Saturday mail on its way out

6-day delivery ends in August unless U.S. lawmakers step in

Posted: February 7, 2013 at 4:21 a.m.

Postmaster General and CEO Patrick R. Donahoe speaks during a news conference at U.S. Postal Service headquarters on Wednesday Feb. 6, 2013 in Washington. The financially struggling U.S. Postal Service says it will stop delivering mail on Saturdays but continue to disburse packages six days a week. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

The financially struggling U.S. Postal Service announced Wednesday that it plans to stop delivering mail on Saturdays starting Aug. 1 — but will continue delivering packages.

USPS Chief: 'Our Financial Condition Is Urgent'

The financially struggling U.S. Postal Service said Wednesday it will stop delivering mail on Saturdays but continue to disburse packages six days a week, an apparent end-run around an unaccommodating Congress. (By The Associated Press)
[View Full-Size]

This story is only available from our archives.

Front Section, Pages 1 on 02/07/2013


« Previous Story

Names and faces

Levon Helm will be honored at this year’s Grammy Awards. The Recording Academy announced Wednesday that Elton John and Mumford & Sons will be joined on stage by T Bone ... Read »

Next Story »

In the news

John Betar, 101, and his wife, Ann, 97, a Fairfield, Conn., couple who eloped 80 years ago after Ann’s father arranged for her to marry another man, have been recognized by... Read »

This is an example of government trying to run a business. It fails. Same will happen to healthcare.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 7, 2013 at 4:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

For my part, Monday, Wednesday, and Friday would be OK. Packages 5 days a week. Post Office open 5 days a week. Close all offices that are not making money. Common cents.

Posted by: JailBird

February 7, 2013 at 4:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "This is an example of government trying to run a business. It fails."
Here are examples of businesses that were not run by government:
Pan Am, TWA, Enron, Montgomery Ward, Olan Mills, Polaroid, Kodak, Borders, Bethlehem Steel, Spiegel, Musicland, Tower Records, CompUSA, Bennigan's, Linens 'n Things, The Sharper Image, Vivitar, Ziff Davis, Trump Entertainment Resorts, Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, Hostess, Fashion Bug....
They failed.

RE "Same will happen to healthcare."
The government doesn't run healthcare. If the health and insurance industries fail, it will be thanks to good old capitalism.

Posted by: AlphaCat

February 7, 2013 at 5:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Amtrak, United Airlines, State of California, City of Detroit, RCA, Kodak, General Motors, Coney Island, Santa Fe, and most recently the United States Government under Obama.

Posted by: JailBird

February 7, 2013 at 5:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Thanks, MM and as far as the Pan Am, etc. I don't believe we bailed them out. Businesses fail and take their own loss.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 7, 2013 at 8:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Thank you for your information. MY

Posted by: JailBird

February 7, 2013 at 9:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "as far as the Pan Am, etc. I don't believe we bailed them out."
I didn't say we did. They all managed to fail without government intervention. Businesses fail; government or no.

Posted by: AlphaCat

February 8, 2013 at 1:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

>>This is an example of government trying to run a business.<

Where in the U.S. Constitution does it say our postal service must have profit or even break even?

Checked any of the other government entities for breaking even or having a profit? Let's say you start with the Department of Defense. Then move to the FCC. Check out the Department of Agriculture. Any of those "break even" or show a profit? Does NASA ever show a profit or break even? NASA provides billions in services to private industry and its research has been a boon to the telecom industries for several decades. Does it show a profit or break even?

One of the "bookkeeping' problems with the postal service is purely a Congressional creation. They mandated that the service fund the next 74 years of retirees benefits. Such a requirement could break a major private corporation.

Another purely Congressional requirement is that the postal service maintain various "tiers" of service each tier producing a different stream of revenue. That's why your junk mail comes so often is because Congress makes it cheap for businesses to send you the furniture and pizza flyers. Think UPS or FedEx would deliver those fliers twice a week for just pennies each? Think again.

Posted by: cdawg

February 8, 2013 at 1:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Of course, you are right, cdawg, but the USPS is not a government operation and recieves no revenue from the government. It is just regulated by the government.

