PDA

View Full Version : Obama goes postal



DarrinS
08-19-2009, 01:54 PM
Fantastic article.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aJ01reSCujDQ





Aug. 18 (Bloomberg) -- “UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems.” -- Barack Obama, Aug. 11, 2009

No institution has been the butt of more government- inefficiency jokes than the U.S. Postal Service. Maybe the Department of Motor Vehicles.

The only way the post office can stay in business is its government subsidy. The USPS lost $2.4 billion in the quarter ended in June and projects a net loss of $7 billion in fiscal 2009, outstanding debt of more than $10 billion and a cash shortfall of $1 billion. It was moved to intensive care -- the Government Accountability Office’s list of “high risk” cases - - last month and told to shape up. (It must be the only entity that hasn’t cashed in on TARP!)

That didn’t stop President Barack Obama from holding up the post office as an example at a town hall meeting in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, last week.

When Obama compared the post office to UPS and FedEx, he was clearly hoping to assuage voter concerns about a public health-care option undercutting and eliminating private insurance.

What he did instead was conjure up visions of long lines and interminable waits. Why do we need or want a health-care system that works like the post office?

What’s more, if the USPS is struggling to compete with private companies, as Obama implied, why introduce a government health-care option that would operate at the same disadvantage?

Obama Unscripted

These are just two of the questions someone listening to the president’s health-insurance reform roadshow might want to ask.

Impromptu Obamanomics is getting scarier by the day. For all the president’s touted intelligence, his un-teleprompted comments reveal a basic misunderstanding of capitalist principles.

For example, asked at the Portsmouth town hall how private insurance companies can compete with the government, the president said the following:

“If the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining -- meaning taxpayers aren’t subsidizing it, but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services and a good network of doctors, just like any other private insurer would do -- then I think private insurers should be able to compete.”

Self-sustaining? The public option? What has Obama been doing during those daily 40-minute economic briefings coordinated by uber-economic-adviser, Larry Summers?

Capitalism Explained

Government programs aren’t self-sustaining by definition. They’re subsidized by the taxpayer. If they were self-financed, we’d be off the hook.

Llewellyn Rockwell Jr., chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, and editor of LewRockwell.com, put it this way in an Aug. 13 commentary on Mises.org:

“The only reason for a government service is precisely to provide financial support for an operation that is otherwise unsustainable, or else there would be no point in the government’s involvement at all.”

Rockwell sees no “economic reason for a government postal system” and would abolish it.

Of course, there’s the small matter of the U.S. Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, grants Congress the power “to establish Post Offices and Post Roads.” A series of subsequent statutes gave the USPS a monopoly in the delivery of first-class mail. Congress thought that without such protection, private carriers would cherry-pick the high-profit routes and leave money-losing deliveries in remote areas to the post office. (In those days, the USPS covered most of its expenses with revenue.)

Less Bad Option

It was only through exemptions in the law that private carriers, such as UPS and FedEx, were allowed to compete in the delivery of overnight mail.

Short of a constitutional amendment or a waiver from Congress, we are stuck with the USPS.

But back to our storyline. Everyone makes a mistake or flubs a line when asked questions on the spot, including the president of the United States. We can overlook run-on sentences, subject and verb tense disagreement, even a memory lapse when it comes to facts and figures.

The proliferation of Obama’s gaffes and non sequiturs on health care has exceeded the allowable limit. He has failed repeatedly to explain how the government will provide more (health care) for less (money). He has failed to explain why increased demand for medical services without a concomitant increase in supply won’t lead to rationing by government bureaucrats as opposed to the market. And he has failed to explain why a Medicare-like model is desirable when Medicare itself is going broke.

The public is left with one of two unsettling conclusions: Either the president doesn’t understand the health-insurance reform plans working their way through Congress, or he understands both the plans and the implications and is being untruthful about the impact.

Neither option is good; ignorance is clearly preferable to the alternative.

Wild Cobra
08-19-2009, 02:07 PM
You know, some time back, I was a temporary (TE) carrier for the USPS as a job between jobs. I still get the union e-mails.

The losses have nothing to do with competition. It's the economy. The carriers still drive the same miles per day, yet had rising fuel prices. Package delivery is down 16% and mail down 10%, but the manpower and costs cannot be lowered by those amounts.

Businesses aren't shipping as many packages and there aren't as many junk mailers being sent! Less revenue, same mileage, etc.

It's the economy stupid... I mean President Obama!

