I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

On Sep 14, 7:12*pm, wrote:
I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. *I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. *They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

It's not an office either!

wrote in :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?


That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

On Sep 14, 11:45*am, Red Green wrote:
wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. *I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. *They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

HB

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:25:36 -0700 (PDT), Higgs Boson
wrote:

On Sep 14, 11:45*am, Red Green wrote:
wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. *I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. *They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Wrong! (as is usual for the HiggsBozo). The USPS is an independent branch of
the US government. It is *supposed* to be self-sustaining. Of course, so is
AMTRAK. Remember CONRAIL? All *very* good examples of why the government
should not be in health care, or any other area where the private sector can
be.

BTW, the USPTO is also self-sustaining.

Higgs Boson writes:

On Sep 14, 11:45Â*am, Red Green wrote:
wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. Â*I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. Â*They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Are you suggesting we use taxes to get the mail delivered?

Sounds socialist to me.

Not to mention some illegal alien might use the US Mail.



Seriously, nothing wrong with setting the postage rate at break even.

--
Dan Espen

" writes:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:25:36 -0700 (PDT), Higgs Boson
wrote:

On Sep 14, 11:45Â*am, Red Green wrote:
wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. Â*I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. Â*They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Wrong! (as is usual for the HiggsBozo). The USPS is an independent branch of
the US government. It is *supposed* to be self-sustaining. Of course, so is
AMTRAK. Remember CONRAIL? All *very* good examples of why the government
should not be in health care, or any other area where the private sector can
be.

He's not wrong. He asked a question.

The answer is that the US post office was made into a corporation-like
independent agency in 1971 (under Nixon) as a result of a postal strike.

The idea being that it would run more efficiently that way and require
less money.

Of course everyone likes to complain about postal rates and the post
office has to create "emergencies" so that Congress will grant them rate
increases.

Do they have to make a profit? No, it's worse. They have to do what
Congress tells them to do.

BTW, the USPTO is also self-sustaining.

The US Post Office has not received US tax dollars since the 1980s.

--
Dan Espen

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:22:38 -0400, wrote:

Higgs Boson writes:

On Sep 14, 11:45*am, Red Green wrote:
wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. *I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. *They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Are you suggesting we use taxes to get the mail delivered?

Sounds socialist to me.

Not to mention some illegal alien might use the US Mail.



Seriously, nothing wrong with setting the postage rate at break even.

Except that there is no "break even" for an organization as inefficient as the
USPS. The higher the rates, the lower the volume, until "poof". We're now
seeing the "poof" part.

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:40:19 -0400, wrote:

" writes:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:25:36 -0700 (PDT), Higgs Boson
wrote:

On Sep 14, 11:45*am, Red Green wrote:
wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. *I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. *They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Wrong! (as is usual for the HiggsBozo). The USPS is an independent branch of
the US government. It is *supposed* to be self-sustaining. Of course, so is
AMTRAK. Remember CONRAIL? All *very* good examples of why the government
should not be in health care, or any other area where the private sector can
be.

He's not wrong. He asked a question.

*SHE* most certainly did not. The sentence may have been followed by a
question mark, but it most certainly was a statement.

The answer is that the US post office was made into a corporation-like
independent agency in 1971 (under Nixon) as a result of a postal strike.

The idea being that it would run more efficiently that way and require
less money.

Of course everyone likes to complain about postal rates and the post
office has to create "emergencies" so that Congress will grant them rate
increases.

Do they have to make a profit? No, it's worse. They have to do what
Congress tells them to do.

BTW, the USPTO is also self-sustaining.

The US Post Office has not received US tax dollars since the 1980s.

Exactly where are the billion$ coming from?

I can't find where to buy usenet posts, either. I dunno.
customer service is not what it used to be.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


wrote in message
...
I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. I went
to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. They said they dont sell
posts.....
why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

In article , wrote:

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

your bad, they sell offices. if you wanted to buy posts go to google

" writes:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:22:38 -0400, wrote:

Higgs Boson writes:

On Sep 14, 11:45Â*am, Red Green wrote:
wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. Â*I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. Â*They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Are you suggesting we use taxes to get the mail delivered?

Sounds socialist to me.

Not to mention some illegal alien might use the US Mail.



Seriously, nothing wrong with setting the postage rate at break even.

Except that there is no "break even" for an organization as inefficient as the
USPS. The higher the rates, the lower the volume, until "poof". We're now
seeing the "poof" part.

You mean when we applied right wing ideology to the USPS it didn't
automatically become efficient?

Come on, tell me it isn't so.

The USPS hand delivers my mail for under .50 a letter.
I'm not complaining, but you are entitled if you think that's too much.

The USPS is in the constitution. It may take some doing to get rid of it.

--
Dan Espen

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:12:19 -0500, wrote:

Why do you keep nym-shifting? Is your real name Sybil?