Posted by: JailBird

February 8, 2013 at 7:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

There should be no gambling and special interest monies to friends with taxpayers money! We work too hard for our money. I don't want to be rich, I just want to do my part and expect everyone else to do the same. Government wastes way too much money without any accountabliity.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 8, 2013 at 8:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Of course, I wouldn't mind if I became rich in the process.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 8, 2013 at 8:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Yes, lets take more jobs away, we're in such good shape now!

Posted by: CEW1

February 8, 2013 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Yes, and jobs will not get any better through more regulations and more taxation of businesses. Look up the prayer breakfast with the President and Rev. Carson. Quite interesting. It was on facebook.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 8, 2013 at 10:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal )


Carson Prayer Speech

Posted by: mycentworth

February 8, 2013 at 12:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Well I want to be rich and if I can convince the Government that my books are art, then I could get a big fat taxpayer check and not have to worry making them good enough to sell on the open market. Remember is it is far better thing to use the Government to steal for you than to risk stealing yourself.

Posted by: JailBird

February 8, 2013 at 4:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I believe many feel that same way, it appears.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 8, 2013 at 4:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

My books are art...

Indeed they should be. Comedy has been an art form for centuries.

Posted by: cdawg

February 8, 2013 at 5:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Comedy sells, as long as it also includes violence, sex, mystery, and horror. Can I include you as one of my admirers, cdawg?

Posted by: JailBird

February 8, 2013 at 5:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

The article does a great job of debunking most of the misinformation people are passing around about the Post Office:

"The Post Office is not broke--and it hasn't taken any of our tax money since 1971"



"UNPROFITABLE. So what? When has the Pentagon ever made a profit? Never, nor does anyone suggest it should. Neither has the FBI, Centers for Disease Control, FDA, State Department, FEMA, Park Service, etc. Producing a profit is not the purpose of government-- its purpose is service. And for two centuries--from 1775, when the Continental Congress chose Benjamin Franklin to be our fledgling nation's first Postmaster General--until 1971, when Richard Nixon's Postal Reorganization Act took effect--America's nationwide network of post offices was fully appreciated as a government service...

...IMPORTANT FACTOID NUMBER 1: Since 1971, the postal service has not taken a dime from taxpayers. All of its operations--including the remarkable convenience of 32,000 local post offices (more service outlets than Walmart, Starbucks, and McDonald's combined)--are paid for by peddling stamps and other products.

...But wait, what about those annual losses? Good grief, squawk the Chicken Littles, USPS has gone some $13 billion in the hole during the past four years--a private corporation would go broke with that record! (Actually, private corporations tend to go to Washington rather than go broke, getting taxpayer bailouts to cover their losses.)

IMPORTANT FACTOID NUMBER 2: The Postal Service is NOT broke. Indeed, in those four years of loudly deplored "losses," the Service actually produced a $700 million operational profit (despite the worst economy since the Great Depression).

What's going on here? Right-wing sabotage of USPS financing, that's what. In 2006, the Bush White House and Congress whacked the post office with the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act--an incredible piece of ugliness requiring the agency to PRE-PAY the health care benefits not only of current employees, but also of all employees who'll retire during the next 75 years. Yes, that includes employees who're not yet born! No other agency and no corporation has to do this. Worse, this ridiculous law demands that USPS fully fund this seven-decade burden by 2016. Imagine the shrieks of outrage if Congress tried to slap FedEx or other private firms with such an onerous requirement. This politically motivated mandate is costing the Postal Service $5.5 billion a year--money taken right out of postage revenue that could be going to services. That's the real source of the "financial crisis" squeezing America's post offices." --ibid

Posted by: fayfreethinker

February 9, 2013 at 3:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I think I laid out those facts above FFT but thanks for bringing us Hightower, a light in the darkness.

Rwing spin used to be entertaining but since it created a nation of dummies Rwing spin has become damaging.

Posted by: cdawg

February 9, 2013 at 3:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

>>Comedy sells, as long as it also includes violence, sex, mystery, and horror. Can I include you as one of my admirers, cdawg?

Only if you list the titles of "your" books. Most authors jump on the opportunity to promote their works. See Coralie's last post. That should say, "published" writers.

Posted by: cdawg

February 9, 2013 at 3:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Good post, Freethinker, well reasoned, indeed.

Posted by: JailBird

February 9, 2013 at 4:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I don't think that a newspaper comment section is the place to sell books. But since you ask, cdawg:

I write for Jove and Penguin usually under the pen names of "Jake Logan" and "Tabor Evans". Those two names have published over 800 books of which only a few are mine. I also edit "American Indian religions and custons" content for various other Western authors who write under their own names. Go to Wal-mart, chances are that one on my books is on the shelf.

