U.S. Postal Service Has Not Earned a Profit in Almost a Decade

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: neo96

Privatize everything... you're not advocating for that?

There is not a damn thing wrong with privatization of business, and it sure doesn't make them a 'fascist' contrary to popular dogma.

Do you have any idea of what current federal spending would be if SS,medicare,medicaid did not exist ?

Government 'loans' for education.

Federal spending would be a third of what it is now insteading of printing, and borrowing, and issuing treasuries so that people an go out, and buy more stuff.

The real fascists are those that support the welfare industrial complex.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ketsuko

You're still lost. 1B profit after they've paid for everything including their salary and benefits obligations for the year... you know like most businesses and government agencies do... not 70 years in advance.

These are the same benefits that we are talking about being unfunded?

Doesn't sound to me like they are funded.

Bwahahaaa!!!!!

From the lips of Mussolini himself:

“State ownership! It leads only to absurd and monstrous conclusions; state ownership means state monopoly, concentrated in the hands of one party and its adherents, and that state brings only ruin and bankruptcy to all.” ― Benito Mussolini

www.goodreads.com...

Mussolini would call the USPS, and 'universal' healthcare, and the rest of social programs 'FASCIST'.

a reply to: neo96

no, he wouldn't.

As noted in the post you quoted (and clearly didn't understand) he is talking about a single party monopoly on state power. Not a state monopoly on any given service.

Neo fail #857353592347556

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: neo96

Privatize everything... you're not advocating for that?

There is not a damn thing wrong with privatization of business, and it sure doesn't make them a 'fascist' contrary to popular dogma.

Do you have any idea of what current federal spending would be if SS,medicare,medicaid did not exist ?

Government 'loans' for education.

Federal spending would be a third of what it is now insteading of printing, and borrowing, and issuing treasuries so that people an go out, and buy more stuff.

Because god forbid people should be able to buy more stuff??!!

The real fascists are those that support the welfare industrial complex.

Godwins law is getting close......

a reply to: ketsuko

Can you name one other private or government entity that must pre-fund its benefits packages for 70 years. Can you name one that has to pay into those beyond each fiscal year?

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Oh no?

Read it again.

Follow it up with this one:

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power” ― Benito Mussolini

No the state is currently mandating corporate products as human rights: healthcare,education,birth control pills.solar panels.

That is the merger of government, and corporate power which has been done by a single PARTY that promotes the welfare industrial complex.

That is as FASCIST as it gets.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: neo96

Privatize everything... you're not advocating for that?

Government intervention into the market causes market unrealities, such as selling at an unprofitable price. The government moves on to regulate the suppliers so that the first sellers can get lower costs. The end result is the regulation of everything, if the first intervention is to be maintained.

A little bit of controlled economy is like being a little bit pregnant.

Everything must be privatized or nothing will be in this new world order.

a reply to: Semicollegiate

Incorrect. Large corporations lobby the government for several reasons... one of them is snuff out competition. That is fascism. Corporate control over the government.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Incorrect. Large corporations lobby the government for several reasons... one of them is snuff out competition. That is fascism. Corporate control over the government.

So why is not called 'fascism' when unions do it, and why is it not called that when people try to buy politicians.

Talk about inconsistency.

a reply to: xuenchen

I Think they use the Money to buy the Postmaster General a Really Cool Uniform with Gold Braids and Stuff . Hmm.... When WAS the Last time they did that , in the 1900's ?

U.S. Postal Service announced today a net operating profit of $200 million delivering the mail in the first quarter of FY 2012 – an impressive achievement given the current economy.

The operational profit turns into red ink only when an external factor unrelated to mail delivery is considered – the 2006 congressional mandate that requires the Postal Service to pre-fund its future retiree health benefits over the next 75 years within a decade. That, along with a non-cash actuarial adjustment to the Postal Service’s workers’ compensation costs, is entirely responsible for the $3.3 billion “loss.” The pre-funding alone accounts for $3.1 billion of the quarter’s “loss.”

source

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I am for Privatizing the Dinosaur that is the USPS . It has been Done with the Federal Prison System, and Privatization would also Force the USPS to be Competitive in the Mail and Package Delivery Business or Face Bankruptcy . Forget To Big To Fail , Just like in the Animal Kingdom , Social Darwinism Dictates the Survival of the Fittest , and the Inevitable Extinction of Life Forms that Cannot Adapt or Change .

Wow, prison for profit, really good idea. /sarcasm

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: neo96

Privatize everything... you're not advocating for that?

There is not a damn thing wrong with privatization of business, and it sure doesn't make them a 'fascist' contrary to popular dogma.

Do you have any idea of what current federal spending would be if SS,medicare,medicaid did not exist ?

Government 'loans' for education.

Federal spending would be a third of what it is now insteading of printing, and borrowing, and issuing treasuries so that people an go out, and buy more stuff.

The real fascists are those that support the welfare industrial complex.

Do you have any concept of how many people would have starved in our great country with out some of these safety nets? But I suppose to the evangelical right wing asshats in this country that would be ok, because if they starved, they were not right with god.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Incorrect. Large corporations lobby the government for several reasons... one of them is snuff out competition. That is fascism. Corporate control over the government.

Corporate influence is a separate phenomenon from both Fascism and market intervention.

Fascism is control of an economy by a government, or governance. Regulation to snuff out competition is Plutocracy.

Market intervention is price fixing or regulation from the intention of making something cheaper or more plentiful than the free market does. Market intervention is the "good" socialism. But it won't work because the free market already offers the lowest price for an item, taking into account all of the other ways the materials in the item are demanded. Forcing a specific price for an item typically causes some amount of producers to become unprofitable. The unprofitable producers move to a different product, stop producing the unprofitable product, and the supply of the forced item decreases.

