In 2010, the current crop of GOP federal representatives made a big show of sounding out the words of our Constitution on CSPAN. They used the word “read.” However, they immediately set out to destroy our post office system. Thus the conclusion can only be that none of the words entered or stopped in their brains, and the process of “reading” was not involved.
The post office system is not a business nor is it an option. The writers of the Constitution believed that it was a necessity for an informed citizenry, even the most rural members, to have access to the news. Thus, the establishment of “post offices and post roads” was written into Article I. It is possible to find the section numbers by actually reading our Constitution. It is not a long document.
Pay attention to the first three words. They describe the government that so many now are complaining about and debasing. The government is YOU, unless you are a nonvoter. You are responsible.
Couldn’t it be said that nonvoters, by shirking their responsibility, have voluntarily withdrawn from the American experience of self-government?
Comments
Liberty_One 9 months ago
Government is not you. This is pure nonsense. If government was YOU then the Jews killed themselves since the Nazi party was democratically elected.
Just because Congress has the POWER granted in the Constitution to create a post office does not mean it MUST do so. Congress has the power to issue letters of Marque and Reprisal but hasn't done so since 1815.
The post office was taken over by the state not because of any belief that doing so would benefit society but because this monopoly right could be used to deny the mails to anyone the state did not like. This was particularly effective at silencing newspapers that were critical because at the time newspapers were delivered by mail. The British government did this during the colonial period and the US just adopted the practice.
vertigo 9 months ago
I doubt the Jews in Poland, Russia, and Hungary (the three largest death tolls for jews) voted for the Nazi party in Germany.
There were only approximately 200,000 jews in Germany just prior to the start of WWII. That's only about 3-5% of the total number of jews killed.
voevoda 9 months ago
The German government first deprived its Jewish population of citizenship, and then killed them. This order of events doesn't make the murders okay, of course. But it does undermine your contention, Liberty_One.
voevoda 9 months ago
If you can't tell the difference between the government of Nazi Germany and the government of the United States, Liberty_one, it is only because your anarchist ideology has blinded you. The US government does not deprive a group that has done no wrong of its citizenship, confiscate their property, confine them in concentration camps, and rent them out as slave labor to private companies to work to death. Instead, the US government protects the rights of our citizen, Liberty_one.
vertigo 9 months ago
It is relevant when you use them to attempt to make a point.
You said the jews killed themselves because they voted for the Nazi party, when in fact 97% of the jews killed were not from Germany therefor they had no vote.
Just pointing out you used a terrible analogy to make your point.
vertigo 9 months ago
Just like it was the Iraqis fault we invaded them in 2003 since they voted for Bush for President.
vertigo 9 months ago
You don't believe there were Iraqi's with U.S. citizenship in Iraq?
Faulty analogies you got plenty of.
vertigo 9 months ago
When shown you've made a mistake or error you always resort to name calling.
My analogy holds as much weight as yours does. 97% of the jews killed in the holocaust could not have voted for or against the Nazi party in Germany, yet it's their fault the holocaust happened- according to you.
"the Jews killed themselves since the Nazi party was democratically elected"
Now if you had said "the German jews killed themselves..." you may have made your point. But you didn't. You blamed all the jews, consisting chiefly of those from other nations, for who rose to power in pre WWII Germany.
MarcoPogo 9 months ago
Nazis in the FIRST response to this story. Liberty, you are today's winner. Well played!
MarcoPogo 9 months ago
Uh, I didn't say anything about your context being right or wrong. I gave you an award.
queequeg 9 months ago
what point? You're comparing the US Constitution and government with Nazi Germany. You're a fool.
voevoda 9 months ago
So, by your example No. 1, Liberty_One, you are saying that there is no difference between our American government and the government of Nazi Germany? That is a nonsensical position, and one that would be extremely offensive to Jewish Americans. In regard to Nos. 2 and 3, the Constitution mentions the post office because its authors intended for the United States to have one. The Founding Fathers recgonized the need for the government to facilitate communication. I can't think of a single time that the government prevented citizens from sending words of their choice through the mail. (Of course, there have been restrictions on sending goods--some intelligent and some stupid--but that's a different issue.)
voevoda 9 months ago
Okay, Liberty_one; name one specific occasion when the US government prohibited someone from sending political speech through the postal service, if you are so sure that they exist. Present your case, and we'll see whether your knowledge of American history is any less flawed than your knowledge of German history. And if the US government enjoys a monopoly on mail service, how do UPS, Fedex, and all those companies exist?