Posted by: JailBird

February 9, 2013 at 5 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

MM - You quoted Edward Abbey, so I ordered a couple of his books from the library. Always looking for some good reading material.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 9, 2013 at 6:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Desert Solitude" is the book to start with and then add "Fire on the Mountain" and "One Life at a time Please.

Posted by: JailBird

February 9, 2013 at 11:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Desert Sollitude is the one I ordered. Then I just asked for his latest novel. Looking forward to it.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 10, 2013 at 8:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

mycentworth says "Businesses fail and take their own loss."
Not, however, if they are BIG banks that are "too big to fail."
The UK is warning its financial sector that the next time one of those monster banks fails, it will not be bailed out but will be split up into smaller institutions.

Posted by: Coralie

February 10, 2013 at 2:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

mycentworth is reading Edward Abbey novels.
Try some of his non-fiction, such as The Monkey Wrench Gang. You'll be surprised.

Posted by: Coralie

February 10, 2013 at 2:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mycent, you won't get any of his latest books as Abbey died in 1989. The Monkey Wrench Gang and it's sequel Hayduke Lives! are millitant environmentalist novels. And Coralie, those two are fiction, Desert Solitare is non-fiction. The novel The Brave Cowboy was made into a movie titled "Lonely Are the Brave" and stared Kirk Douglas. "Hayduke Lives" was published after his death.

Posted by: JailBird

February 10, 2013 at 4:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I got on "fantastic fiction" and learned about him. Desert Solitare was one of his more popular books, I believe. Coralie must be familiar with his books. I asked for his latest book, so that probably is "Hayduke Lives'.

Coralie, I was never for the bail out of the big banks. It should have been split up.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 10, 2013 at 4:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

>>I write for Jove and Penguin usually under the pen names of "Jake Logan" and "Tabor Evans". Those two names have published over 800 books of which only a few are mine.<<

That's normally called "pulp" and there's a reason for that.

Posted by: cdawg

February 11, 2013 at 3:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

its easy to keep usps running. 1. freeze all wages. 2.abolish all unions connected with the usps. like the air traffic controllers.3.stop all further benefits added to the empolyees wages, by the usps. if they want benefits, pay for them with their on wages peroid!

Posted by: 101stnamvet

February 11, 2013 at 7:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Hey, cdawg, it puts bacon on the table and it's easy to crank out. You asked, I replied, and, of course, now comes the put down. I'd like to say that I expected more out of you, but honestly I didn't.

Good post 101, I would add to that; get rid of all unproductive employees.

Posted by: JailBird

February 11, 2013 at 7:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Every one wanted to get on the payroll of the federal (not state) govt, including the PO. The pay and benefits were great. Far above what you could make in private business.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 11, 2013 at 7:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Class envy is when working-class people envy other working-class people who thanks to unions and labor struggles over the last 250 years have now achieved a decent living.

Posted by: Coralie

February 11, 2013 at 12:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Until the unions became corrupt and demanding too much.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 11, 2013 at 2 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "Until the unions became corrupt and demanding too much."
Are you somehow saying that it is okay for corporations to become corrupt and demand too much? That is, essentially, the situation that the USPS faces in regard to Congress.

Posted by: AlphaCat

February 11, 2013 at 3:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

mycentworth, do you have any evidence that most unions "became corrupt"?
And when did this happen?
And which unions demanded "too much"? Too much of what? Too much from whose perspective?
Is this opinion based on evidence or on a widely shared notion?

Posted by: Coralie

February 11, 2013 at 4:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Re the USPS, why did Congress lay the crippling burden on them to fund all future retirees for the next 75 years?
Nobody else has to.
Sounds to me like somebody wants them to fail, so they can privatize postal service.
And you think it will be cheaper and better service then!.

Posted by: Coralie

February 11, 2013 at 4:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

The defination of "too much" is a unicorn on the far side of the moon. Too much, for Walmart is "any" and too much for Hostess is "none". Unions are corrupt and corperations are corrupt and when corrupt fights corrupt, the honest worker loses.

