|reply to IowaCowboy |
Re: The post office should cut costs
Now wait a minute. Aren't a lot of folks (not just rural folks) making noise about getting more government subsidies to lay fiber in corn fields -- otherwise poor farmers won't have high-speed Internet? If we're open to charging a fee for them to get postal service, why would we entertain subsidizing fiber for them?
I'm not trying to single rural folks out, I'm just looking from a logistical and cost perspective. My aunt lives in Washington state (in Cheney which is just outside of Spokane) and UPS ads a rural surcharge if we send her a package using UPS. We used to send her Devil Dogs because she couldn't get the Drake's brand on the west coast (she grew up in Springfield, MA before she joined the military in 1969) and she loves Drake's Devil Dogs. We could not get them in Iowa either.
The hard truth is urban areas are cheaper for service providers whether that is a broadband provider, electric utility, or delivery service.
I might be from Iowa but I grew up in the city (Cedar Rapids) so I am used to urban areas. Urban living does have drawbacks like crime and traffic. Rural areas might have their advantages as well but they have their drawbacks like long emergency service (police, fire, and EMS) response times.
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord.
We all know what happen to devil dogs. and this is a very bad try to save the post office the thing with it is outdated and to slow for today all the mail i get is junk mail. If they don't change soon they will also go the way of devil dogs.
How many times is this patent bullshit going to be repeated? THE POST OFFICE IS SOLVENT!!
There, I had to yell it, but do you understand that yet?? THE POST OFFICE IS NOT LOSING MONEY!
They are only operating in the red because the government has forced them to fund 75 YEARS worth of pensions. Right now, they are putting money away for employees that haven't even been born yet! Not to mention that, under the current administration, this pension has been seen as a cash center and has already been raided, meaning the post office must put EVEN MORE MONEY away to fund pensions.
The post office is not the problem, government liars and bureaucrats who sway the public opinion of the ignorant (such as people who believe the post office is "outdated" or "slow", which they aren't for the price they charge) into believing things are dire at the post office so they can steal even more of their money, are!
Don't believe everything you hear on CNN or read on the internet.
The pension funding is still 68% of the loss. The $5.1 billion could easily be made up with a 5 cent increase in stamps. Anyone thinking it was smart to fund 75 years worth of pension over 10 years is an idiot. Where does funding the pensions of future workers that aren't even born yet makes sense? I'm glad some guy who won't be born until 2025 already has his pension funded.
Pompano Beach, FL
|reply to chip89 |
If you read the article.. It's prefunding of retiree health benefits that's responsible for most of the loss.. to the tune of $11.1 billion..
To me.. it's just another Neocon scam.. to build up another fund, just so they can borrow and spend it..