If your point by invoking Nazi Germany and the murder of Jews is to prove that "government is not YOU," then you are guilty of bad logic. All that analogy proves is that the government of Nazi Germany did not reflect the will of its Jewish residents. It doesn't prove a thing about the US government.
Your mistake, Liberty_one, is to assume that all government, everywhere, at every time, can never reflect the will of the people and work towards their benefit. That is the position of radical anarchists.
voevoda 9 months ago
You have to go back to the Civil War to find an example of the government using the postal service for censorship? Even in that case, the mail ban was simply a means to enforce a more general censorshp order, which was in itself illegal. So your "example" hardly suffices to sustain your contention. And as for delivering letters, yes, you can send mail through UPS or FEDEX (I've gotten things that way, and sent things that way); it's just not cost-effective compared to the postal service.
Topple 9 months ago
Hmmm, I think you've lost this debate, voevoda.
laurennoel 9 months ago
I don't get how you jump from mail to Nazi's. There are plenty of other ways to make the analogy that the "Government is Not You" without envoking Nazis. Maybe stick with something American since we're talking about something American. I'm sorry, but I feel like I need to make you a tin foil hat.
laurennoel 9 months ago
The most obvious example is far fetched and is obviously not receiving the reaction that you anticipated. Debate skills are important when trying to prove a point and I'm not sure you did that. Honestly, I'm not 100% sure what your point is and by reading the other reactions, I'm not sure anyone did.
laurennoel 8 months, 3 weeks ago
My point was... which you missed. The provocative aspect of your opinion distracts people from your point. Everyone was more apt to respond to the Nazi thing than your "message." That's why no one disagreed with your logic. All anyone read was Nazi's, not your actual point. That's what I mean by rethinking your debate skills.
jhawkinsf 9 months ago
Not every manslaughter results in jail. Some, especially those done accidently, result in financial considerations. That has been done in Afghanistan and Iraq. And of course, if it's the U.S. government paying for those accidental deaths, that money will be coming from you and I, assuming you pay taxes as I do.
voevoda 9 months ago
You have missed jhawkinsf's point, Liberty_One. He is saying that we do pay a penalty for the misdeeds of our government. You are assuming that the only penalty for accidental death is imprisonment. In fact, quite often the penalty for such offenses is a fine. So once again, your logic doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
number3of5 9 months ago
As for us nonvoters, I for one feel if the politicians would uphold the integrity that I have for my fellow man, then I would gladly vote. All they seem to want is to line their already full pockets with the money of the poorer class. So, no, I will not vote for some greedy, money hungry bureaucrat who only cares about someone who is as greedy as they are...
75x55 9 months ago
How does it make any sense to rob the poorer classes? They don't have the money, hence the term "poorer".....
Egad - even the silly azz occupiers point at Wall Street money interests. Gotta find out where the money is.
voevoda 9 months ago
Maybe, Liberty_One, they have figured it out all too well, and their conclusion doesn't match yours.
deec 9 months ago
The post office is not funded by Congress or taxpayers, except a small stipend to support mail service for the military.
kansanbygrace 9 months ago
False--No other entity in the United States is required by law to fund retirement for 75 years into the future, government nor private. This is a completely transparent attempt by the neo-cons to monetize one of the best-functioning postal services in the world.
deec 9 months ago
The post office wants access to money that the post office overpaid into the post office's retirement fund. Congress required the post office to overfund their retirement account, and now the post office wants to use the overpayments for operating expenses. It has nothing to do with social security.
hear_me 9 months ago
As kansanbygrace pointed out, the post office is required to pay the pension fund 75 years into the future. Has there really been a proposal to tap the current fund or are they discussing the budget for the next fiscal year which starts October 1?