Posted by: JailBird

February 11, 2013 at 5:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Union dues became excessively high in many cases. Threat of bodily harm if you did not join. Businesses, even those that paid fairly, were victims of outrageous demands by union negotiators. Unions started out good, but greed and corruption took over. Just like the government started out to serve the people, but look at it now. Where money is, you will find thieves. I'm sure we don't even know half of the schemes the taxpayer has been the victim of.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 11, 2013 at 5:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Great post of common sense, mycentworth. Someone asked Willie Sutton why he robbed banks and his reply was; "Because thats where the money is."

Posted by: JailBird

February 11, 2013 at 5:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Anybody here actually know anything about the history of Anerican labor struggles that doesn't come from the movies or RW propaganda?
"The first local trade unions of men in the United States formed in the late 18th century, and women began organizing in the 1820s. However, the movement came into its own after the Civil War, when the short-lived National Labor Union (NLU) became the first federation of American unions.
Women working under sweat shop conditions organized the first [women's] union in the early 19th century. According to the book American Labor, in 1834–1836 women worked 16–17 hours a day to earn [on average] $1.25 to $2.00 a week. A girl weaver in a non-union mill would receive $4.20 a week versus $12.00 for the same work in a union mill. The workers had to buy their own needles and thread from the proprietor. ...
Women carried their own foot treadle machines or were held in the shops until the entire shop had completed an immediate delivery order. Their pay was often shorted, but a protest might result in immediate dismissal. Sometimes whole families worked from sun up to midnight. Pulmonary ailments were common due to dust accumulation on the floors and tables. Some shops had leaks or openings in the roofs, and workers worked in inclement weather.
Despite the odds, some women challenged the employers. Their first organization was as an auxiliary, the Daughters of Liberty in 1765. In 1825, the women organized and called themselves the United Tailoresses of New York. Strikes occurred over the years, and some were successful."

Posted by: Coralie

February 12, 2013 at 1:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Pullman Strike, 1894:
During the major economic depression of the early 1890s, the Pullman Palace Car Company cut wages in its factories. Discontented workers joined the American Railway Union (ARU),...which supported their strike by launching a boycott of all Pullman cars on all railroads. ARU members across the nation refused to switch Pullman cars onto trains. When these switchmen were disciplined, the entire ARU struck the railroads on June 26, 1894. Within four days, 125,000 workers on twenty-nine railroads had people quit work rather than handle Pullman cars.
The railroads were able to get Edwin Walker, general counsel for the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway, appointed as a special federal attorney with responsibility for dealing with the strike. Walker went to federal court and obtained an injunction barring union leaders from supporting the boycott in any way. The court injunction was based on the Sherman Anti-Trust Act....Leaders of the ARU ignored the injunction, and federal troops were called into action.
The strike was broken up by United States Marshals and some 2,000 United States Army troops sent in by President Grover Cleveland on the premise that the strike interfered with the delivery of U.S. Mail. During the course of the strike, 13 strikers were killed and 57 were wounded. ...The ARU disintegrated."
(same source as above)

Posted by: Coralie

February 12, 2013 at 1:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Teamsters Union:
The Teamsters union was expelled from the AFL for its notorious corruption under president Dave Beck. Its troubles gained national attention from highly visible Senate hearings led by Robert Kennedy in the late 1950s. The target was Jimmy Hoffa, (1913–1975), who replaced Beck and held total power until he was imprisoned in 1964.
For Republicans in the 1950s the campaign against labor racketeering offered a chance to peel the working-class vote away from the Democratic Party by politically dividing union members from their leadership. The culmination of this trend came in the late 1950s during the McClellan Committee hearings, which was the largest congressional investigation up to that time. Those hearings transformed Teamsters president Hoffa into a potent symbol of the danger posed by labor racketeering. The committee's revelations and the publicity they received undercut the labor movement.
(same source)

Posted by: Coralie

February 12, 2013 at 1:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Labor legislation:
"Before 1874, when Massachusetts passed the nation's first legislation limiting the number of hours women and child factory workers could perform to 10 hours a day, virtually no labor legislation existed in the country. Indeed, it was not until the 1930s that the federal government would become actively involved. Until then, the field was left to the state and local authorities, few of whom were as responsive to the workers as they were to wealthy industrialists. "

