ShaklesOfBigGov
Restore the Republic
- Nov 19, 2010
- 5,077
- 749
Why does Congress insist on destroying the Postal Service?
The USPS ought to be abolished.
Going Postal
Daniel McAdams
The USPS is a Soviet nightmare. Want to rent a P.O. box? Be prepared to fill out an extensive and invasive application form and prove that everything on it is accurate.
People hate the USPS so much they look for any possible alternative. Which is one reason they lose a ton of money. Then come crying to the taxpayer to bail them out.
Just last month the USPS told us they lost $1.9 billion in the second quarter of the year. The Postal Service says it is in desperate need of legislation to help make them more competitive. Only government action can make them competitive!
To return the Postal Service to solvency requires a comprehensive approach, which is reflected in our updated Five-Year Business Plan, said Postmaster General and CEO Patrick Donahoe.
Five year plan? Where have we heard that before? Oh yes
So now we hear that the same USPS that cannot operate without massive financial losses even with a monopoly on first class mail delivery somehow has the resources to photograph the front and back of each piece of mail processed!
They cannot deliver our mail properly, cannot operate at a profit, cannot provide anything resembling customer service beyond the 1950s East Europe model, yet somehow they have unlimited resources to play big brother with all our postal communications."
.
This is about the liberal mindset that somehow, government can perform a task at greater satisfaction and more efficiently than what can be accomplished through the private sector. They are so quick to demonize when a business makes a profit. Then look to punish those very ones who ARE successful through increased taxes, to make up for every government program that fails to ( grasp the very basic notion of ) work within their own financial means. In a battle of ideologies, the private sector continues to be the more successful in becoming more self efficient while effectively meeting the needs of the people, meanwhile those under it's bureaucratic competitor continues to fail under an increased volume of debt. This is the result of supplying their employees with high benefits they know they can't really afford, while refusing to make cuts that would allow them to work within a "budget" in order to demonstrate they can effectively be competitive. Financial efficiency, after all, is simply a term the government is unfamiliar with.