Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Postal Service reports massive $5 billion loss


  • Please log in to reply
109 replies to this topic

#46 Porn Shop Clerk

Porn Shop Clerk

    Honky

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,370 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 02:59 PM

lol welfare

#47 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 03:04 PM

< steelin yer tax dollars using them to buy robitussin.

#48 Porn Shop Clerk

Porn Shop Clerk

    Honky

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,370 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 03:05 PM

better than selling them for 50 cents on the dollar like everyone else i guess

#49 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 03:07 PM

<stimulating the economy with tussin.

#50 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,156 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 03:19 PM

i get my checks by mail... those are pretty important.


No direct deposit?

#51 SCP

SCP

    Crop Dusting Son of a Bitch

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,104 posts
  • LocationOn a Sales Call

Posted 16 November 2011 - 03:25 PM

Of couse there are. You can not assuming universal Internet access even today. In 2010 it was estimated that as much as 25% of residences did not have Internet access.


Ironically, the people who lived in those residences without internet access were the most productive employees in the United States.

#52 Carolina Husker

Carolina Husker

    I hate football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,474 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 03:29 PM

Of couse there are. You can not assuming universal Internet access even today. In 2010 it was estimated that as much as 25% of residences did not have Internet access.


My guess is the costs can either be passed along to the receipient in those cases (i.e. charge those who opt for a papercheck mailed to them over DD), and if not, that it's still much less expensive to send these documents to individual places once a month than it is to operate a largely unncessary service to every address 6 days a week.

#53 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,156 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:23 PM

My guess is the costs can either be passed along to the receipient in those cases (i.e. charge those who opt for a papercheck mailed to them over DD), and if not, that it's still much less expensive to send these documents to individual places once a month than it is to operate a largely unncessary service to every address 6 days a week.


Now we're talking!

This same type of brainstorming approach should be applied to every part of the 1940 style goverment programs to streamline them all.

#54 Montsta

Montsta

    Rest In Peace

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,478 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:44 PM

Is there anything that needs to be delivered by mail anymore?


Jury summons. $10 check from nana two weeks after my birthday. That's really all that matters.

#55 Carolina Husker

Carolina Husker

    I hate football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,474 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:49 PM

Now we're talking!

This same type of brainstorming approach should be applied to every part of the 1940 style goverment programs to streamline them all.


Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but here's the deal. If we all come to the agreement that it's okay to operate the USPS at a reasonable loss, that's fine. It's a service provided to the tax payers by the tax payers managed by the Federal Gov't, so I get it that it may not be profitable, much less fiscally sound. But upwards of $10B or whatever that figure was is absolutely uncalled for, especially when it's largely a useless function of not only government but modern day life.

By and large, if you need something mailed to you, you should be responsible for the delivery service charge. As is the case with everything else, if it becomes unfeasible to pay for these things, we create a better way to do it.

#56 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,156 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:53 PM

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but here's the deal. If we all come to the agreement that it's okay to operate the USPS at a reasonable loss, that's fine. It's a service provided to the tax payers by the tax payers managed by the Federal Gov't, so I get it that it may not be profitable, much less fiscally sound. But upwards of $10B or whatever that figure was is absolutely uncalled for, especially when it's largely a useless function of not only government but modern day life.

By and large, if you need something mailed to you, you should be responsible for the delivery service charge. As is the case with everything else, if it becomes unfeasible to pay for these things, we create a better way to do it.


Not that it has happened that often, but I am totally and enthusiastically agreeing with you.

#57 Carolina Husker

Carolina Husker

    I hate football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,474 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:55 PM

Hold me.

#58 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,156 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:59 PM

reaching across the aisle in the huddle

Hey ya'll, don't look!

#59 Niner National

Niner National

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,358 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 05:22 PM

The whole system needs to be re evaluated. I can have "junk" calls stopped from coming into my home, why not "junk" mail?

You actually can. The companies sending you mail get your address from mailing lists that are sold by the post office. You can have your information removed.

It won't cut it off completely, but it can significantly minimize it.

#60 Niner National

Niner National

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,358 posts

Posted 16 November 2011 - 05:29 PM

A lot of companies depend on direct mail for business.

Significant rate increases could result in a lot of job losses outside of the post office.

I think they should either reduce delivery to 3 days per week or stop delivering to every home on a public road. Instead, set up post offices in Walmart stores or some other national retailer with significant national reach and leave existing post offices in areas without that luxury open. Make people pick up their mail rather than having it delivered.

I'd pick my mail up once a week, I don't need to get it every day. Anything important I have delivered via email anyway. If you want to have it delivered every day (like a business), that provides opportunity for private companies to start local mail delivery services in areas with the demand for it.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.