Posted by: Coralie

February 12, 2013 at 1:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Working conditions 100 years ago:
"As late as the year 1900, the United States had the highest job-related fatality rate of any industrialized nation in the world. Most industrial workers still worked a 10-hour day (12 hours in the steel industry), yet earned from 20 to 40 percent less than the minimum deemed necessary for a decent life. The situation was only worse for children, whose numbers in the work force doubled between 1870 and 1900."
(source above)

Posted by: Coralie

February 12, 2013 at 1:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"There is no hard-and-fast line separating labor racketeering from business racketeering—one is often an integral part of the other.
In many schemes involving corrupt union officials, “legitimate” businessmen who willingly cooperated derived benefits such as decreased labor costs, inflated prices, or increased business. Racketeer Moses (“Moe”) Steinman, who dominated the wholesale meat industry in New York City, personifies this phenomenon. "
This very interesting site describes how union racketeering began as a response to employer use of Pinkerton thugs--thugs against thugs.

Posted by: Coralie

February 12, 2013 at 2:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

That was interesting, Coralie, now how does this apply to the USPS?

Posted by: JailBird

February 14, 2013 at 7:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

It applies to comments made here by you and mycentworth about unions demanding too much, unions being corrupt, etc.--did that apply to the USPS?

Posted by: Coralie

February 14, 2013 at 1:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Thank you for the labor history Coralie. I've forgotten much since my college days when I took an econ course in Labor.

Posted by: cdawg

February 14, 2013 at 3:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I think I blamed union greed and management greed equally Coralie. See my Feb 11, 5:15 pm post. No, that did not apply to the UPWU, they have been reasonable and level headed for the most part. Give and take has been their attitude.

Posted by: JailBird

February 14, 2013 at 4:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Whenever you are being paid by the taxpayers, accountability for every dollar should be made. You are taking money from people who do not have the advantage of a "money tree". I remember reading about lavish parties given by govt. (federal again) at taxpayers' expense. I worked for state govt. and we had to pay for our own all the time. Our salaries never matched the feds. States have always been much more conscientious.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 14, 2013 at 4:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "Whenever you are being paid by the taxpayers"
Oooops! The USPS has been supported by its customers-- not "the taxpayers"-- since 1971. You didn't read that link, did you?

RE "I remember reading about lavish parties given by govt. (federal again) at taxpayers' expense."
Well-- at least we know you read every once in a while. But I remember reading about lavish parties given by state governments at taxpayer expense. Maybe you worked for the wrong state.

Posted by: AlphaCat

February 14, 2013 at 5:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

If I gave a lavish party, I certainly wouldn't invite you Kitty. However if we have a fire at the city dump, I would give you a weiner and a stick. Everyone should know his or her station in life, and hers is a lot higher than yours.

Posted by: JailBird

February 14, 2013 at 7:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

moneymyst - I love your posts. Thanks.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 14, 2013 at 8:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "If I gave a lavish party..."
"...you'd have moved out of that room over the garage.

RE "moneymyst - I love your posts. Thanks."
Because you're too nicey-nice to do your own sniping, but not really Christian enough to deplore it in others?

Posted by: AlphaCat

February 14, 2013 at 9:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I am who I am. Mm has a good and unique sense of humor with which he makes his point. I'm not as clever.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 14, 2013 at 10 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

AlphaC: "Because you're too nicey-nice to do your own sniping, but not really Christian enough to deplore it in others?">>


"No, I an not a real person, I am computar(sic) generated from the root word demented. I was created as an example of the evils of mixing zolpidem, pot, and vodka together with a word processer(sic)."
--Moneymyst, October 12, 2012

Posted by: fayfreethinker

February 15, 2013 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

You remembered, Freeby and even gave me credit for the statement, I'm really touched. You did not quote me exactly, but close.

I am not a real person, I am computer generated from the word demented. I was created to become an example of the evils of the mating of zolpidem, pot, and vodka together with a word processor.

That is actually not the order, pot, vodka, and then zolpidem. Now I am adding magic mushrooms and diethyltryptamine to the mixture. Then I print out you posts, take them to the throne room, read them, realize what moonbat you are, wipe and flush in your memory.

Posted by: JailBird

February 15, 2013 at 12:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

MM: "You did not quote me exactly,">>

Actually, I did (of course). Including the notation "(sic)" was necessary so people wouldn't think I'm some kind of buffoon who doesn't know how to spell basic words. If you don't know what "(sic)" means (and it's not actually part of a quote), I encourage you to look it up. Being an "author," it would be useful for you to know some of these basics.

