obvious Play for Power.

[-] -3 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

UPS and FedEx lobbying, in HUGE amounts, shows whats going on in the end game.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Yes, they all lobby to get more pieces of the government pie ... it is like getting a new market, creating a new product, or even like getting a monopoly sometimes.

Better to break up Corporations and discourage large corproations, than to privatize and turn over to large entities that lobby to have rights like people.... Public Private partnerships are even worse since the taxpayer is on the hook for any risk.

[-] -3 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

So you seem to be in denial on actual mail volume? Do you deny that there is a loss of significant volume due to email, Internet bill pay, etc. It's is environmentally responsible to go digital. I get all trade magazines digitally, bank online, invoice online, etc. I do believe there are problems with how they are required to fund themselves, especially future requirements. This has nothing to do with unions. You seem to be angry that Saturday mail might have to go. Why is that? Regular mail delivery during the week is not in jeapordy. Please respond to the question related to mail volume loss and the Internet. Do you prefer paper mail or email? Is there special regular mail that you need to receive on Saturday that is so important and must be acted on? Do you support the efforts to be sustainable in our resources (one of the benefits of the Internet). Not that i care, but does it really matter who runs the post office if it delivers mail efficiently? Maybe we should just trade addresses and have this conversation by mail over the course of a year that it would take.

[-] 2 points by 99nproud (1509) 1 year ago

Killing sat delivery to satidfy the union busting congressional requirements will result in 25k lost jobs.

Those are decent hard working American families that suffer.

Obviously much change in mail use affects the USPS but the problem is the unfair union busting congressional pension requirements.

So get rid of that and they will manage the mail change fine.

[-] -1 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

No one wants job loss, but Saturday delivery is not really necessary. Why run a business with same level of employees and less volume and revenue? It makes no sense. I agree with the problem of funding the future pensions, but that does not change the facts on continuing loss of volume. we have the same problem here with schools. The city wants to close 20% of schools as the number of students has dropped over the years by almost 40%. Yet the teachers and school workers are protesting the loss of jobs,etc. it's the same thing. Not enough students, not enough mail to sustain the system at current levels. Are we supposed to teach empty desks, drive empty trucks? It is just the way of change, whether through technology or population, or what ever the reason, but it occurs and we must learn to deal with it.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (1509) 1 year ago

I acknowledge the diminished mail volume. I reject that as the reason for the end of sat delivery.

The end of sat del is a result of the union busting congressional law to force funding of future pension costs in current fiscal years.

[-] 1 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

Still having trouble accepting what Bush did to them as he left office and the economy was crashing down on the 99%?

Until you can do that. You still have nothing.

[-] 0 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

Both congress and bush did the USPS no favors when the ridiculous overfunding requirement was placed on them. But in reality, that would only extend the problem. Now how about answering the question posed: do you believe the significant loss of revenue from first class mail is a real threat to the operation of the post office as it is currently operating? Do you deny that the Internet has been a real negative impact on the USPS? Do you deny that social media has had a negative impact on postal revenue? Do you recall when congress was actually considering some type of charges for email? What do you believe are the pros/cons of Saturday delivery? Do you email or send paper? Do you pay by mail or on line banking?

[-] 1 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

Still nothing on the Bush, union busting bullshit?

Just can't wrap your mind around reality?

I fear it is so.

It's just another GOP libe(R)tarian union busting effort.

That's all it is.

Nothing more.

Nothing less.

[-] 0 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

What are you on about? Is this just about unions? Would it make any difference if the workers were non union? Did you read my response? Bush has not been around now for 4 yrs. Are you that obtuse that you can not have any discussion about reality of reduced mail volume? Let me ask you this: how does Saturday delivery have anything to do with what you claim as union busting?

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

Why don't you talk about it then?

It IS an attack on unions.

It was begun in earnest, as Bush left office, as a last kick at the family dog.

Why don't you at least pretend to understand what he did?

[-] -1 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

I have already commented on the problem created by the funding act. What else besides ridiculous should I say about it. It should be changed. Your turn.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

You just refused to use it in your analysis then?

That is pretty ridiculous of you.

Here read some more.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/usps-some-facts-and-why-you-should-be-outraged/

It's union busting. Plain and simple.

Now why would YOU support such an anti 99% kind of thing?

[-] 0 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

Shooz. In my Initial comments to this post I never even brought up the the union thing. I was speaking about Saturday delivery and loss of volume and responding to the article. You have commented about union busting, etc. mostly to others in this post and then mixed it into our narrative. You are deflecting from my original points in order to get your position across and then demanding that I acknowledge your position as a precondition to get an answer to my questions. There is a real loss of first class mail volume that you refuse to admit. Your mail box might be stuffed, but it is with third class and bulk mail junk, which is not where the revenue is. It is from first class mail. As for union busting, I do not support any activity that would make that happen. A union should stand on their own merit or decertify. I do support right to work, yet I support free and fair choice to unionize or not. I support free and even playing field negotiations. I do not support public unions, am fine with private unions. So how about an answer to some of my questions.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

Here you go again.

I'll tell it to you too.

They were doing fine until BUSH! did what he did.

There IS no difference between those two "forms" of unions.

None at all.

So to hate one is to hate them both.

To crush one, is to crush the other.

Union busting is union busting.

Bottom line.

[-] 0 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

Why are you avoiding the questions I asked? You are avoiding this. Why? There is a problem with current business model of post office due to decreasing volume. Do you deny this? Why are you making this a single issue. "union busting" and problems with decreasing mail volume are separate issues. Is this just an anti bush rant?

[-] 1 points by Ackhuman (-88) from Fairfax, VA 1 year ago

Tax payers? You mean "stamp buyers"?

[-] -1 points by engineer4 (272) 1 year ago

There are not enough stamp buyers anymore. So who will make up the budget shortfall?

[-] -1 points by Ackhuman (-88) from Fairfax, VA 1 year ago

How about the military?

[-] 0 points by Narley (-629) 1 year ago

I don't like it, but I have to agree with you. If it can't support itself, then it needs to go.

[-] -3 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Well tell me, how is that going to put the screws to women and minorities when the USPS is run by uinons?

If that happens then I guess it's the Unions that will put the screws to women and minorities - don't you think?

[-] 2 points by shooz (17816) 1 year ago

You didn't read what was in the post.

Unions have brought more equality to the workplace than anything else. So WTF are you talking about?.