A Complete Waste of Space

callmeslick wrote: try getting anything delivered, anyplace by UPS or FedEx for 50 cents.

As if the price of a stamp actually pays total costs for delivery of that letter. You're comparing businesses that compete on a free market level versus one that is government (taxpayer) subsidized.

Ya the Post Office has a legal monopoly on first class mail, that's the only reason no one else does it. It isn't because they're good at it. Remember in the days before Fedex and UPS? "Please allow 6-8 weeks for delivery.....". Private competition has dramatically improved the efficiency of package delivery, not the other way around. The Post Office is a perfect example how the free market does a better job, and by a large margin, providing better value. Obama was not correct in touting the USPS as an example where government has to fill a gap in service that the free market can't provide.

Just out of curiosity....did Fedex or UPS go 8 billion in the hole like the USPS did last year? If so, did the taxpayers have to "bail" them out?

I called bullshit on the numbers you used Slick....you have yet to address that.....per usual.

Pudfark wrote:Just out of curiosity....did Fedex or UPS go 8 billion in the hole like the USPS did last year? If so, did the taxpayers have to "bail" them out?

excuse me, but no private concern is going to take the load that the USPS does. Advertising mail? Letters for 50 cents? Of course, they are subsidized, but that has nothing to do with efficiency in what they do.
They deliver what they do FAR cheaper than anyone else could.

I called bullshit on the numbers you used Slick....you have yet to address that.....per usual.

call whatever you want, those numbers can be easily located with a simple search. I'm done doing the basic legwork, and then having you make up some gibberish to 'counter' it.
Fact is, cradle to grave Medicare is the way to go, it will happen sooner or later, call it whatever you wish....

On the USPS thingy.....If they had any this "efficiency....why do they have to be subsidized? It ain't cheaper.

I'm still calling bullshit on yer numbers....You threw out a number...your basic legwork looks like basic leg humping....substantiate the number or look stupid and irrelevant to all.....nice try on "changing the subject".....not.

Pudfark wrote:On the USPS thingy.....If they had any this "efficiency....why do they have to be subsidized?

nice piece of writing, even by your standards. Start drinking early today, did we?

.

I'm still calling bullshit on yer numbers....You threw out a number...your basic legwork looks like basic leg humping....substantiate the number or look stupid and irrelevant to all.....nice try on "changing the subject".....not.

I've posted those numbers, with citations and links, repeatedly on here. Accept them as fact.

callmeslick wrote: Accept them as fact.

By far the funniest thing you've ever said.

ruggbutt wrote:

callmeslick wrote: Accept them as fact.

By far the funniest thing you've ever said.

glad you enjoyed it......you've read the links in the past, so you know. There's no point in repeating the same facts over and over again. Those poll numbers are fact, anyone can spin them if they want, but the polls were done, and that's how folks answered.

Folks didn't answer the way you spun it. It is funny, but you're not a comedian.

Speaking of polls about obamacaresless, the Washington Post left out the detail that 68% of the people it polled were in favor of demolishing the bill.

The Washington Post is as fucked up as slick is, so the results won't be the least bit credible in his book.