It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Postal Service Losing $42,335,766 Per Day

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by MDDoxs
Is the money not in-directly put back into the economy by the employees spending?

Still a significant drag on the federal budget, but has positive affects


if that were the case noone would complain about welfare......

give me a couple thousand dollars of tax payer money and i promise ill spend it


TO use your analogy, If those on welfare did not spend their cheques domestically, i am sure the US economy would collapse.....again. The fact that the people are spending on goods allows the economy to keep its head above water..

Here is a thread, started by same OP about your welfare state.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Can you imagine if 100million people stopped putting their welfare cheques back into US based businesses....
Spending doest solve the problem..but it prevent compele collapse...


well what about all the money by rich people hoarded? saved for generations,, what about all the money in savings? or does that generate interest for banks or something? held in bonds and stuff?
you first were saying,, its not bad that the tax payers have to pay these billions of dollars to the post office, because the post office employees will spend the money,,, to me sometimes these concepts sound like,,, If im a doctor and i have no business,, i can cut off my friends foot and fix it so at least ill have some short term income




posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


We are not talking about the Rich here....How did we go from those on welfare to the super rich?

The point i am trying to make is that at the end of the day some of the 42million/day lost in put by into the economy in directly.

I know this doesnt make things even with the tax payers of the US, but would you rather to be shorted a few dollars per person..actually lets do the math..

Population 311, 591,917 as of July 2011 disperse that 42mil across the total pop x 365 a year (less weekends and holidays), also lets presume everyone pays the same taxes.....works out to approx 2.7k a year per person.

that will be much less figuring in tax brackets, other forms of income the US government uses to pay off its expenditures...

Would you rather pay some amount less then 2.7k a year or have the entire economy collapse?



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


We are not talking about the Rich here....How did we go from those on welfare to the super rich?

The point i am trying to make is that at the end of the day some of the 42million/day lost in put by into the economy in directly.

I know this doesnt make things even with the tax payers of the US, but would you rather to be shorted a few dollars per person..actually lets do the math..

Population 311, 591,917 as of July 2011 disperse that 42mil across the total pop x 365 a year (less weekends and holidays), also lets presume everyone pays the same taxes.....works out to approx 2.7k a year per person.

that will be much less figuring in tax brackets, other forms of income the US government uses to pay off its expenditures...

Would you rather pay some amount less then 2.7k a year or have the entire economy collapse?



went from those on welfare to super rich,, because you claimed as long as money being spent in the country is good for the economy,, people always say the super rich, job creators and what not should be more respected and pay less taxes so they can help the economy,, i merly pointed out that a lot of those super rich people probably have a snipload of money stored away not doing anything for the economy...

I think the federal taxes should be straightened out and major budget cuts should be made,, not trying to steadily grow the government and pay off nations debt at the same time, is digging a whole,, who does the nations debt actually effect? will it eventually mean taxes will have to be raised to eventually pay it? is there interest on that debt? does balancing it matter? what does the 42 million equal? the amount paid to the USPS? so 3 grand a year from every citizen just for that one federal program and occurrence?,, you took the entire us population around 300 mil in your calculation, im wondering if babies pay taxes?



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


I don't want to debate this much more here. Your going into a much larger topic that is wider and more complicated then I wish to discuss.

To reiterate, I just wanted to point out that not all of the 42million spent on salary is lost, some of it is returned to the economy.

Don't be ignorant, my example was just to illustrate that in a large sense 42mil is offset by the population. Don't be ignorant to assume I think infants pay taxes. Just trying to spur on the discussions. But you have effectively killed my interest with the dumb comment.

Enjoy
edit on 10-8-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


I don't want to debate this much more here. Your going into a much larger topic that is wider and more complicated then I wish to discuss.

To reiterate, I just wanted to point out that not all of the 42million spent on salary is lost, some of it is returned to the economy.

Don't be ignorant, my example was just to illustrate that in a large sense 42mil is offset by the population. Don't be ignorant to assume I think infants pay taxes. Just trying to spur on the discussions. But you have effectively killed my interest with the dumb comment.

