They sure are doing a good job deliving the mail.

[Caveman_Nick]

The USPS hasn't been directly funded by tax dollars since 1980. What sucks is they have a legal monopoly, but due to utter incompetency and unions we (or at least those of us that pay taxes) are probably going to get to bail it out. My biggest problem with all of this is that the government is supplanting the free market. Call me crazy but I think it should cost me more to mail a letter to Hawaii than it does to mail a letter 30 miles away.

 

FWIW I'm still contemplating the trade offer.

 

Isn't this really a situation where you are going against your own principals? You are one that talks regularly about the constitution and the founders, but in this case what they laid out in the constitution isn't good enough? How can you hold other people and ideals to that standard when you are unwilling to accept it here?

 

This has nothing to do with private business. Congress is empowered to create and fund a post office in the constitution. Shouldn't that be enough here?

Edited April 14, 2010 by Caveman_Nick

[keggerz]

Isn't this really a situation where you are going against your own principals? You are one that talks regularly about the constitution and the founders, but in this case what they laid out in the constitution isn't good enough? How can you hold other people and ideals to that standard when you are unwilling to accept it here?

 

This has nothing to do with private business. Congress is empowered to create and fund a post office in the constitution. Shouldn't that be enough here?

good think you aren't the one trying to trade with perch for Jamaal Charles

[i_am_the_swammi]

Isn't this really a situation where you are going against your own principals? You are one that talks regularly about the constitution and the founders, but in this case what they laid out in the constitution isn't good enough? How can you hold other people and ideals to that standard when you are unwilling to accept it here?

 

This has nothing to do with private business. Congress is empowered to create and fund a post office in the constitution. Shouldn't that be enough here?

 

The constitution to Perch is like the Bible to Catholics....only the parts they want to observe are considered sacred.

[Perchoutofwater]

Isn't this really a situation where you are going against your own principals? You are one that talks regularly about the constitution and the founders, but in this case what they laid out in the constitution isn't good enough? How can you hold other people and ideals to that standard when you are unwilling to accept it here?

 

This has nothing to do with private business. Congress is empowered to create and fund a post office in the constitution. Shouldn't that be enough here?

 

I have no problem changing the Constitution where it needs to be changed, via the proper procedure of doing it.

[TimC]

The constitution to Perch is like the Bible to Catholics....only the parts they want to observe are considered sacred.

 

[Perchoutofwater]

The constitution to Perch is like the Bible to Catholics....only the parts they want to observe are considered sacred.

 

Not true at all. My problem is when it is changed in an improper way. You've never heard me complain about and amendment, just when congress and the president (who ever that may be at the time) over step their authority and the court turns a blind eye to it. Just like the SCOTUS decision a few months ago that Obama inappropriately called them out on during the State of the Union, I thought the SCOTUS made the correct decision based on the Constitution and the current amendments. I also stated I wouldn't mind seeing this changed via amendment.

Edited April 14, 2010 by Perchoutofwater

[Ursa Majoris]

Not true at all. My problem is when it is changed in an improper way. You've never heard me complain about and amendment, just when congress and the president (who ever that may be at the time) over step their authority and the court turns a blind eye to it. Just like the SCOTUS decision a few months ago that Obama inappropriately called them out on during the State of the Union, I thought the SCOTUS made the correct decision based on the Constitution and the current amendments. I also stated I wouldn't mind seeing this changed via amendment.

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on Kelo vs New London? If not, why not?

[SEC=UGA]

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on Kelo vs New London? If not, why not?

 

 

NOOOOOOO!!!!!

[WaterMan]

How's Obama stopping the mail this week? Does he have La Raza and Acorn sniping mail routes?

[Perchoutofwater]

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on Kelo vs New London? If not, why not?

 

Based on what I remember of it, no I don't agree with it. I think the definition of "public use" was bastardized. There have been several SCOTUS decisions I disagree with. If enough people disagree with them there are ways to remedy it through legislation. What is your point?

[westvirginia]

Based on what I remember of it, no I don't agree with it. I think the definition of "public use" was bastardized. There have been several SCOTUS decisions I disagree with. If enough people disagree with them there are ways to remedy it through legislation. What is your point?

 

His point was that, since the all powerful SCOTUS gave themselves power of sole arbiter of the law in Marbury, you should bow down to them. Never minding that they are people who aren't always right, he was trying to paint you as inconsistent or hypocritical or some such...

[Ursa Majoris]

His point was that, since the all powerful SCOTUS gave themselves power of sole arbiter of the law in Marbury, you should bow down to them. Never minding that they are people who aren't always right, he was trying to paint you as inconsistent or hypocritical or some such...

Pretty much. I personally believe the SCOTUS is the most worthless of the three branches regardless of their decisions, though I don't expect many to subscribe to that. Kelo was a joke (and that was the liberal half) as is the recent "if-you've-got-lots-of-money-feel-free-to-buy-an-election" vote.

[SEC=UGA]

Pretty much. I personally believe the SCOTUS is the most worthless of the three branches regardless of their decisions, though I don't expect many to subscribe to that. Kelo was a joke (and that was the liberal half) as is the recent "if-you've-got-lots-of-money-feel-free-to-buy-an-election" vote.