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:07:26 -0400, wrote:

" writes:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:22:38 -0400, wrote:

Higgs Boson writes:

On Sep 14, 11:45*am, Red Green wrote:
wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. *I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. *They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Are you suggesting we use taxes to get the mail delivered?

Sounds socialist to me.

Not to mention some illegal alien might use the US Mail.



Seriously, nothing wrong with setting the postage rate at break even.

Except that there is no "break even" for an organization as inefficient as the
USPS. The higher the rates, the lower the volume, until "poof". We're now
seeing the "poof" part.

You mean when we applied right wing ideology to the USPS it didn't
automatically become efficient?

You're nuts if you think there is *anything* right about the USPS.

Come on, tell me it isn't so.

You're nuts, but you should have known that by now.

The USPS hand delivers my mail for under .50 a letter.
I'm not complaining, but you are entitled if you think that's too much.

Except they're not. They're subsidizing junk and losing $6B a year to unions.
If you think it's a well run organization, well, that's a great example of
what passes for lefty "thought".

The USPS is in the constitution. It may take some doing to get rid of it.

It can get a real trimming. Watch for it.

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:07:59 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

I can't find where to buy usenet posts, either. I dunno.
customer service is not what it used to be.

You have to buy yours?

In article , wrote:

You mean when we applied right wing ideology to the USPS it didn't
automatically become efficient?

What is right wing about all the restrictions placed on the post
office. The biggest single problem they are having now is
Congressionally imposed expenditures for retiree health care, playing
with work rules and Congress' meddling in not allowing them to close
unprofitable branches in their districts and states.
The USPS is a frankenstein's monster that isn't purely
governmental, yet not remotely free trade.




--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

Kurt Ullman writes:

In article , wrote:

You mean when we applied right wing ideology to the USPS it didn't
automatically become efficient?

What is right wing about all the restrictions placed on the post
office. The biggest single problem they are having now is
Congressionally imposed expenditures for retiree health care, playing
with work rules and Congress' meddling in not allowing them to close
unprofitable branches in their districts and states.

The right wing part is when they changed from a government agency to an
"independent" agency.

Being more like an American Corporation was going to cure the inefficiency.

The USPS is a frankenstein's monster that isn't purely
governmental, yet not remotely free trade.

Agreed.

But not with the Frankenstein monster part.

They don't cost taxpayers anything.
They hand deliver mail to your doorstep for less than .50 a letter.

--
Dan Espen

wrote

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Are you suggesting we use taxes to get the mail delivered?

Sounds socialist to me.

Not to mention some illegal alien might use the US Mail.



Seriously, nothing wrong with setting the postage rate at break even.

--
Dan Espen

I may walk across the street for 44¢, but the USPS will carry a letter
across the country for that amount. IMO, the PO is a pretty good deal. If
they have to raise the price of a stamp a few pennies, I'm in. Would not
bother me if they cut out Saturday delivery either.

On Sep 14, 1:25*pm, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Sep 14, 11:45*am, Red Green wrote:

wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. *I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. *They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? *Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

HB

Not to forget the most egregious example of government trying to run a
business; Mustang Ranch. they went broke tying to sell booze and
p****.

Harry K

On Sep 14, 7:51*pm, "
wrote:


Except they're not. *They're subsidizing junk and losing $6B a year to unions.
If you think it's a well run organization, well, that's a great example of
what passes for lefty "thought".

Case in point: Federal employees selecting BC-BS health insurance pay
$4800+ out of pocket premiums per year. Postal employees receive the
exact same policy for $120 a year thanks to the unions. Until the
USPS reigns in the union I'll oppose any increase in rates no matter
how small.

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:49:17 -0700 (PDT), Harry K
wrote:

On Sep 14, 1:25*pm, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Sep 14, 11:45*am, Red Green wrote:

wrote :

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. *I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. *They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? *Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

HB

Not to forget the most egregious example of government trying to run a
business; Mustang Ranch. they went broke tying to sell booze and
p****.

Perhaps none of their customers wanted to be "audited".

In article , wrote:

Kurt Ullman writes:

In a

The right wing part is when they changed from a government agency to an
"independent" agency.

By a radical right wing Democratic Congress in '71.

Being more like an American Corporation was going to cure the inefficiency.
And then they (the Dem Congress) managed to come up with something
that did not even begin to look like an American corp.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

Stormin Mormon wrote:

I can't find where to buy usenet posts, either. I dunno.
customer service is not what it used to be.



Nowadays, "service" is pretty much like what a farmer brings his cows to
a bull for...

Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10e12 furlongs per fortnight.

In article ,
Red wrote:
On Sep 14, 7:51*pm, "
wrote:


Except they're not. *They're subsidizing junk and losing $6B a year to unions.
If you think it's a well run organization, well, that's a great example of
what passes for lefty "thought".

