Postal Service posts $8.5 billion loss

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I don't mail much personally but my business does. I try to fax, email, set customers up on ebill, but there is still a large % who don't like that and want a bill. Hell I get 5 to 10 people who come into my office to pay their bill by check and then want a receipt. That I don't get. I can give people a 15% discount off their auto ins. if they do automatic withdraw and ebill and only about 40% of the people will sign up for that.

Some companies are still weird about paying online. I pay all of my bills online now except for my water bill because those F'ers charge me a $3 service fee for anything other than a mailed check.
So I could pay $3 every month for my $13 water bill or I could pay $.044. Um, tough choice.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

That's the thinking we need to get away from. I feel if we start getting every federal employee or person working for the goverment to find ways to save $100 here and $100 there then we start to make a dent in this problem. Its not always the other persons waisted money that's the problem. Its time for everyone to watch what they spend.

Our governments issues is not the nickel and dime type problems. It is the approx 66% of the "non discretionary" spending that will solve the problems. I am sorry, but 100 here or 100 there doesn't cut it.

The solution, at least for "rational" people is not to cut the legitimate and long standing processes of government, but to cut the overgrown monstrosity that it has become.

Should the post office do what it can to run at a 0 net loss, sure, but don't let saving those few billion detract from what should be the bigger goal of getting the government back under control.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Our governments issues is not the nickel and dime type problems. It is the approx 66% of the "non discretionary" spending that will solve the problems. I am sorry, but 100 here or 100 there doesn't cut it.

The solution, at least for "rational" people is not to cut the legitimate and long standing processes of government, but to cut the overgrown monstrosity that it has become.

Should the post office do what it can to run at a 0 net loss, sure, but don't let saving those few billion detract from what should be the bigger goal of getting the government back under control.

I'd say that what started the problem and its the real way to start and fix the problem. Look at the people here that are saying that 8.6 billions is no big deal in the larger picture. See if you teach people how to not waist $100 then its much easier to teach them how not to waist $1000, $100,000 , 1,000,000,0000, etc.... Any business person know when you need to cut cost you start with the easy smaller cuts and work your way up.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I'd say that what started the problem and its the real way to start and fix the problem. Look at the people here that are saying that 8.6 billions is no big deal in the larger picture. See if you teach people how to not waist $100 then its much easier to teach them how not to waist $1000, $100,000 , 1,000,000,0000, etc.... Any business person know when you need to cut cost you start with the easy smaller cuts and work your way up.

What started the problem, was when citizens (poor and rich) start looking to the government for handouts. And even more so, when our government, and the people by extension, decided to get caught up in foreign entanglements. I understand your thought process, but you are letting the numbers cloud your process.
Currently the national debt is:
$ 1 3 , 7 9 6 , 1 8 6 , 8 8 8 , 5 2 5 . 0 6
post office loss
$ 0 0 , 0 0 8 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

putting this in perspective: if a company is running a $14,000 dollar debt, and you go to the owner and say our telemarketing unit lost $8.50 last year, Chances are the owner will say "well see what you can do." and focus on the retirement plan that is running $3000 in debt or the transportation and security concerns that are running $4500 in debt.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

What started the problem, was when citizens (poor and rich) start looking to the government for handouts. And even more so, when our government, and the people by extension, decided to get caught up in foreign entanglements. I understand your thought process, but you are letting the numbers cloud your process.
Currently the national debt is:
$ 1 3 , 7 9 6 , 1 8 6 , 8 8 8 , 5 2 5 . 0 6
post office loss
$ 0 0 , 0 0 8 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

putting this in perspective: if a company is running a $14,000 dollar debt, and you go to the owner and say our telemarketing unit lost $8.50 last year, Chances are the owner will say "well see what you can do." and focus on the retirement plan that is running $3000 in debt or the transportation and security concerns that are running $4500 in debt.

Well a telemarking dept. is suppose to generate money so if its loosing money that's a bigger issue. Also a retirment accounts allways cost money (cost of having employees) and never makes money so thats a poor example. Your other examples are also cost to a business and never make money so they are also poor examples.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Well a telemarking dept. is suppose to generate money so if its loosing money that's a bigger issue. Also a retirment accounts allways cost money (cost of having employees) and never makes money so thats a poor example. Your other examples are also cost to a business and never make money so they are also poor examples.

the biggest drains on the budget are medicare/ss (retirement) and defense (transp. and security).

The government isn't a business, and hence no part of "makes" money (except the treasury lol). I used the business analogy as a frame of reference but tried to be transparent enough that you could substitute in Postal Service = telemarketing, retirement = social security/medicare, and transportation/security = National defense.

Bottom line: a businessman that is hacking a useful part of his corporation that lost $8.50 when he has $14,000.00 in debt to get control of, isn't going to be in business very long.