The government has two options then. It can give up on price forcing, or it can force the prices of input materials lower so as to make the unprofitable producers profitable again.

If the second option is chosen, that is lowering the costs of material used by the first group, then in the market of suppliers there will be unprofitable companies.

So the Gov has again to choose will it regulate the suppliers of the suppliers, or will it give up on the whole thing.

Eventually, the government has to regulate the entire economy, or regulate nothing.

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: neo96

Privatize everything... you're not advocating for that?

There is not a damn thing wrong with privatization of business, and it sure doesn't make them a 'fascist' contrary to popular dogma.

Do you have any idea of what current federal spending would be if SS,medicare,medicaid did not exist ?

Government 'loans' for education.

Federal spending would be a third of what it is now insteading of printing, and borrowing, and issuing treasuries so that people an go out, and buy more stuff.

The real fascists are those that support the welfare industrial complex.

Do you have any concept of how many people would have starved in our great country with out some of these safety nets? But I suppose to the evangelical right wing asshats in this country that would be ok, because if they starved, they were not right with god.

Do you have any idea how many would have starved?

No you don't.

Heretofore (1935) in this country sudden crises of misfortune have been met by a mobilization of social power. In fact — except for certain institutional enterprises like the home for the aged, the lunatic asylum, city hospital, and county poorhouse — destitution, unemployment, "depression," and similar ills, have been no concern of the State, but have been relieved by the application of social power. Under Mr. Roosevelt, however, the State assumed this function, publicly announcing the doctrine, brand new in our history, that the State owes its citizens a living.

When the Johnstown flood occurred, social power was immediately mobilized and applied with intelligence and vigor. Its abundance, measured by money alone, was so great that when everything was finally put in order, something like a million dollars remained.

If such a catastrophe happened now, not only is social power perhaps too depleted for the like exercise, but the general instinct would be to let the State see to it. Not only has social power atrophied to that extent, but the disposition to exercise it in that particular direction has atrophied with it.

mises.org...

Corporations and private businesses are motivated by profit above all else, profit over people. I don't want a private company handling my mail, some of which may include legal documents. There is a reason the USPS was created as a quasi-governmental agency.

Well, if we want to get rid of the USPS, we're going to have to amend the United States Constitution...

Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, known as the Postal Clause or the Postal Power, empowers Congress "To establish Post Offices and post Roads".

So we have all these hardcore conservative constitutionalists that are constantly up in arms about how we don't follow the constitution now claiming we need to privatize the USPS...

The postal clause was one of the few instututions established by the constitution. Why stop there? Why not privatize the currency, the navy? Those are both powers afforded congress by the constitution. There's another one we might want to change too under section 8. This one power of congress seems a little dated, why not strip this one?

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Link

We all know how politicians are. Once we allow them to tinker around with one thing, soon it'll be another, and another...

We ought to be finding ways to restructure the USPS, not throwing it into the hands of private companies who answer to shareholders and not the American People.

a reply to: neo96

Do you know why the USPS hasn't earned a profit since 2006? It's because Congress, at the request of UPS and FedEx in a move of corporate politics convinced Congress to make the USPS fully fund the pensions for all of their employees for the next 75 years. It was called the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 and it essentially made the USPS come up with well over $100 billion dollars over the next decade, something no private industry has to do. To put this in perspective, as part of their operating expenses at FedEx's request the USPS has to fully fund a government pension today for an employee who isn't even born yet.

The fact that the USPS is still operating is proof that it's well run and efficient, especially so considering that email is taking a huge chunk of what was their main revenue generation. What do you think would happen to FedEx or UPS if Congress put these types of regulations on them? That those companies were able to do this in the first place is the problem.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Incorrect. Large corporations lobby the government for several reasons... one of them is snuff out competition. That is fascism. Corporate control over the government.

Corporate influence is a separate phenomenon from both Fascism and market intervention.

Fascism is control of an economy by a government, or governance. Regulation to snuff out competition is Plutocracy.

Market intervention is price fixing or regulation from the intention of making something cheaper or more plentiful than the free market does. Market intervention is the "good" socialism. But it won't work because the free market already offers the lowest price for an item, taking into account all of the other ways the materials in the item are demanded. Forcing a specific price for an item typically causes some amount of producers to become unprofitable. The unprofitable producers move to a different product, stop producing the unprofitable product, and the supply of the forced item decreases.

The government has two options then. It can give up on price forcing, or it can force the prices of input materials lower so as to make the unprofitable producers profitable again.

If the second option is chosen, that is lowering the costs of material used by the first group, then in the market of suppliers there will be unprofitable companies.

So the Gov has again to choose will it regulate the suppliers of the suppliers, or will it give up on the whole thing.

Eventually, the government has to regulate the entire economy, or regulate nothing.

Actually a good explanation. Here is the problem, corporate america is driven by greed, not simply a profitable bottom line, but honest to god greed. The shareholders used to be happy with a nice quarterly dividend, now the institutional investors and hedge fund guys demand unrealistic profits.

a reply to: BubbaJoe

Why yes people step right up and get your free GMO foods while making the JP Morgans billions, While making the Monsanto's BILLIONS.

Why yes people corporations should be guaranteed income, and why yes pass the 'buck' to the state, and OUTSOURCE that responsibility of their fellowman to the STATE.

Why yes people I just see, all the 'caring is sharing' hell just as long as someone else is footing the bill, and others are doing all the work.