Here's today's union propaganda in my mail from the NALC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_Letter_Carriers):


Dear xxxxxx,

As you may know, the battle to reform our nation’s health care system began months ago in Washington. And this month, with Congress in recess, the debate has spread to communities all across the country as citizens meet with their elected officials in district offices and town hall meetings.



While none of the proposed legislation will dramatically change the Federal Employees Health Benefit (FEHB) Program letter carriers enjoy, NALC stands shoulder to shoulder with our Sisters and Brothers in the labor movement in support of comprehensive health care reform.



With 47 million Americans uninsured, health care costs rising more than twice the rate inflation and insurance company abuse rampant, the American health care system needs reform. And as we ask Congress to support legislation that will bring the Postal Service’s health care obligations under control, the time to reduce long-term health care costs for everyone is now.



NALC supports legislation which will:

· Include a strong public insurance option. This will keep insurance companies honest, drive waste out of the system, guarantee affordable coverage for all and keep down costs for individuals, businesses and the government.

· Require employers to pay their fair share. This will hold down federal deficits and level the playing field for good employers who contribute to their employees’ insurance premiums.

· Does not tax employer-provided health benefits. Working families need relief from health care reform, not increased costs.



I encourage you all to support health care reform by attending and participating in a town hall meeting in your area. A partial list of events can be found here, but keep your ear to the ground for other events happening near you. Thank you for hard work to make the American economy work for working people once again.



Finally, since this message is about town hall meetings, I wish to raise one final point. Many of you may have seen the video clip of President Obama at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire last week. While trying to make a point about health care reform -- that private insurance companies should have no difficulty in competing with a public plan -- he inaccurately and unfairly criticized the Postal Service. Our legislative staff immediately contacted the White House to discuss the matter and was assured that the President would be informed about our concerns. I followed up with a letter to the President which will appear in next month’s Postal Record. I do not believe the President intended to offend letter carriers or other postal employees and I believe we should give him the benefit of the doubt as he fights to rebuild the middle class in America with health care reform legislation. Thanks again for your hard work on behalf of all letter carriers.

In Solidarity,
Fred Rolando
President

Wild Cobra
08-19-2009, 02:16 PM
Let's not forget what I posted in another thread. God I hate Obama and his propaganda.


OK, here is the last 10 years of reconciled data from the OMB:



Year Revenue Expenses gain/(loss) cumulative
1998 60,116 59,566 550 550
1999 62,755 62,392 363 913
2000 64,581 64,780 (199) 714
2001 65,869 67,549 (1,680) (966)
2002 66,688 67,364 (676) (1,642)
2003 68,764 64,878 3,886 2,244
2004 69,029 65,964 3,065 5,309
2005 69,993 68,548 1,445 6,754
2006 72,817 71,917 900 7,654
2007 81,538 80,353 1,185 8,839

note: numbers are in millions of dollars.

Funny how the postal service usually has a positive income, and over $8 billion between 1998 to 2007. Maybe I should go back and see what even older data shows for positive income that congress eats up. People cry when in bad times. There was a reported $2.8 billion loss for 2008 (http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2008/pr08_118.htm) and a $7 billion loss projected for 2009 (http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2009/pr09_066.htm). These are not OMB reconciled numbers yet. Projected numbers don't mean much and are often far off. Estimates for 2007 was a loss of $4,944 million, but had a gain of $1,185, from the 2008 report. The 2009 report corrected a huge error in the 2007 estimation. 2008 estimates were a loss of $2,141 million, but there was a $2,800 loss reported, yet not reconciled yet.

Data sources:

[09 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564748388061+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

[08 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564748387935+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

[07 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564749387885+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

[06 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564750387859+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

[05 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564750387249+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

[04 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564751388068+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

[03 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564752384133+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

[02 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564753387848+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

[01 Budget Appendix] POSTAL SERVICE (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=564753387146+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

I found data as far back as 1994. With the 2008 and 2009 losses, the post office is still $2.727 billion ahead with the 2009 $7 billion projected loss. 1994 was a $913 million loss year also.

George Gervin's Afro
08-19-2009, 03:08 PM
Let's not forget what I posted in another thread. God I hate the GOP and thier propaganda.

SpurNation
08-19-2009, 03:57 PM
Wow Afro...you just pulled an Obama twist.

Purposely misquote a quote and try to have others believe.

Unfortunately that's what the majority of the voters did.

Wild Cobra
08-19-2009, 04:08 PM
Wow Afro...you just pulled an Obama twist.

Purposely misquote a quote and try to have others believe.

Unfortunately that's what the majority of the voters did.

I wasn't going to acknowledge his childishness. Now he will just do it even more.