It is kind of interesting you bring up Kelo... There is a much smaller version of this going on in Marietta and it involves the state rather than a private developer, so really it is nothing like Kelo, but there was an interesting comment...

 

In Cobb County they are palnning on running a biking/walking trail from the Kennesaw Mtn. National Battle field to the Chattahoochee river. One part of this trail is slated to go through a portion of the historic district where I live. For a portion of the path there are two options. One option is to run the trail between the backyards of a few homes and an apartment complex that was once the Brumby rocking chair factory, the city already holds title to the land that runs through there so no private propety would be disturbed. The second option is to close off a small street, Brumby street, a street on which people live, the residents would still have access to their homes because of the way the road system is layed out. In closing down Brumby street they would also have to confiscate about 12 foot wide strip of the front yards of 2 homes. Well, the county is leaning toward shutting down Brumby street because there are historic trees, defined as a tree over 50 years old, on the piece of land owned by the city... So at the council meeting one of the homeowners was pissed and asked the commissioners this:

 

"So, you are inclined to take a 12 foot wide strip of my property and my neighbors property so not to disturb some historic trees. You really mean to tell me that vegetation has more proerty rights than I do?"

[westvirginia]

Pretty much. I personally believe the SCOTUS is the most worthless of the three branches regardless of their decisions, though I don't expect many to subscribe to that. Kelo was a joke (and that was the liberal half) as is the recent "if-you've-got-lots-of-money-feel-free-to-buy-an-election" vote.

 

You know, you will ask a question like "If we torture them, what does that make us." Then you excoriate the SCOTUS for making a decision that IS factually, demonstrably in line with the document that is supposed to define and control our government. So I ask you - "If we don't follow our own laws, what does that make us?" If you just go along with the whim of the people, ignoring the rule of law, then you see what happens. Like PJ O'Rourke said: "When buying and selling are controlled by legislatures the first thing to be bought and sold are legislators." If SCOTUS actually stood more firmly for that document and what it actually says, special interests wouldn't be a problem (or not nearly the problem they are) because fedgov CLEARLY isn't allowed to do 90%+ of what it does on a daily basis. Like boy princess wallace says about immigration (and he's making a damn fine point of it) - take care of the founding issue, the one from which it all originates, and you won't have to worry about how to fix most of the other chit.

[Perchoutofwater]

His point was that, since the all powerful SCOTUS gave themselves power of sole arbiter of the law in Marbury, you should bow down to them. Never minding that they are people who aren't always right, he was trying to paint you as inconsistent or hypocritical or some such...

 

Like you I think the SCOTUS is fallible, as they are just men. I also think that the Constitution was/is flawed, but that the founders were smart enough to give us a way in which to change it. My problem is when it is ignored, or changed in an improper manner, whether I agree with the decision or not. The recent SCOTUS case involving freedom of speech and corporations / unions is a perfect example. I agreed with the decision based on the constitution and amendments, but would like to see an amendment that changes it. I don't see that as being hypocritical. On the Kelo case I think the court just bastardized the language to give government more power, you will note it was the statist/progressives that were the majority on that case.

[westvirginia]

It is kind of interesting you bring up Kelo... There is a much smaller version of this going on in Marietta and it involves the state rather than a private developer, so really it is nothing like Kelo, but there was an interesting comment...

 

In Cobb County they are palnning on running a biking/walking trail from the Kennesaw Mtn. National Battle field to the Chattahoochee river. One part of this trail is slated to go through a portion of the historic district where I live. For a portion of the path there are two options. One option is to run the trail between the backyards of a few homes and an apartment complex that was once the Brumby rocking chair factory, the city already holds title to the land that runs through there so no private propety would be disturbed. The second option is to close off a small street, Brumby street, a street on which people live, the residents would still have access to their homes because of the way the road system is layed out. In closing down Brumby street they would also have to confiscate about 12 foot wide strip of the front yards of 2 homes. Well, the county is leaning toward shutting down Brumby street because there are historic trees, defined as a tree over 50 years old, on the piece of land owned by the city... So at the council meeting one of the homeowners was pissed and asked the commissioners this:

 

"So, you are inclined to take a 12 foot wide strip of my property and my neighbors property so not to disturb some historic trees. You really mean to tell me that vegetation has more proerty rights than I do?"

 

Keep me informed on this. If this guy sues I want to contribute both my time and money. What did the lying, thieving gov't goons only worthy of our contempt say in response?

Edited April 14, 2010 by westvirginia

[SEC=UGA]

Keep me informed on this. If this guy sues I want to contribute both my time and money. What did the lying, thieving gov't goons only worthy of our contempt say in response?

 

They explained how it was a bit more complicated than what the homeowners were conveying due to plans they had submitted to get some federal funds, etc...

 

The whole situation is a bit more complex, for brevity sake I didn't feel it was necessary to take the time to post the full thing. Just thought that the home owner's comment was freaking priceless.