MM: "take them to the throne room,">>

Be careful not to fall in, like you did that other time. It scares people.


Posted by: fayfreethinker

February 15, 2013 at 10:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Being an author I write at a sixth grade level in order for those with short attention spans like you will be able to focus. As any writer knows, when a manuscript is sent in for publication, it goes through editing and proof reading which corrects grammer and spelling. I turn spell check off because it spoils th flow of the writing. Does that help you understand writing a small bit better?

And you are some kind of buffoon, a clown actually. When I am writing and need a break, I just move over here and read your attemps at comedy, post a bit, and I'm ready to go again. Thats why I missed you so much when you went on the magic mushroom cruise. If I did the right thing, I should send you part of my next advance, nah I don't do the right thing very often. But you are a great help for comic relief. I've even started writing you in when I need a know-it-all moonbat character. Your ranting could have been even greater help to JK Rowling since she writes about people like you, but I fit you into a western story every now and then.

I am flattered that you would go back and look at some of my past posts. My vanity is gratified. Now if you will excuse me, Solcum has gotten himself into a real mess with a gunfigthter, a cattle baron, and a beautiful senorita and only I can get him out of it in one piece. Wish I knew how to make that little ~ over the n in senorita. They will do that when they proof read though. If you want to know, I'll tell you how Solcum gets out of this women trouble he is in. See yo down the trail and thanks again Freeby.

Posted by: JailBird

February 16, 2013 at 2:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Uh oh, Moneymyst is getting a little grumpy. He should learn someday that for his insults to have any bite, they would need to have some slight basis in reality. The more the better. That's why my gentle corrections bother him so. It's because my comments are true and he knows they're true. It's also why his attempts fall flat. Because he knows what he says isn't true. If he doesn't, he should.

Hey MM, when you send in your pulp to be fixed up and mistakes corrected (what a task that would be), does the person in charge check to make sure you didn't dishonestly plagiarize the material? I hope so, and with good reason.

MM will never forgive me for pulling his pants down in public and catching him lying with the following bits of blatant plagiarism back on November 29th:


And: http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2012/no...

Thing is, for someone who pays attention to what smart looks like and what a faker looks like, it was instantly recognizable as not his writing and clearly stolen from someone else. The big clue was the fact that the writing was coherent and the person appeared to have some knowledge of what they were talking about.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

February 16, 2013 at 12:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Freeby, I am very pleased to recieve so much attention from you. As someone so familer with my writing style, obviously you have purchased my books. As one of my readers and fans, I thank you.

Copying is the sencerist form of flattery and anytime you want to copy some of my work (as you have done in the past) you have my permission because you are a reader of mine.

Thank you for your business.

Posted by: JailBird

February 16, 2013 at 2 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"sencere" the way to spell it in order not to offend an athiest.

Posted by: JailBird

February 16, 2013 at 3:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Getting back to the subject of this thread--Postal Service problems--have we had any comment on this situation?
"Except the post office isn't broke — and hasn’t taken a dime of taxpayer money since 1971. Congress created the USPS's financial crisis, and they could end it today. A Bush-era requirement that the Postal Service pre-fund its retiree benefits 75 years into the future — a burden imposed on no other government agency or private employer — has been digging the otherwise profitable Postal Service deeper and deeper into the red. Instead of working to fix the problem, Republicans in the House are taking advantage of the post office's financial vulnerability to try to shut it down."
It's the drive to privatizize everything, pure and simple.

Posted by: Coralie

February 21, 2013 at 11:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Social Security ain't broke either. But it would be a lovely chunk ;of money for the financial marketeers to play with.

Posted by: Coralie

February 21, 2013 at 11:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

There's a lot of money invested in education, too. That's why some want to privatize the schools.
Strangely enough, the mantra about how bad the schools are and how they are failing started about the same time as desegregation and has never stopped..

Posted by: Coralie

February 21, 2013 at 11:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

My point, Coralie. Government does not know how to handle money.

Posted by: mycentworth

February 21, 2013 at 2:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Or manage anything. Did the Government schools start to fail with desegregation? I don't think so. Separate, but equel never was equel, but was separate.

Posted by: JailBird

February 21, 2013 at 2:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

No, mycentworth, your point is different from my point.

