Facing a second year of losses totaling $8 billion or more, the agency also wants to pull its workers out of the retirement and health benefits plans covering federal workers and set up its own benefit systems.
Congressional approval would be needed for either step, and both could be expected to face severe opposition from postal unions which have contracts that ban layoffs.
The post office has cut 110,000 jobs over the last four years and is currently engaged in eliminating 7,500 administrative staff. In its 2010 annual report, the agency said it had 583,908 career employees.
Postal officials have said they will be unable to make a $5.5 billion payment to cover future employee health care costs due Sept. 30. It is the only federal agency required to make such a payment but, because of the complex way government finances are counted, eliminating it would make the federal budget deficit appear $5.5 billion larger.
More Here
Question: Is this an example of the future of Obamacare? Why don't they just raise the cost of mail to raise revenues like Obama wants to raise taxes to raise revenues instead of cutting expenses? If it works for Obama then it should work for the Postal Service, no? At least Keynesian Economics says so.
12 comments:
That idea makes perfect bureaucrat sense!
but how much "economic" sense does it make, huh?
.
"i never said anything either explicitly or implicitly during this discussion to lead anyone to the conclusion you have come to in regards to what i am for or against."
Question: Is this an example of the future of Obamacare? Is Obamacare what you call it when a person HATES Mr Obama more than he/she loves USA?
Why don't they just raise the cost of mail to raise revenues like Obama wants to raise taxes to raise revenues instead of cutting expenses? USA has been raising the cost of 1st Class mail ever since Ben Franklin was Post Master General.
If it works for Obama then it should work for the Postal Service, no? What is "it"?
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
contempt is the word you are looking for, Ema, not hatred.
Obamacare is what it is called when a President and his allies in Congress refuses to abide by their oath and reveal their contempt by deliberately placing an issue above the Constitution.
Obamacare is what it is called when a President and his allies in Congress show their contempt for a nation by not learning from history that the people do not want universal health insurance only affordable health care.
Obamacare is what it is called when a political party as led by this President shows so much contempt for the intelligence of the people as to pretend that they can make better decisions for the lives of individuals then the individual can therefore justifying the use of force to impose their will upon the people.
.
"... justifying the use of force to impose their will upon the people."
Congress is the voice of the people. The men and women in Congress speak for the people of USA. It is called governing (you know "we the people" thing.
Have to admire your willingness to put your inferiority complex on such prominent display.
_________________
The solutions are simple and easy:
Tax the rich/wealthy,
End government corporate welfare,
End the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan,
Increase spending on Social Security and Medicare, and
Universal free health care for ALL!
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
I'm a bit disgruntled myself my friend.
if expressing my viewpoint of government is a revelation of my inferiority complex as you have explicitly declared then you have just implicitly admitted that, as a liberal or progressive, in expressing your viewpoint of government is a revelation of your superiority complex.
thank you Ema for being honest enough to admit that.
but that is a common trait of liberals isn't it?
each and every one of you think you are so superior to the rest of the people as to believe you know better than we do what is best for us even when we disagree.
it is from this unconscious attitude of superiority that you dispise those who possess more than you and pity those who possess less than you.
it is from this unconscious attitude of superiority that liberals or progressives think that their views represent the will of the people and are so willing to see those that disagree as inferior to you as you have shown in your last comment.
remember too, Ema, it was you that brought up the issue of "inferior" and "superior" attitudes in this discussion, not me. i just responded to it in a logical manner based entirely upon your words.
as are the people, my irish friend. this is why the next election is going to be so interesting and i might add so amusing.
in my opinion it will be an election that determines the direction that this nation will go as no other election has in recent history.
may even have to go all the way back to the election of roosevelt to find a comparison.
.
"but that is a common trait of liberals isn't it?"
I am not a bright person. I do not claim to speak for liberals/progressives or to know what is a 'common trait' of any
group. I am bright enough to know though, I speak only for myself. My responses to your blog postings are written
specifically to your blather.
It is you who feels, "each and every one of you think you are so superior to the rest of the people as to believe you know
better than we do what is best for us even when we disagree." You show this belief throughout your writings.
"i just responded to it in a logical manner based entirely upon your words."
_________________
The solutions are simple and easy:
Tax the rich/wealthy,
End government corporate welfare,
End the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan,
Increase spending on Social Security and Medicare, and
Universal free health care for ALL!
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
How bright you are Ema is not for me to say so I won't speculate on that. Will say though, it doesn't take a very bright person to ape the thought of others as you have aped mine already in your last comment. But then again a bright person who is just too lazy to do their own research on issues are known to ape the thoughts of others too.
If you have no idea of the common traits of a liberal be then you must be admitting you have no understanding of the Social studies of Sociology or Psychology since they are the scientific study of collectives as determined by their common traits. This must mean that your viewpoint is founded upon theological principles rather than secular principles that relies on scientific facts and this is a common accusation of the left towards the right.
If you speak for yourself and no one else then you should be promoting the ideas of individualism as opposed to the theory of collectivism which has been proven fallacious for many a century now and which you would have known if you had done your own homework instead of relying on others to do so then repeating their fallacious thoughts because they believe the possibility of something already proven to be untrue.
If you were presenting ideas in a logical manner as you say there would not be as many obvious self-contradictory statements from you. And there is nothing more obvious then to contradict yourself within two consecutive comments as you have here. First you accuse me of having an inferiority complex then you turn right around and accuse me of having a superiority complex. Which is it? Such obvious contradictions are signs of a person who has not given much thought to their ideas thus the need to repeat the thoughts of others. And this is called the collective thought process.
And the collective thought process reveals itself glaringly in the presentation of solutions but present them without any thought that they need to be backed up by logical reasoning as your solutions have been presented.
All in favor of tripling the postage on junk mail raise their hands. Two birds with one stone,
etc...:)
an idea that would get biparisan support from the ppl also and support from both extremes too, BB. mine is raised.
Post a Comment