If a postal worker started at the age of 18 and remained a career postal worker, s/he would be funded until the age of 97 years of age if they worked for 75 years. If USPS payed for 50 years into the future, it would have more funds for operating costs next year. The CBO could probably come up with a lower number based on historical data.
There's plenty of leeway to fix the problem. Congress should have already worked this out. Where is the hold up?
jafs 9 months ago
According to a story I heard on the radio, the federal government has been using the post office pension fund to pay for other things, general expenses.
That means they need it so they don't have to raise taxes.
Therein lies the hold-up.
hear_me 9 months ago
Just like the Social Security trust funds.
jafs 9 months ago
Yep.
Liberty275 9 months ago
"The government is YOU"
The govenrment is my employee. Don't make that mistake again.
75x55 9 months ago
Then YOU must be to blame - your management of your employees is really sucking wind.
jafs 9 months ago
We can fire politicians by voting them out.
It takes a bit longer than just firing somebody, but we can do it.
jafs 9 months ago
That's a problem, I agree.
I'm somewhat in favor of proportional representation, which might help that, but I think that in practice, it might be very difficult.
Liberals say raise taxes, conservatives say cut them, libertarians say eliminate them,...
voevoda 9 months ago
Well, Liberty_one, maybe you'd be happier with a government that reflects the views of a minority--as long as it's the minority that agrees with you.
CWGOKU 9 months ago
Eliminate Saturday delivery to save money and conserve fuel. Heck, cut mail to 3 or 4 days a week delivery. Very little of importance comes in the mail anymore.
deec 9 months ago
They've been trying to but Congress is stalling. http://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2012/pr12_091.htm
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 9 months ago
It's already been noted on this thread, but let me repeat it for those who need the information.
The budget crisis at the Post Office is completely contrived by the Republican-driven requirement that they pay pension cost decades in advance-- something no government agency or anyone in the private sector is required to do. This was passed specifically to cripple the PO financially so that it could be portrayed as a failure of government and the postal employees union, and sold off/closed up to the benefit of UPS, Fedex and others who will swoop in like vultures to pick up the pieces, the cost of sending a letter or a package will skyrocket and the level of service greatly diminished.
It's actually a criminal act perpetrated on the American people.
Agnostick 9 months ago
I'll just say this...
The United States Postal Service has, for at least the last decade, been one of the favorite whipping boys of the various groups of false patriots: the neoconservatives, the teabaggers/tea partiers, the extremist theocrats. This bandwagon is so overloaded, the wheels are ready to fall off.
Yet I've seen two things in recent weeks that defy (whatever passes for) logic, for these groups.
While visiting my parents, my mother brought out this big stack of mail she'd been saving up to show me. Scam fundraising, "fright mail" from various shadow groups claiming to be on some mission to "save Social Security." These groups have names like "Health Care Reform Task Force"... "Senior Citizen Association of America"... "Federation of Responsible Citizens"... and "National Campaign To Guarantee Social Security." Most of them are headed up by a couple of America's leading psychological terrorists of senior citizens, Amy Ridenour and Douglas Ramsey. These letters enlist former members of Congress, former federal officials, and others. During the four or five days I was home, maybe eight or nine more letters arrived in the mailbox. Effective? In 2010, Amy Ridenour helped herself to a salary of approximately $197,000. She paid her husband, David, a little more than $156,000. What percentage of this, I wonder, came from the limited income of senior citizens... especially their Social Security checks?
I don't know if anyone else noticed this, but in the two or three weeks prior to the latest round of primary elections, I received more glossy postcards and campaign mailers and letters and so forth, than I think I ever have before. Most, though not all of these were from Republican candidates.
Ridenour salary info:
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=5416
So I wonder... what will these groups and individuals do when the Post Office is no longer there to deliver their fright mail, and their campaign notices? Do they really expect to get the same service--every house in every town--at the same price, from FedEx or UPS or DHL? Do the Ridenours really expect all those senior citizens to rush out, buy the latest computers and laptops and tablets and smartphones, check out their web sites, or log onto YouTube?
