BS: And now the Post Office....

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 30 Sep 11 - 09:35 AM

Publications also sold out of the post office. Federal Register and Federal Code books subscriptions are not free, though I warrant they sell them at a loss. And the more is available online the fewer print products sold. Yet it still costs to get these documents online.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 03:57 PM

The Post Office is the largest employer, in number of employees, in the country.
Efforts to chip away at the P.O. increase unemployment when jobs are sorely needed.

Money is taken out of the P.O. income for general government funding.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 03:32 PM

The Post Office has a surplus at present and is not bound to balance its books every year. It's supported by sales of (you got it) stamps.Hasn't taken tax money since (as I recall) 1983.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: artbrooks
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 01:24 PM

Dick, I said nothing at all about the quality of the work they do. If the taxpayers didn't cover their shortfall last year, and the one projected for this year, who did?

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 09:55 AM

ARTBROOKs-No the PO doesn't get tax money, except when the government buys stamps.(They do get some kickback on letters to the handicapped, as do the private carriers.)

YOu may think they don't do a good job, but it's a better one than any of th privarte oufits do. At very least, they cover the entire country.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 09:20 AM

There has been a move to "privatize" the PO since at least 1966.

The U.S. Post Office HAS been partially privatized by the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970.

Back in the day when it was a tax-supported government SERVICE, it was doing just fine, thank you very much.

Just another example of grover Norquist's "shrinking" campaign- and it's worked just as miserably as all the rest.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 04:26 AM

Perhaps I should be flattered that guest stalks my posts and sends me threatening messages on facebook. I've never been the centre of a complete stranger's attention before joining mudcat.

Yes I was a coordinating editor for LexisNexis on Federal Register online product. Still friends with former colleagues on my facebook. But you should know this, since you reportedly have access to "my photos, profile info and email address" and plan to publish it on every networking and photo sharing site on the "World Wide Web." Yes I saw the message you left me before you deleted it. And I copied it.

I know some mod will delete this soon enough, but maybe a few catters will see what I have been being subjected to since joining this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 04:05 AM

You were working? And for Lexus/Nexus? Care to sing the national song of Siam?

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 12:44 AM

When I was working for LexisNexis, the US Post Office was also managing the printing of the Federal Register. Weekly magazine with updates to federal code and they printed the US Federal Code books. I suppose they managed the printing of many or all federal publications.

They were attempting to outsource that between 2001 and 2003 and I think finding it more expensive to outsource than to run itself. I remember late arriving publications because private printers could not get in step with the deadlines.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 11:58 PM

If you listen to the Diane Rehm interview you'll learn that a lot of the post office problems stem from the pre-paid healthcare investment the congress mandated. They discuss some quite innovative programs, including the "last mile" delivery of lots of parcels, not just USPS items. Makes good sense for them and the other carriers.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: artbrooks
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 11:37 PM

Well, they lost $8.5 billion last year, and I presume that the Federal government (that would be the taxpayers) made up the difference. Even if the stupid requirement that they prefund retirement benefits to the tune of $5.5 billion each year were eliminated, that's still a lot of first class stamps.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: Rapparee
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 11:14 PM

There has been a move to "privatize" the PO since at least 1966.

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 10:49 PM

Here is a very good hour-long interview about the post office with the postmaster on yesterday's Diane Rehm Show on NPR. There's a little volume control on the upper left and you can click that icon to listen to the podcast.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 10:22 PM

Because the Repubs want everyone, except them, living in abject poverty... This is about benefits and pensions... The Repubs hate 'um...

B~

Subject: BS: And now the Post Office....
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 10:17 PM

What's the excuse for picking on the Post Office? THey don't get any tax money (Unlike Exxon and GE). And, inefficient or not, they provide a service that for-profit outfits like UPS and FedX are unable (or unwilling) to provide. And the're a helluva lot less expensive to use than the private outfits.
   Could it be just another case of union-busting?