Originally posted by mathdotcom
-
You missed the point. Government charges $60 for the package because it doesn't want to make profit. Fedex charges $300 because it needs to justify $100 per share stock price to Wall Street and needs to pay 1 billion dollars bonus to executives who don't deserve it.Comment -
Originally posted by mathdotcom
Comment -
How bout the government stays out of it and let competition grab hold of the delivery service? If the true cost is $40 to send said package overseas with a 25% profit margin, and fedex charges $300, how many private business will raise capital and create a viable alternative that charges $60 per package. Maybe Pavy Express will offer a reduced rate at $50 thus forcing Fedex to be more competitive. Or maybe fedex will become the shit in the courier business and charge the $40 or $50 and dominate the industry? who knows but they will do better that is certainOriginally posted by pavyracerComment -
If your house was burning Biden would say you need to pour some gas on the house.Comment -
Boy Pavy that sounds like a great idea. Why don't they go ahead and charge $600 and bump that share price even higher?Originally posted by pavyracer
Did you read what the previous posts about the govt losing millions on USPS? Hmm, maybe it is because they are pricing below true cost?Comment -
As a small business enterpreneur I care about the low cost of shipping. If Fedex wants my business they better be competitive with the postal service. I don't give a hoot if the postal service is not making any money. I view it as a benefit of me beiing taxed by the government so indirectly I'm getting a subsidy of my tax dollars via low cost postal service in which my small business viability is dependent.Comment -
You mean you don't care if the postal service is losing money?Originally posted by pavyracer
You are basically arguing that if there were a law proposed whereby everyone is taxed a penny, including pavyracer, and then all proceeds are given to pavyracer, you would support it because you are better off. Fair enough - but the appropriate view to take when analyzing policy is to look at how all parties are affected by the policy. Suppose in my example there are 100 taxpayers. Everyone is taxed a penny and then you get $0.50. You would support this, even though $0.50 disappears? This should be a skill-testing question before people are allowed to vote.Comment -
this administration is a total joke. obama brainwashed everyone into CHANGE and yes we can!!!! hes been an utter failure. no way this clown gets a second term.Comment -
You probably said the same thing in 2004Originally posted by j0hnnyv
Comment -
Why will I care if the postal service is losing money? Will you care if you bought an Iphone for $10 and it works perfectly but it cost Apple $100 to make? Will you call your congressman and complain they sold it below cost? Same with the postal service. As long as I save money for my business I would care less if they fold tomorrow. Until they fold I will suck their blood like a vampire and not donate free vacations to Fedex executives.Comment -
Not the best example because if you can get an Iphone for $10 from Apple and not from the trunk of Guido's car in the back alley behind your house, it's probably a loss that the company is using as a marketing tool or something and is part of their budget and or upcoming marketing campaign.Originally posted by pavyracerComment -
Sigh, you are still looking at it from your perspective instead of the perspective of all taxpayers. I can't believe you run a business; this is truly shocking.
Imagine if USPS was free, and I decide to ship a block of cement to someone in Russia. The Russian pays me $5 for the block of cement. But suppose it costs USPS $100 to ship. I make $5 - that's great. Of course I will not complain. But when the government consistently comes up with these policies, in the end everyone is worse off. Imagine you are lactose intolerant and the government decides to give away milk for free. You get no benefit from this, but you pay for it through higher taxes.
I hope this thread never dies so people can refer to it as a great example of lefty logic.Comment -
When the conservatives were in power for the last 8 years the budget went from a surplus to 1.3 trillion in deficit. If the conservatives are perfect economists it wouldn't have happened. Since they don't care about the taxpayers why would I care when my operating budget for the year is only $130,000? You got to do what you got to do to have the baby's bottle full of milk and if that means saving money on shipping costs by supporting a losing money enterprise then so be it. I will sleep better at night knowing my baby is not hungry than if Fedex executives got lap dances on their last vacation.Comment -
I never attacked your personal love of USPS. In your shoes I would like it too. I would rejoice if the government decided to subsidize beer.
Conservatives/Democrats/Republicans, whatever, they will all fukk everything up. Fiscal hawks prefer to vote Republican because there is at least a better chance they will not support failing companies and not spend like crazy.
By the way, you might want to get your numbers right, pal. Federal deficit broke the $1 trillion mark for the first time on July 14, 2009.Comment -
I'm counting the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Wall Street bailout in the conservatives costs because Obama was given a turd and was asked to save it when his predecessor screwed up everything. So technically it broke on July 14 2009 but it is still a carryover of failed policies of the previous administration.Comment -
Wow. Great thread, fellas.
Good stuff in here.
Comment -
Why do you feel necessary to point to the past in an attempt to somehow justify your point. A bad idea is a bad idea regardless of what happened in the past. Isn't it?Originally posted by pavyracerComment -
Well if the Japs didn't bomb Pearl Harbor we wouldn't have entered WWII. So if Bush didn't screwed up the country Obama wouldn't have to bust his ass to save it. So the past is very important. It's the effect affect dogma.Comment -
obama isn't busting his ass. he barely lifted a finger since he took office. he's lazy just like the rest of them.Originally posted by pavyracerComment -
Did you ever consider that your taxes are going towards funding those losses?Originally posted by pavyracer
Do you even consider taxes when thinking about your company's finances and profitability? Doesn't sound like it.Comment -
i dont think the usps vs. fedex is an apples to apples comparison
fedex is truly overnite
usps overseas expedited delivery takes three or four daysComment -
wrong wtf, they charge more so they can get lapdances, not because they provide better/faster service.Comment -
Pavyracer is a great example of the thought process of a liberal democrat.