This is akin to someone who walks everyplace--to the market, to the doctor, to church--suddenly waking up one morning and saying, "You know, I spend too much money on shoes and socks. I need to cut my legs off, and find a better, more efficient way to get around."
Go ahead... kill it off. I'll be the one laughing when you do! :D
CWGOKU 9 months ago
Too many people going postal these days...
Agnostick 9 months ago
Technology? Absolutely!
"Greedy government unions?" Typical urban myth espoused by the pseudo-Conservative Clown College... greedily gobbled by pseudo-Conservative Clowns everywhere!
Don't be such a clown!
hear_me 9 months ago
What did the unions have to do with the 75 year advanced budget to the pension fund? Did the union request it? Negotiate for it?
deec 9 months ago
The postal union sees this as an attempt at union-busting. The 2006 Congress caused the post office's budget woes. Congress is now blocking reform so they can continue to raid the bloated pension fund for other expenses.
jafs 9 months ago
Up until November of 2006 R had control of both the Senate and the House.
When exactly was the post office "reform" passed, if you know?
deec 9 months ago
Introduced Dec 07, 2006 Passed House Dec 08, 2006 Passed Senate Dec 09, 2006 Signed by the President Dec 20, 2006 This bill was enacted after being signed by the President on December 20, 2006.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407
jafs 9 months ago
Thanks - I assume that the R had complete control of Congress and a R president at the time.
Even though elections are held in November, the parties don't actually change until January of the next year, right?
deec 9 months ago
"noon on the 3rd day of January of every odd-numbered year"
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_does_each_term_of_congress_start#ixzz23vWSapsk
voevoda 9 months ago
Liberty_One has posted many times here, becoming increasingly vituperative as I and several other posters pointed out the flaws in his logic and facts. He sent the message below to my private email; it's revealing of his character.
Private email from Liberty_One, August 18, 2012 Hello,
The user Liberty_One sent the following message to you via LJWorld.com:
==============================
Well, I proved to you that I know what I'm talking about when it comes to US history and the post office. I've done this many, many times to people on here. I state a fact, you guys act as if I'm just making it up, then I prove it with multiple sources. I have never been proven a liar with this kind of stuff, yet you guys keep acting like I'm making it all up. I've spent years studying US history. I know my stuff and can prove everything I say. Maybe you think my theories about WHY things happened are wrong, but I know WHAT happened far better than you or anyone else here and I'm sick of being questioned by ignoramuses when I've proven it over and over again.
You don't know what you're talking about. You're a child compared to me. Learn. Your. Place.
Given the attitudes Liberty_One has expressed, should we believe that the political and economic order he espouses would be in the interest of the rest of us?
Katara 9 months ago
That is hilarious!
deec 9 months ago
I notice he keeps binging up how you can't send a letter through Fedex or UPS, even though I've linked several times to Fedex's website where they list "letter" right on the shipping page. "Package, Envelope, or Express Freight FedEx Express or FedEx Ground"
Of course it will cost at a minimum $11.38 for 3 day delivery instead of 45 cents to send.
deec 9 months ago
See, I knew you'd split that hair. It doesn't matter what the name of the document is. You can, in fact, send correspondence, greeting cards, contracts or any other document you want through private carriers. You just can't call it a "first class letter."
It still costs over $11 at a minimum to send with Fedex and 45 cents through the post office. So clearly private enterprise DOESN'T do it better.
Those "better" more expensive prices are also dependent on USPS for final delivery to thousands of addresses daily. My local post office has dropoffs from both Monday-Friday.
deec 9 months ago
They don't compete with the post office. They use the post office to deliver many of their letters and packages. Fedex also has a contract with the post office for air movement of post office mail.
Regardless of how you want to play semantic games, a person can readily send all the cards, letters, bills, payments and documents they like without ever in life going directly through the post office. They'll just pay $11 or more to do it. Clearly the private option is inferior in price for the consumer.
They also don't require letters to be "packages."