Case in point: Federal employees selecting BC-BS health insurance pay
$4800+ out of pocket premiums per year. Postal employees receive the
exact same policy for $120 a year thanks to the unions. Until the
USPS reigns in the union I'll oppose any increase in rates no matter
how small.


Postal employees who select BC-BS standard family plan pay about $4000 a
year. It is possible that the BC-BS low opion may cost as little as $120
a MONTH for SINGLE employees. In general, unionized Postal employees
pay about 10% less for health plans compared to other federal workers. Not
sure where you got the $120/year figure, but it is cleary wrong.


--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

wrote in message ...
" writes:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:22:38 -0400, wrote:

Higgs Boson writes:

On Sep 14, 11:45 am, Red Green wrote:
wrote
:

I'm planning to build a fence and need fence posts. I went to the
POST OFFICE to buy the posts. They said they dont sell posts.....
What the ****..... why are they called the POST OFFICE if they dont
sell POSTS?

That's why they lost $3 billion in 3 months.

Who ever said the Post Office has to be profitable? Are other govt.
offices profitable? Hell, no; they suck up our tax $$ to pay for
sloppy, inefficient political appointees who **** all over the work of
dedicated Civil Service public servants.

Are you suggesting we use taxes to get the mail delivered?

Sounds socialist to me.

Not to mention some illegal alien might use the US Mail.



Seriously, nothing wrong with setting the postage rate at break even.

Except that there is no "break even" for an organization as inefficient
as the
USPS. The higher the rates, the lower the volume, until "poof". We're
now
seeing the "poof" part.

You mean when we applied right wing ideology to the USPS it didn't
automatically become efficient?

Come on, tell me it isn't so.

The USPS hand delivers my mail for under .50 a letter.
I'm not complaining, but you are entitled if you think that's too much.

The USPS is in the constitution. It may take some doing to get rid of it.

--
Dan Espen

I disagree. Many things in the Constitution have been eliminated or
ignored. We could start with states rights. Then there's the federal
government being involved in lots of things not granted to them by the
Constitution.

But don't get me started.

I can mail an envelope from my town to the next, about five miles away. It
has to go to Atlanta, first, 4,000 miles total. Or sometimes, just to
Provo, 700 miles total. Their efficiency experts are all crack heads.

Steve

"Larry W" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Red wrote:
On Sep 14, 7:51 pm, "
wrote:


Except they're not. They're subsidizing junk and losing $6B a year to
unions.
If you think it's a well run organization, well, that's a great example
of
what passes for lefty "thought".

Case in point: Federal employees selecting BC-BS health insurance pay
$4800+ out of pocket premiums per year. Postal employees receive the
exact same policy for $120 a year thanks to the unions. Until the
USPS reigns in the union I'll oppose any increase in rates no matter
how small.


Postal employees who select BC-BS standard family plan pay about $4000 a
year. It is possible that the BC-BS low opion may cost as little as $120
a MONTH for SINGLE employees. In general, unionized Postal employees
pay about 10% less for health plans compared to other federal workers. Not
sure where you got the $120/year figure, but it is cleary wrong.


--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

Right or wrong, who cares? It is just one part of a compensation package.
If you pay less for healthcare, you may get less in other benefits. Unless
you look at the entire package, you cannot say if it is a good or bad deal
for the employee.

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...
In article , wrote:

You mean when we applied right wing ideology to the USPS it didn't
automatically become efficient?

What is right wing about all the restrictions placed on the post
office. The biggest single problem they are having now is
Congressionally imposed expenditures for retiree health care, playing
with work rules and Congress' meddling in not allowing them to close
unprofitable branches in their districts and states.
The USPS is a frankenstein's monster that isn't purely
governmental, yet not remotely free trade.

That's the sad part about it being in the Constitution. The founding
fathers believed that communication between the new nation's citizens was
extremely important. Privatizing the mail will cause us to end up
short-changing rural residents much the same way they can't get fast
broadband service. It's just not profitable to hook all the outliers into
the system. But the US Mail does it, and does a pretty good job of it.

Consider this: Neither UPS nor Fedex will ship something for much under $5.
Would you want to pay $5 per piece to mail a letter? I don't. I am happy
to pay taxes that keeps all the country's citizens connected to each other
and keeps the cost of sending a letter affordable.

Something has to change to keep the service afloat and we'll soon see if
people think that Saturday deliver and convenient nearby post offices are
something worth paying for. I know I do.

--
Bobby G.

*DICKEY, DOUGLAS E. Rank and organization: Private First Class, U.S. Marine
Corps, Company C, 1st Battalion, 4th Marines, 9th Marine Amphibious Brigade,
3d Marine Division (Rein). Place and dale: Republic of Vietnam, 26 March
1967. Born: 24 December 1946, Greenville, Darke, Ohio. Citation: Suddenly
an enemy grenade landed in the midst of a group of marines. Pfc. Dickey, in
a final valiant act, quickly and unhesitatingly threw himself upon the
deadly grenade.