[MTK]

good points CR, makes perfect sense to me.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by ArtMonkDrillz

Since I currently work in the direct marketing industry (ie retail/financial junk mail) I sincerely hope this doesn't happen any time soon.
And actually I think it will be a long time before regular mail is completely abandon. Many people still use it all the time.

No one that's relevant. :cheeky-sm

Seriously, if billy bob and beth ann from middle america can't figure out a way to pay their bills online and do paperless banking, let 'em starve.

(kidding... kind of....)

[firstdown]

Look I'm just using your example and I know our biggest issues are SS/medicare and the military. Any business that has spending problems need to start from the bottom and work up is all I'm saying. We can stick a bandaid on this by increasing SS ben. to 67, cut medicare etc... but we are not fixing the problem of spending we are just ****ing people out of their retirement that the government took from them. Or we can start to make the tough decisions from the bottom and get government under control so we don't have to keep patching things together.

As we discuss this government agencies are on a spending spree so they can spend their entire budget by the end of the year even if they don't need to spend. That so they don't loose that money next year but why fix that those stupid items only cost a $100 here and a $1,000 there. Same think as to why fix the Post Office its only 8.6 billion and not the real problem. I guess we should also keep earmarks because they account for less then 1% of spending.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by BleedBurgundy

No one that's relevant. :cheeky-sm

Seriously, if billy bob and beth ann from middle america can't figure out a way to pay their bills online and do paperless banking, let 'em starve.

(kidding... kind of....)

Billy Bob and Beth Ann still don't use debit cards and instead whip out the checkbook at Wal-Marts... one step at a time.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Look I'm just using your example and I know our biggest issues are SS/medicare and the military. Any business that has spending problems need to start from the bottom and work up is all I'm saying. We can stick a bandaid on this by increasing SS ben. to 67, cut medicare etc... but we are not fixing the problem of spending we are just ****ing people out of their retirement that the government took from them. Or we can start to make the tough decisions from the bottom and get government under control so we don't have to keep patching things together.

As we discuss this government agencies are on a spending spree so they can spend their entire budget by the end of the year even if they don't need to spend. That so they don't loose that money next year but why fix that those stupid items only cost a $100 here and a $1,000 there. Same think as to why fix the Post Office its only 8.6 billion and not the real problem. I guess we should also keep earmarks because they account for less then 1% of spending.

k.
as i have said multiple times. If someone shows a legitimate plan to bring the govt back under control, and that plan includes(but doesn't rely on) hacking the post office, fine hack away. But if some politician is going to try to sell me a bill of goods that he did something to reduce the govt because he got rid of the US Post Office then he/she can kiss my heinie.

I agree with one thing you wrote, we need to stop trying to patchwork it.

We need politicians who have the intestinal fortitude to take a look at things from scratch, and say this is what we need to do, these are our priorities, and this is what we need to do to have a functioning, fiscally responsible govt that meets the requirements and duties as outlined in the constitution.

This all makes me think of the constitutional convention. Can you imagine, just a few years after the country was created, they got together, rather than going to war against each other, and agreed to scrap the old plan entirely, and start new and from scratch! That was radical

I am not saying that we need a constitutional convention, but we do need to throw out the old ways and get serious about having a functional fiscally responsible government

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

k.
as i have said multiple times. If someone shows a legitimate plan to bring the govt back under control, and that plan includes(but doesn't rely on) hacking the post office, fine hack away. But if some politician is going to try to sell me a bill of goods that he did something to reduce the govt because he got rid of the US Post Office then he/she can kiss my heinie.

I agree with one thing you wrote, we need to stop trying to patchwork it.

We need politicians who have the intestinal fortitude to take a look at things from scratch, and say this is what we need to do, these are our priorities, and this is what we need to do to have a functioning, fiscally responsible govt that meets the requirements and duties as outlined in the constitution.

This all makes me think of the constitutional convention. Can you imagine, just a few years after the country was created, they got together, rather than going to war against each other, and agreed to scrap the old plan entirely, and start new and from scratch! That was radical

I am not saying that we need a constitutional convention, but we do need to throw out the old ways and get serious about having a functional fiscally responsible government

I pretty much agree with you.

The actual reason I started this thread was to point out another failing government function.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Billy Bob and Beth Ann still don't use debit cards and instead whip out the checkbook at Wal-Marts... one step at a time.

I think you would be surprised at how many people still whip out the checkbook at all levels of income and education. I think my parents write checks for most of their purchases. They are both educated and very well off I think its the physical act of writing and having that check as proof of purchase that they are stuck in.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Why do you have yo pay to toss out junk mail? I give it to my daughter and she gets a kick of sitting there opening up mail like mom and dad and pretends to read it. I don't mind junk male because I'm in sales and advertise myself and I have done plenty of mailings over the years. I'm also the person who does not mind solicitors knocking on the door because I have done that myself and they are only trying to do their job. Annoying yes but I'll live with it.

Never knew you were into that FD. lol

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Never knew you were into that FD. lol

I'm not. I'm a very strong 1 on the Kinsey Scale.