Don't waste your time trying to have any sort of rational conversation with him. Its ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS.
If AARP truly supports this Obama socialized medical care plan, then they are going to get EXACTLY what they deserve.
The group that is going to suffer more than any other if Obama's medical care plan becomes a reality will be seniors.
Since this forum attracts a world-wide audience, I would like to ask all those living in countries that have a fully socialized medical care plan how it works out for seniors?
From what I understand, they are pretty much told to "go away and die quietly".
Joe Biden is an absolute buffoon and I would bet that even Obama agrees with that statement.
This administration has done more long-term damage to our country in 6 months than Bush did in 8 years and there is nobody with any intelligence at the wheel.
GOD HELP US!!!Comment -
Sharp post.
Canadians die on wait lists and in waiting rooms all the time. If you are even lucky enough to get a bed, it will be in a hallway. I am not joking.
I only see the doctor when I've got 5 STDs. It is not worth the wait to just deal with one. Okay, here I am kidding.Comment -
Shortly after Obama's medical care plan is passed, hospitals around the country will be shutting down.
Specialized medical care will be NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE to receive and the medical facilities that remain open will be packed 24 hours a day and will feature overworked and exhausted doctors and nurses.
As the medical care system deteriorates, the smartest and brightest people will no longer aspire to become physicians.
As bad as it is in other countries that have socialized medical care systems, it will be FAR WORSE here in the U.S. as we have a far higher percentage of people that consume far more than they produce as compared to other countries.
Do you think Barack Obama will subject himself and his family to the nightmare of his socialized medical care system when they get sick? OF COURSE NOT!!! He will seek the best private practice care he can find for his family and so will all the other liberal hypocritical politicians that support this plan.Comment -
Guy is on a roll with another sharp post.Comment -
of course obama will never subject his family to such degrading public medicine, liberals want everyone else to do what they say but never dream of using it themselves.
reminds of a recent incident where these group of black kids from inner city were allowed in some pool by some goof managing it, well the idiot forgot to think about what the PAYING MEMBERS of the pool would think. which they were furious.
but the lilly white liberal interviewing the poor kids was just horrified by what happened to them.
this cunt would soon let her kids in the same pool as them than chew razor bladesComment -
the usps is a perfect example of why the government has no business in anything other than protecting the rights of the people.Originally posted by pavyracer
of course you dont care if the usps is losing money, will they shut down? go out of business? of course not. it's a government entity. so how does the government raise the revenue to keep the usps running?
taxes?, and they do it by force no less.
this can apply to any government function that government has no business in. (like health care and education)
what i want to know is why are the parasites that dont pay taxes allowed to use the ballot box to put people in office that promise to steal more tax payer money to support these government functions?Comment -
what school does obama's daughters go to in DC?Originally posted by andywend
government schools i'm sure...
Comment -
Losturmarbles said what i want to know is why are the parasites that dont pay taxes allowed to use the ballot box to put people in office that promise to steal more tax payer money to support these government functions?
Marbles, it was NEVER the intention of our founding forefathers to allow these parasites to vote.
Back when the constitution was written, the voting requirements to vote were as follows:
1. You had to be white.
2. You had to own your own land
3. You had to be male.
4. You had to know how to read and write (during the late 1700's/early 1800's, approximately 20% of the population was literate)
5. You had to pay a SIZEABLE poll tax to vote.
Lets take a look at the people that were excluded back then and see how they vote today:
1. Non white voters
2. Non land owners
3. Female voters
4. Illiterate voters
5. Low income voters
Every single one of these groups votes OVERWHELMINGLY democratic.
If our country reinstated the original voting requirements set by our founding forefathers, republicans would control the house 435-0 and the senate 100-0.
The next time you hear a liberal democrat mention the constitution, remember what the INTENT was of the people who actually wrote it.
The "one man/one vote" needs to be abolished. There is no justifiable reason why Bill Gates and a welfare mom should have the same voting power. AT THE VERY LEAST, anyone collecting even one dollar's worth of government assistance should NOT be allowed to vote.
Mathdotcom, thanks for the support.
WTF, liberal democrats are actually the most racist people on the Earth and your story doesn't surprise me at all.Comment -
Andy, Liberals and conservatives are just another set of labels for who has stuff and who doesn't.
Over time, everyone of the groups you mentioned become conservative when they become owners of something substantial. But they have to have earned it, not have had it given to them.
Comment -
Dutch, I have always been conservative even when I didn't have two nickels to rub together.Originally posted by Flying Dutchman
When I was in college, I was the only conservative in my political science class.
However, for the most part, you are spot on accurate with your assessment and I also agree with you about the low quality scum we keep electing to public office.
U.S. citizens need to think things through a whole lot better and stop electing so many idiots to congress.Comment -
Democrats are dumb, they represent blacks and minority with no money
Dems will ruin the nationComment -
Andy, my politics are to the right of Attila-the-Hun, and I see your late President W as the Anti-christ.
Next to him Obama looks to "us" Europeans like Christ-on-a-cracker.
You fvks better start getting it right, because when YOU ass-holes mess up politically and/or economically, WE pay for it!
Comment -
The U.S. financial meltdown was certainly felt worldwide but I don't see how you can blame Bush for that. The democrats were the ones putting the immense pressure on banks to lend to those who they knew wouldn't pay the loans back.Originally posted by Flying Dutchman
What exactly did Bush do to make him the "Anti-Christ" in your mind? If your politics are really to the right of Attila the Hun, I would be interested in reading say a top 5 list of Bush's biggest mistakes according to you.Comment
