16 February 2013

More than a week ago on Slate, Brian Palmer posed the following questions:

Why Doesn’t the Postal Service Make Money? What do UPS and FedEx know that the USPS doesn’t?”*

These frequently heard questions seem deliberately determined to undermine a fine, government program that has served America since its founding, by making an odd, apples-to-oranges comparison.

I can send a letter from where I sit, here in Bee Cave, Texas (78738), all the way to Barrow, Alaska (99723) or  Mililani, Hawaii (96789) for 46¢, and it will arrive in a day or two.

When was the last time that UPS and FedEx delivered a letter for 46¢? When was the first time either private company did this? Even back in their founding days (1971 for FedEx; 1907 for UPS, which started as a parcel service in Seattle).

Why doesn’t the Postal Service make money, indeed?
____________________

Forget about Congress’s requirement that the USPS fully fund all its pension obligations up front. Forget the requirement that the USPS visit every mail box receiving even a single piece of cut-rate “bulk” mail six or five days a week:

When’s the last time you mailed a letter using FedEx or UPS, and got change back from your dollar?

What’s missing here? Other than an ideological determination to undermine the constitutional mandate that the United States government provide postal service?

Regards,
(($; -)}
Gozo!
__________
*Why Doesn’t the Postal Service Make Money?
by Brian Palmer, Slate (02/07/2013 at 2:29 PM CT)

@GozoTweets
Advertisements
10 January 2013

In response to a piece by David Weigel posted on SLATE,* someone asked why it is that the views of so-called “Conservatives” are shown respect and consideration which it seems is disproportionate to the lack of respect and consideration such views merit. What follows is Gozo’s response.
____________________

The Answer Involves the psychological concept of “projection”:

The Right continually accuse the Left of deliberate malfeasance. What does this projection say about those on the Right?

On the other side, the Left continually speak to the Right as if they—such as those “neocons”—are reasonable and honorable people, determined to do what is best for self and country.

What does this projection say about the Left?
____________________

The Downside to the Left’s honorable and respectful expectations of the Right is that the whole of the country remains held up—obstructed and impeded—by the Left’s honorable need to include the malevolence of the Right in resolving our shared challenges.
____________________

In America, the Right consists of that deadbeat brother-in-law, at the far end of the Thanksgiving table, who insists that, here in the United States of America, he’s got the God-given right to bring his assault rifle to the God-damn table and set it down on the table in front of his place, and what are you going to do about it?
____________________

The Way I See It, that type of scenario represents the basic answer to the question of “Why?” Those on the Left are constrained by a unilateral sense of mutual respect.

That the Right is not similarly constrained by this putative “Christian” practice remains part of the puzzle.

And as for the brother-in-law’s question—“What are you gonna do about it?”—I haven’t any idea.

Regards,
(($; -)}
Gozo!

__________
*“Kristol vs. Hagel: The neoconservative’s campaign to stop Obama’s Defense nominee is smaller than it looks, and it might have peaked.” (Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2013 at 1:15 PM ET)

@GozoTweets