Enjoy
edit on 10-8-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)


didnt mean to hurt your feelings i was just asking questions trying to better understand,,,,

your example is 42 million is offset by the population,,, is it wrong for me to assume that you think 42 million dollars is chump change because it can be easily offset by the population? or just that its not a problem? and if you and I have relatively no say in what the government spends all this tax money on, is the nations debt not, and never a problem,, because it will always theoretically be offset, and because infinite money can always be printed?

you dont need to answer,, just thinking out loud,,, im not looking to debate



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by usernameconspiracy
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein
 


It's the cheapest mail delivery service available. Sorry you can't swing 40 cents. See how much UPS or FedEx (ie the private companies) will charge for that letter... And $30 to overnight a package? Cheap compared to UPS or FedEx.


You hit it right on the head. And to boot the others charge you to deliver on sat. If you ship your items flat rate through the post office it's delivered within 2 business days and doesn't really cost much at all. If given the choice I would go with the postal service any day vs the others....



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


You presume that 100% of those on welfare would simply sit idle with no cash or beg on corners when in fact likely a majority would find work. Good work? Nope. Work that pays as much as the bouquet of government spiff they currently get, not at first, but who knows after they put some time in.

You're correct that there is money put back into the economy. It is certainly immaterial to the health of the economy and to the extent that 15% - 20% of those currently on welfare got jobs, the nation, the families those people represent would be immeasurably better off. If the country took a hit, with 20M people now off the government nipple and back to work it would be well worth it.

Who gets hurt by this cash not being put back into the economy? Convenience store owners who won't sell as many 40oz beers, smokes, chips, candy bars and bubble gum. Oh, I forgot - the lotterys would be about 1/3 of the size they currently are.

Suggesting that the very fact that people are doing something, regardless of the prudence or wisdom of it and in so doing that, they get paid and thus inject cash into the economy is absolute rubbish. They should not be doing it, it is not in the countrys best interests for them to be doing it and, face it - there are many talented people who work for the Postal Service and we live in a country where close on 80% of the bridges are in need of major retrofits as well as countless other critical infrastructure needs. How about we kick them out of the post office and put them to meaningful work that serves the country rather than stacking Lands End catalogs into piles along with bogus flyers for cheap storm windows and the rest of the trash you get?

BTW - those jobs retrofitting our bridges should not be done by the government either, but rather private industry. The government has no business building roads and bridges either. They should be setting standards, approving designs, inspecting them, but they should not be doing any of the construction or maintenance. Had these bridges been sold to private enterprise with a long term contract, guess what? They would not need retrofitting today.



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I love how the Gop is getting blamed for the USPS but hey wasn't the gop who unionized government jobs like Amtrak and the TSA and Air traffic controls etc.

The post office had its day and with the advent of modern technology two things need to occur privatization so that that will be able to compete.

Or end the unions.

Funny how everything union is one giant crap sandwhich that other people are forced to pay for.
edit on 10-8-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


"BTW - those jobs retrofitting our bridges should not be done by the government either, but rather private industry. The government has no business building roads and bridges either. They should be setting standards, approving designs, inspecting them, but they should not be doing any of the construction or maintenance. Had these bridges been sold to private enterprise with a long term contract, guess what? They would not need retrofitting today."

who would pay for the bridge and roads? today the government uses tax dollars to hire government contractors to build bridges and roads?

whereas you suggest giving the tax payers money to private companies to do the same job?

I guess the right choice would be how to build bridges and roads with the most quality, for the lowest cost on the taxpayers,,, if that is going through a private company,, i guess Id have to agree with you,,,



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


Population 311, 591,917 as of July 2011 disperse that 42mil across the total pop x 365 a year (less weekends and holidays), also lets presume everyone pays the same taxes.....works out to approx 2.7k a year per person.




$42 million per day divided by 312 million people equals thirteen and a half cents per person, per day. Multiply that by 52 weeks of 6 day work weeks ( currently USPS works six days a week, so we'll just use that as the baseline) you get $0.135 multiplied by 312 days equals $42.12 per person, per year. Where in the world did your $2700 a year figure come from?



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


The people who use the bridge pay for the bridge. Thats what is supposed to happen, you pay to consume. Why should someone in Florida pay for improvements in the Washington State ferry system. There should not be a dime of federal tax dollars going to any form of ground transportation other than interstate highway system and all of the work done on those highways should be done by private firms.




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join