"Declared Value for Letters and Paks FedEx Letter maximum declared value is US$100.00 and up to 1/2 kilo, or 30 unfolded pages. FedEx Pak maximum declared value is US$100.00 and up to 1 kg. Over 1 kg use FedEx International Priority rates."
http://www.fedex.com/mx_english/rates/rateinfo.html#5
jafs 9 months ago
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
jafs 9 months ago
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
jafs 9 months ago
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
hear_me 9 months ago
"The measure was passed 62 to 37, despite a warning from Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee, that it would add to the national debt." New York Times, April 25, 2012
Senator Corker was not implying that USPS pensions were paid out of the general fund. He was saying that congress would no longer have the cash flow from the USPS pension fund to use for general expenses thus increasing the national debt. Congress has been tapping into the USPS pension funds just like it did with Social Security.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 9 months ago
Give it up, jafs. It's pointless to reason with the unreasonable.
jafs 9 months ago
Thanks - I have.
It is interesting though to see the shadow come out, angry and dominating, even though it's pretty ugly.
headdoctor 9 months ago
It is very easy at times for people to blame the US Postal Service when their budget problems gets news worthy. The postal service does make money and a lots of it. There will always be budget issues with the postal service the way it is set up as a quasi-public-corporation with the Government removing much of the profit for other uses other than maintaining the postal service. I believe that several of the most recent large money grabs from the postal service was used in part to fund unfunded war efforts, etc.
hear_me 9 months ago
Congress uses the 75 year pay ahead as free cash flow. Postal workers pay into their retirement. Congress takes it out to pay for wars and whatever else they need. That's why they created the 75 year forward in the first place.
kansanbygrace 9 months ago
"I'm not sure why the post office isn't completely privatized anyway." The Constitution establishes it and the conversations at that time are available to those who choose to read them. I'm pretty sure the reason is because no private for-profit business has demonstrated they can come even close to the surety, the rapidity or the consistency of the delivery, much less do it at such a minimal cost. The USPS performs in the top fraction of a percent of the world's post/delivery services. What's preventing its going the way of the dodo is good, common sense.
kansanbygrace 9 months ago
If you can't figure out my point, you should shut up until you catch on.
Cappy 9 months ago
I would not want the Postal Service privaitzed for the same reason I don't want the water treatment plant or sewage treatment plant privatized. Service would suffer as private entities cut corners to profit off essential services.
deec 9 months ago
There is already competition, but the competition resorts to using the post office to avoid the expenses of delivering to far-flung addresses. And they charge $11 or more to do what the post office does for less than 50 cents in the same amount of time.
kansanbygrace 9 months ago
If you can't figure out my point, you should shut up until you catch on.
Agnostick 9 months ago
There's just no point arguing with pseudo-Austrians... none.
http://critiquesoflibertarianism.blogspot.com/2009/05/parable-of-ship-why-austrian-economics.html
Agnostick 9 months ago
Uuhhhmmmmm... I wasn't talking to you. As you may recall, you asked me some months back to refrain from responding to your posts. I've done my best to uphold my end of the bargain. Are you rescinding that request, or are you just being your usual hypocritical self?
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 9 months ago
"Are you rescinding that request, or are you just being your usual hypocritical self?"
Bingo.
camper 9 months ago
I have always been happy with the service of the USPS. For less than 50 cents I can send a letter most anywhere. I did the math, and it was cheaper for me to send a B-Day card to Chicago by mail rather than getting into my car and delivering it myself. It was also cheaper than a private carrier rate.
The UPS long been the designated whipping boy for conservatives who like to say "See, I told ya. The Gubernment can't do nuthin right. Jus look at the post office".
Agnostick 9 months ago
Uh-huh. Right after they send an intern over to the nearest post office with a sack full of 5,000 glossy campaign cards. Bulk mail rates, of course.
camper 9 months ago
Private carriers do compete with the post office. Both the USPS and private carriers deliver mail and packages. I could have sent my card to Chicago by FedEx if I wanted to. I went with the US Post office. It was easier to put a stamp on the envelope and put it in the mail. Plus, the USPS has never lost something I've mailed. That is a pretty darn good record.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.