 

http://mdjonline.com/view/full_story/69875...me_news_bullets

 

http://mdjonline.com/view/full_story/70266...me_news_bullets

 

And for full disclosure, here is the man's actual quote:

"Here we have a 50-year tree that has property rights and I don't," he said. "You're going to take my property for this trail, you're going to take my neighbor's property for this trail, but that tree has a say so. I want to know how come vegetation has more rights than my family does when it comes to property rights."

Edited April 14, 2010 by SEC=UGA

[redrumjuice]

Start with the fact the Postal Service is a great jobs machine, employing 712,000 people at an average annual compensation, including wages and benefits, of $83,000. And those hefty pay checks are a great source of political contributions for Democrats. In 2010, almost 90 percent of the approximately $4 million contributed to campaigns by postal unions went to Democrats. Take a guess where much of the opposition to reform comes from.

 

[redrumjuice]

So efficient!

 

A former Denver-area postal worker who stole more than 11,000 packages and sold the items for more than $85,000 has been sentenced to 2.5 years in federal prison.

 

Authorities say Schmauder stole packages over two years at a Highlands Ranch post office. The items included DVDs, CDs and lingerie from Victoria's Secret.

 

The Postal Service estimates the losses at $283,913, but say there's no way to know how much was stolen.

 

http://cbs4denver.com/news/Schmauder.Color....2.2029341.html Bring on health care big gov't!!!!

[Clubfoothead]

:oldrolleyes:

 

At least private industry is free from employing people who steal:

 

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/52429

http://consumerist.com/2009/09/ups-employe...sunglasses.html

http://www.postalnewsblog.com/2010/08/20/u...-to-mail-theft/

http://www.ohio.com/news/103722039.html

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.asp..._0_OLHMIY986453

http://www.co.dupage.il.us/dpccfoundation/...cfm?doc_id=3203

http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-fedex-emplo...0,6435312.story

http://privateofficernews.wordpress.com/20...ateofficer-com/

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=...&id=6973569

 

I can keep going that's just the first page of google search results.

 

That's the same thing the free market is doing to you each time you go to the doctor. Stealing from you.

[redrumjuice]

Uhhh, smokey little difference here.

 

A source at the company revealed to Ars Technica that copies of the highly anticipated open world shooter were lifted by three employees, who were later fired in the same 24-hour period. The tipster noted that such theft is not typical.

 

I only wasted enough time to check a couple links, but it appears they were caught almost immediately and punished harshly.

 

The USPS guy stole over 11,000 packages and when people complained to the post office they were laughed at.

 

Listen, I know the only dealings you have with the PO is waiting outside in the rain waiting for your check to arrive, but real people in the real world know the post office is a horribly mismanaged money hemorrhaging waste of tax dollars that oh, just happens to have a horrible rate of employee theft and package abuse.

 

But hey, I am proud you know how to use google, you must have had a minor moment of lucidity out of your THC induced haze to make a stupid, but at least an attempt at a rebuttal.

[Duchess Jack]

But hey, I am proud you know how to use google, you must have had a minor moment of lucidity out of your THC induced haze to make a stupid, but at least an attempt at a rebuttal.

for a cat who keeps Busch Beer in the black, you're sure quick to pass judgements on folk.

[Big John]

for a cat who keeps Busch Beer in the black, you're sure quick to pass judgements on folk.

CD likes Busch Light, Redrum is a Budweiser guy.

[redrumjuice]

for a cat who keeps Busch Beer in the black, you're sure quick to pass judgements on folk.

 

 

For him, his illicit drug use is worn like a badge of honor, it is the only thing he can still do to make himself feel relevant. But watch, he'll strut in here with feigned indigence and puff up like a big goofy gobbler and get red and cackle before the hatchet comes down and makes dinner out of him.

 

On the other hand, everyone knows beer makes you smarter and other people better looking.

[i_am_the_swammi]

List of 3,600+ post offices to be studied for closure to be released shortly....nothing surprising, and likely needed if the current daily-delivery model is to survive:

 

Postal Service aims to shut down 3,600 offices

By Laurie Segall, staff reporter @CNNMoney July 25, 2011: 7:26 PM ET

 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The U.S. Postal Service on Tuesday will release a list of 3,653 post offices that could be shut down.

 

These locations will be studied for possible closure, according to U.S. Postal Service spokeswoman Sue Brennan. Most of the post offices that are on the chopping block have "lower foot traffic and revenue," she said, and the majority of them are in smaller communities.

 

In its release, the Postal Service will also outline what it calls a replacement strategy that will have local post offices partner with third party businesses in those smaller communities to create alternative options.

 

Such arrangements will likely be put in place place in "communities that have existing businesses, mom and pop shops -- some type of local business that could also provide postal services," Brennan told CNNMoney.

 

The announcement comes as no surprise. In an ongoing effort to battle fiscal concerns, the money-losing U.S. Postal Service announced plans in January to shut down thousands of stations and branches.

 

In fiscal year 2010, the Postal Service suffered a $8.5 billion net loss, compared to a loss of $3.8 billion the prior year. Last quarter, the U.S. Postal Service posted a loss of $2.2 billion. Its fiscal year ends in September. To top of page