Ron 10 #51 December 24, 2009 QuoteRight, since that is a designation given by USPS upon receipt of the letter and postage. It is not about the name... It is about the type of service. REALLY, read up on it and quit taking stabs in the dark hoping something sticks. I have worked in this industry for 18+ years. You have no idea what you are talking about. REALLY, READ THE DAMN RULES and THEN get back to us. Cause until you do, and it is CLEAR you have not.... I am just wasting my time with you."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #52 December 24, 2009 QuoteQuoteRight, since that is a designation given by USPS upon receipt of the letter and postage. It is not about the name... It is about the type of service. Clearly, you have ignored the point made (or simply are unable to understand it).Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #53 December 24, 2009 QuoteSince it's pretty obvious you're not going to read the linked info: Quote In 1979 the Postal Service authorized the delivery of extremely urgent letters outside the USPS; this has given rise to delivery services such as Federal Express and UPS. These letters must either cost at least the greater of $3 or twice what First Class (or Priority) mail service would cost, or they must be delivered within strict time limits or otherwise lose value. They must be marked "EXTREMELY URGENT". Records of pick up and delivery must be maintained for Postal Service inspection if the time sensitive exception is being used. Interestingly enough, a quick price check on UPS.com reveals that the regulations are easily bypassed and lower prices can be obtained.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #54 December 25, 2009 Quote Are we really surprised that the government can manage to do it cheaper than UPS? Just because it's cheaper to you doesn't mean it's actually cheap. A $7B deficit has to be paid somehow... Are we really surprised the government runs a massive deficit and people see it as "cheap." QuoteI suspect That's all you've done in this thread. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #55 December 25, 2009 QuoteJust because it's cheaper to you doesn't mean it's actually cheap. A $7B deficit has to be paid somehow. That point has already been addressed.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #56 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteJust because it's cheaper to you doesn't mean it's actually cheap. A $7B deficit has to be paid somehow. That point has already been addressed. It was not addressed. It was an attempt to justify the deficit. Justifying it does not make it go away and it certainly doesn't mean cheaper for you is actually cheaper overall. The deficit still exists whether you think sweeping it under the rug is right or not. The government could further subsidize the cost of mailing a letter down to zero. Do you think that means sending a letter would be free? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #57 December 26, 2009 QuoteIt was not addressed. If you really believe that, then there is no point in discussing the issue further with you. Just because you disagree with the logical conclusions does not mean an issue has not been addressed.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
loumeinhart 0 #58 December 26, 2009 Quote In Reply To Ha ha. Try it and see. What will the privately owned company do to me if I don't pay? I like how Kallend answered my question. I guess I'll just ask it again. Dear Kallend, If I dispute a $50 charge from a privately owned company, what can they do to me? (ps.. I know they can take me to small claims court) I await your answer soon Kallend! Love, Lou Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #59 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuote insanely overregulated Regulation in the airline industry has actually gone down in the last decades. That's the understatement of the century. Carter started it in the late 70's and the industry has taken a shit ever since - from a guy in the biz. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #60 December 26, 2009 QuoteAir carriers aren't exactly privately or publicly owned businesses anymore. They're private. Quantas is public for the Aussies. QuoteBetween the bailout money most are getting and being insanely overregulated, they don't really have alot of say as well as not much competition to provide better customer service. Regulations have fallen off in the airline indust. Remember the summer just before 911? 2 major airlines had their mechs wanting to strike, your president (GWB) told them if they struck, their union contracts would be voided - they didn't strike, but appealed to higher courts and the judge stuck with the fascist guy you voted for. He said the pres had no authority, but WTF, it's just peasants whining. Now after 911, the airlines are in trouble, your guy hoisted millions in gift boxes to airlines with NO REQUIREMENT TO CONTINUE TO EMPLOY ANYONE. I'm sorry you feeel the need to further defend the airlines when the gov does nothing but lick their asses, poor corporate airlines. QuotePeople just need to stand up for themselves and then companies can't walk over you. - Personal responsibility - Never got a job from a poor guy - Pull yourself up by your bootstraps - Heard enough of your style of cliche to choke a horse............. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #61 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuote>Pick your cherries and build your strawmen. I have this image of you at a party. "A guy walks into a bar and . . ." "What kind of bar? I used to own a bar, Mr. Know-It-All. Is this one of those stupid anti-bartender comments? I'm waiting to see how this applies to anything anyone here was saying. Can you say 'strawman?' " Ahahaha, that pretty much sums up EVERYTHING in the SC. Thanks for the laugh Bill! You have 2 main types of posters: 1) The type above 2) The type who often post data or other reference when available I guess the 3rd type would be the ones who have nothing substantive to contribute and then defer to spell-check queen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #62 December 26, 2009 QuoteWhen someone in the United baggage handling stream stole stuff from my gate-checked bag on the way back from the wingsuit big-way in November, the airline more or less told me to fuck off. Are these the kind of people we want running our health care? These ARE the people we have running our HC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rainmaker_(1997_film) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #63 December 26, 2009 Quote Quote Funny that. I had to pay for my own mailbox on my property. Despite that, it remains property of the USPS while in service as a mailbox. Right, and we cannot drop regular mail in those FED EX drop boxes either, so the other side is arguing such an invalid and moot point that it exposes their desperation for any counterargument. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #64 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteWhen someone in the United baggage handling stream stole stuff from my gate-checked bag on the way back from the wingsuit big-way in November, the airline more or less told me to fuck off. I hope you didn't stand for that and made them compensate you. I'm sure not, just like HMO's, you have to threaten to sue or actually file suit to get them to act right sometimes, that is such a yummy system you guys support. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #65 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteWould you be okay with someone using your house without your permission? Post office boxes and mailboxes are property of USPS. Why should UPS or FedEx be allowed to use them? Did you buy your mailbox, or did the PO buy and install it for you? Do you pay rent on the PO box, or does the Govt give it to you for free? You are (intentionally) missing the point. The PO has a monopoly by LAW that gives them certain advantages. And that these advantages are being left out of the USPS/FedEx Vs. private/public HC comparison. OK, we'll go with you whether you're right or not. The gov, thru the USPS, has this monopoly that provides ultra-low cost shipping in mass quantity that is generally very reliable and expeditious. This system doesn't care what classs, color or any other division you might be a part of, they provide teh axact same service for everyone. To do this, they need certain cooperations like post office boxes, private mail boxes, etc. They need to have exclusive rights to certain facilities. If a person wants to go to the private sector to get better / different services, they may do so, but they cannot utilize the system that provides a basic service; get it? Not a hard grasp, just replace HC with post office and that's the point. It's a no-frills service that provides for everyone unless they want to go outside of that to teh private sector. If you want FED EX to deliver to a box, errect a private mailbox marked: FED EX ONLY and you'll be fine. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #66 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou are (intentionally) missing the point. No, I'm just pointing out why your example was a bogus one, since "your" mailbox is property of the USPS, not the owner of the property where it is used. Really? If it's USPS property, why did *I* have to buy, install and maintain it? Why can *I* change it out whenever I like, or not have one at all? You can, you can get a MAIL PLUS MORE type private service and the USPS would be more than happy to deliver all mail there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #67 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteNo, I'm just pointing out why your example was a bogus one, since "your" mailbox is property of the USPS Then why did *I* have to buy it? You just can't admit your analogy is faulty, and thats just funny. You can't admit that THERE ARE LAWS that give the USPS a monopoly and how that does not allow the USPS as a good comparison to HC. Just like with HC if it were gov-run, there could be minimal costs that are assigned to the individual, the mailbox requirement is also one that is a basic cost assigned to the user. FAIL. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #68 December 26, 2009 QuoteAbout the Private Toll road, if it's privately owned you should have no trouble telling them where to stick that $50 ticket. Funny, I don't even need examples. I just listen to anyone in this administration speak for more than 2 minutes and I'll be damned if I think they know how to do anything. I know, at least the previous R admins knew how to take descent economies and find a way to ruin them while running up the debt and making millionaires into billionaires. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #69 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteAbout the Private Toll road, if it's privately owned you should have no trouble telling them where to stick that $50 ticket. . Ha ha. Try it and see. Kind of like our photoradar tickets assessed by Redflex or ATS, if you ignore the gov sends a process server out. Any fascist government has a tight relationship between gov and corporation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #70 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou can't admit that THERE ARE LAWS that give the USPS a monopoly … Perhaps you've not heard of UPS and FedEx? They send letters and packages from one address to another, just as USPS does. Perhaps you've never heard of the private express statutes . Just like all roads are for military use, we are just allowed to drive on them. Look at public / eminent domain laws, they give the gov the power to take your house, part of your yard or all for that matter or whatever they wish for the good of the rest of us. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain So your citation of PES is just another example of eminent domain, so you've done nothing but brought in more support for what is already known and enforced in every aspect of the US. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #71 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuotePerhaps you've not heard of UPS and FedEx? Worked for FedEx for 18+ years. So, yes.... I have heard of them. QuoteThey send letters and packages from one address to another, just as USPS does. Better check again. By LAW they are not allowed to send letters like the USPS. Reference: The private express statutes. QuoteThe reality is that consumers have a choice regarding which carrier they use. Nope, BY LAW FedEx and UPS are not allowed to offer the same types of services.... Tell ya what, actually read the private express statutes and get back with us. Here is just a quick synopsis for you: QuoteAs a quasi-governmental agency, it has many special privileges, including sovereign immunity, eminent domain powers, powers to negotiate postal treaties with foreign nations, and an exclusive legal right to deliver first-class and third-class mail. So BY LAW FedEx and UPS are not allowed to deliver 1st and 3rd class mail. Seriously, read up on it and get back to us. We can compare the city bus to Greyhound and have the same example. Gov utilities are highly regulated but offer cheap svs. Private services are more freely regulated, offer more svs but cost considerably more. The same goes with HC, of course the party with the Swastika will never let us see how the gov would provide HC under the same design. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #72 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteConsidering they do send letters, they seem to have sidestepped any legal restrictions quite effectively, doesn't it. Nope....BY LAW FedEx and UPS are not allowed to deliver 1st and 3rd class mail. Seriously, read up on it and get back to us....Cause you are not even close. Right, they have a different name for it, they call it overnight, same day, etc. Here is a chart for their terminology: http://www.fedex.com/ratetools/RateToolsMain.do?link=2 The drop-down will reveal 20 or so diff shipping rates, so your semantic argument of 1st class vs 2-day or whatever you want to fill in is irrelevant. Why is it that connies always seem to get hung up on semantics? (rhetorical ?) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #73 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteBy LAW they are not allowed to send letters like the USPS. Considering they do send letters *I* certainly can't take an addressed, stamped envelope to FedEx or UPS and have them deliver it. I have to use their packaging and pay fees over/above USPS postage. Prove your claim. You're taking an argument of sending letter to that of cost. That is, by defintion, a strawman. BTW, yes, and the USPS packaging is a stamp and an addy. UPS / FED EX has their own packaging, so does that mean shit about what? Let's take this back to the original argument. You would then complain that a gov HC program had their own forms as I see it. Again, such semantics as your primary argument. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #74 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteBy LAW they are not allowed to send letters like the USPS. Considering they do send letters, they seem to have sidestepped any legal restrictions quite effectively, doesn't it. The cheapest rate for delivering a letter on UPS is $16.38. Not exactly the same thing, is it? Calling it a package, you can get down to 9.44. They can't deliver a 1 oz package without charging you as if it were a pound. Note also that they charge more to deliver to residential addresses, because they don't have mailboxes there. That's an intra-UPS policy, not a law. So what you've illustrated is that the gov option allows for more flexibility saving the user money over the private option. For once we agree. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #75 December 26, 2009 QuoteQuote Are we really surprised that the government can manage to do it cheaper than UPS? Just because it's cheaper to you doesn't mean it's actually cheap. A $7B deficit has to be paid somehow... Are we really surprised the government runs a massive deficit and people see it as "cheap." QuoteI suspect That's all you've done in this thread. And we know what you add: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)