Posted by: Coralie

February 22, 2013 at 1:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

My point is that the moneymen want to get their hot little hands on Social Security, the Post Office, and Education.
They've already largely privatized the prison system.
As for your assertion that "Government does not know how to handle money," Free answered this very well on a different thread--I'll see if I can find it.

Posted by: Coralie

February 22, 2013 at 3:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I hope Free doesn't mind my reposting this comment:
MyC: "And anything done through the government cost at least twice as much as need be - at least.">>

That's not remotely true and there are no end of examples flatly refuting this commonly passed along claim. I'll give six examples:

1) About 95% of fire stations are handled by municipal governments because it's cheaper to handle it in house rather than pay a for profit private company.

2) Same with sanitation.

3) Social Security operates with an expense of about 1%. That's incredibly efficient. Countries that have experimented with privatizing social security have found the expense goes up to as high as 20%-30%.

That's a really big difference.

4) The entirely government run VA medical system operates with better outcomes and far less cost than the private for profit sector.

5) The IRS. "The employment of private tax collectors has been, for federal unions, a particularly egregious example of the misuse of contractors. In March, the Internal Revenue Service stopped using two private tax collection companies because, according to an agency statement, "IRS collection is more cost-effective than the contractors." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...

6) The military. As of some time ago it cost about $1,000,000 per soldier, per year, to station them in Afghanistan. This absurd amount is no doubt largely because so many military services have been out-sourced to expensive profit driven private contractors. Note:

"Contractors Outnumber U.S. Troops in Afghanistan"

"The White House Office of Management and Budget is directing federal agencies to take a series of actions designed to reduce the government's growing reliance on outside contractors..."

"Frederick D. Barton, a senior adviser to the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington,... questioned whether using contractors was cost effective, saying that no one really knew whether having a force made up mainly of contractors whose salaries were often triple or quadruple those of a corresponding soldier or Marine was cheaper or more expensive for the American taxpayer." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/02/wor...

Posted by: fayfreethinker
February 21, 2013 at 8:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Posted by: Coralie

February 22, 2013 at 4:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Did the Government schools start to fail with desegregation?"
No, instead I think that is when people started to downrate the school system.
Sort of an ideological form of "white flight."

Posted by: Coralie

February 22, 2013 at 4:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Coralie are you saying that when the smart whites left the school system when the dumb black came in that is when the school systems downrated? What local meetings of the Klan do you attend?

Posted by: JailBird

February 22, 2013 at 4:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

OK, here's a translation just for trolls. I did not say what you said I said.
I said that people downrated the schools, not that the schools downrated.
downrate: To give something a lower rating
Perhaps a better word would have been disparage, or belittle, or deprecate, put down, bad-mouth, denigrate, rip, slam, downgrade, or dump on.
Those who were against desegregation--in other words, those who supported the status quo of segregation--downrated, disparaged, or bellittled the public schools as soon as they were desegregated, and ever since.

Posted by: Coralie

February 23, 2013 at 1:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

The Klan was mostly made up of Democrats like Robert Bird and Orville Falbus. Choose your party carefully lest you brand yourself. Are you a Democrat, Coralie?

Posted by: JailBird

February 23, 2013 at 4:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "Did the Government schools start to fail with desegregation?"
While disgruntlement with the public schools might have started at that time, the actual decline began with the energy crisis of the 1970s and accelerated, not coincidentally, with the Reagan administration.

RE "The Klan was mostly made up of Democrats like Robert Bird and Orville Falbus."
Note that at that time, southern Democrats were conservative-- conservatism being the leaning underlying the KKK and the like. They referred to themselves as "Dixiecrats" because the Democratic Party was not widely conservative. The Republican Party actively recruited Southern Democrat voters as it became more conservative; most of the remaining Klansmen and (apparently) almost all of their sympathizers are now Republicans. Read up on the GOP's "Southern Strategy", and remember, while you're at it, that Lyndon Johnson was a southern Democrat.

Posted by: AlphaCat

February 23, 2013 at 5:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I've said on numerous occasions that I'm a Green.
Lay off, Money, or I'll send out the second Billy Goat Gruff.

Posted by: Coralie

February 24, 2013 at 3:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Cor: "I'll send out the second Billy Goat Gruff.">>

I like how that story ends, always have.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

February 24, 2013 at 3:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )