(December 5, 2011 at 5:18 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: Yeah..we should get rid of the postal service and replace it with a private organization that will eventually create a monopoly and charge us outrageous prices to move postage..because if it isnt run by a private company, then it isnt run right. Period.

Haven't tried email?

If there are multiple competing private parcel delivery services, why would the private postage delivery service be a monopoly?

I think written letters and other informational postage is already largely superceded by e-mail and on-line services, and will eventually be 99% superceded by those. There would simply not be the volume of traffic available to support any postage service at present rate and service level. Eventually, what is left of the postal service will literally just be an insured parcel service. Only those things which absolutely requires the delivery of a physical article will need to be sent by non-electronic means, and then what is left of the postal service had better offer something more competitive than Fedex or UPS if it were to have any traffic at all.

(December 5, 2011 at 5:41 pm)Chuck Wrote:

(December 5, 2011 at 5:18 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: Yeah..we should get rid of the postal service and replace it with a private organization that will eventually create a monopoly and charge us outrageous prices to move postage..because if it isnt run by a private company, then it isnt run right. Period.

Haven't tried email?

If there are multiple competing private parcel delivery services, why would the private postage delivery service be a monopoly?

I think written letters and other informational postage is already largely superceded by e-mail and on-line services, and will eventually be 99% superceded by those. There would simply not be the volume of traffic available to support any postage service at present rate and service level. Eventually, what is left of the postal service will literally just be an insured parcel service. Only those things which absolutely requires the delivery of a physical article will need to be sent by non-electronic means, and then what is left of the postal service had better offer something more competitive than Fedex or UPS if it were to have any traffic at all.

I can have my new microphone sets emailed?

Who said there would be multiple companies competing? Is that somehow mandatory?

Care to give me a guarentee on your life that it would be multiple competing companies, instead of 2 companies who dont really compete against each other, but both raise their prices pretty much equally? Make me a guarentee that several companies will be competing and the benefits be passed down to my family.

Quite frankly I have NEVER believed nor fallen for that "competing companies are good for consumers" bullshit line. There are so many things wrong in that line of thinking....sure...fast food chains compete. Do gas stations compete? Nope. A hand full of pennies difference isnt shit to me. Do convenience stores compete? Nope, their prices are the same as the others. How about grocery stores, do they compete? Nope, all of their prices are pretty much the same as the others.

Care to explain?

(December 5, 2011 at 8:41 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote:

(December 5, 2011 at 5:41 pm)Chuck Wrote:

(December 5, 2011 at 5:18 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: Yeah..we should get rid of the postal service and replace it with a private organization that will eventually create a monopoly and charge us outrageous prices to move postage..because if it isnt run by a private company, then it isnt run right. Period.

Haven't tried email?

If there are multiple competing private parcel delivery services, why would the private postage delivery service be a monopoly?

I think written letters and other informational postage is already largely superceded by e-mail and on-line services, and will eventually be 99% superceded by those. There would simply not be the volume of traffic available to support any postage service at present rate and service level. Eventually, what is left of the postal service will literally just be an insured parcel service. Only those things which absolutely requires the delivery of a physical article will need to be sent by non-electronic means, and then what is left of the postal service had better offer something more competitive than Fedex or UPS if it were to have any traffic at all.

I can have my new microphone sets emailed?

No, but you can have it UPSed.

(December 5, 2011 at 8:43 pm)Chuck Wrote:

(December 5, 2011 at 8:41 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote:

(December 5, 2011 at 5:41 pm)Chuck Wrote:

(December 5, 2011 at 5:18 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: Yeah..we should get rid of the postal service and replace it with a private organization that will eventually create a monopoly and charge us outrageous prices to move postage..because if it isnt run by a private company, then it isnt run right. Period.

Haven't tried email?

If there are multiple competing private parcel delivery services, why would the private postage delivery service be a monopoly?

I think written letters and other informational postage is already largely superceded by e-mail and on-line services, and will eventually be 99% superceded by those. There would simply not be the volume of traffic available to support any postage service at present rate and service level. Eventually, what is left of the postal service will literally just be an insured parcel service. Only those things which absolutely requires the delivery of a physical article will need to be sent by non-electronic means, and then what is left of the postal service had better offer something more competitive than Fedex or UPS if it were to have any traffic at all.

I can have my new microphone sets emailed?

No, but you can have it UPSed.

What if I would rather have my Federal postal service do it for me instead?

Is there anyone else other than fed ex or UPS? I dont care much for them.

Quote:Why would it be a good thing to pay the same number of people to deliver fewer and fewer letters, promising additional cost to get those letters there the next day when an email will cost nothing to get there instantaneously?

I've been thinking the same thing. A book of ten stamps lasts me about a year instead of a week as was once the case. I use email daily and pay most of my bills on line or by direct debit. I tend to use private couriers for parcels because their prices are competitive and they are easily as fast as Australia post.

I can see the public postal service here disappearing entirely by the middle of this century. Its remaining functions will be taken over by the internet or private companies. This is not what I want to happen but I think it's probably inevitable.


Probably quicker in the US:the avaricious and amoral pricks who actually run the country will continue to fuck the ordinary people up the arse. Heaven forbid big business and the rich be taxed at an equitable level or actually pay their workers a decent wage.

Keynes said; for an affluent society to develop ,you need three things: full employment,(which he defined as 97%) high wages and high taxes at all levels.Those things are true of Australia,as well as strict controls over the financial sector.None of those things are true of the US. (OK our national unemployment level is currently 5.2% **)


**source;Australian Bureau Of Census and Statistics figures for October 2011.

(December 5, 2011 at 9:17 pm)padraic Wrote:

Quote:Why would it be a good thing to pay the same number of people to deliver fewer and fewer letters, promising additional cost to get those letters there the next day when an email will cost nothing to get there instantaneously?

I've been thinking the same thing. A book of ten stamps lasts me about a year instead of a week as was once the case. I use email daily and pay most of my bills on line or by direct debit. I tend to use private couriers for parcels because their prices are competitive and they are easily as fast as Australia post.

I can see the public postal service here disappearing entirely by the middle of this century. Its remaining functions will be taken over by the internet or private companies. This is not what I want to happen but I think it's probably inevitable.


Probably quicker in the US:the avaricious and amoral pricks who actually run the country will continue to fuck the ordinary people up the arse. Heaven forbid big business and the rich be taxed at an equitable level or actually pay their workers a decent wage.

Keynes said; for an affluent society to develop ,you need three things: full employment,(which he defined as 97%) high wages and high taxes at all levels.Those things are true of Australia,as well as strict controls over the financial sector.None of those things are true of the US. (OK our national unemployment level is currently 5.2% **)


**source;Australian Bureau Of Census and Statistics figures for October 2011.

Thats just it, we are using the keynesian system of stimulus, but we are not holding the rich to their end of the bargain. We are supposed to be in on it together, which is how keynesian system is supposed to work, but the rich refuse to do their share. They want us to do our share, but they refuse to employ or pay their share of the taxes.

Quote:Shall have the power to establish, not shall establish.

They ARE established. You have 220+ years of precedent to deal with.

Only tea bagging morons ( and their libertarian paymasters) pretend that the last two centuries have not happened!

"shall have the power to establish" would seem to suggest having the power to also unestablish. "shall establish" on the other hand, might suggest bring it into being and keep it in being.

Besides, I am not one to hang on the phraseology of the constitution as if those men back then were somehow better than these men now.

---

(December 5, 2011 at 8:54 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: What if I would rather have my Federal postal service do it for me instead?

Same thing will happen as if you wanted your pony express to do it for you.

(December 5, 2011 at 8:54 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: Is there anyone else other than fed ex or UPS? I dont care much for them.

We can't all have options we care for. I have to breath air molecules that i don't care for because they passed through republican lungs.

(December 5, 2011 at 9:17 pm)padraic Wrote: Keynes said; for an affluent society to develop ,you need three things: full employment,(which he defined as 97%) high wages and high taxes at all levels.Those things are true of Australia,as well as strict controls over the financial sector.None of those things are true of the US. (OK our national unemployment level is currently 5.2% **)


**source;Australian Bureau Of Census and Statistics figures for October 2011.

Well Australia's level of taxation was estimated by the The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal to be 30.8% of GDP in 2011. That figure is among the lowest among developed nations (Only Ireland and the United States were lower than Australia). Government spending was estimated to be 34.3% of GDP, which is actually lower than the USA which government spending was estimated to be 38.9% of GDP.

Taxes appear to be high in Australia, because unlike other western countries we don't have social security taxes. If you factor in social security contributions, taxes paid by a household on an average income are more at the level of the US and Canada than the European nations are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in...ome_tax.29

Quote:Well Australia's level of taxation was estimated by the The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal to be 30.8% of GDP in 2011

Really? I didn't know that. I'm assuming that of course includes indirect taxes and levies. ,including the 2.5% medicare levy.