Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
"UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It's the Post Office that's always having proble
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Risen Tree" data-source="post: 52638706" data-attributes="member: 5345"><p>The Post Office is what crashed the economy last year? <img src="/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/old/scratch.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":scratch:" title="scratch :scratch:" data-shortname=":scratch:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Wow, I honestly didn't know that the Post Office received zero federal funding. I think that doing so should be considered, complete with a cost-benefit analysis of whatever funds are proposed. To those who oppose this, keep in mind the economic principle of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality" target="_blank">externalities</a>. If a $1B investment produces a $3B economic boost, then it is more than worth it. Viewed another way, the $7B deficit the USPS is currently running (I'm going to assume that number is true, for now) is entirely justifiable if that $7B creates more than that in economic benefits. Contrary to what many capitalists believe, running an organization at a loss is NOT necessarily a bad thing.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>How come you numbered your points #2 and 6? <img src="/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/old/scratch.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":scratch:" title="scratch :scratch:" data-shortname=":scratch:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>"No competition"? Despite the fact that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Parcel_Service#History" target="_blank">UPS has been around since 1907</a>? <img src="/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/old/scratch.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":scratch:" title="scratch :scratch:" data-shortname=":scratch:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Can you please post some non-biased evidence to support all these claims?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Risen Tree, post: 52638706, member: 5345"] The Post Office is what crashed the economy last year? :scratch: Wow, I honestly didn't know that the Post Office received zero federal funding. I think that doing so should be considered, complete with a cost-benefit analysis of whatever funds are proposed. To those who oppose this, keep in mind the economic principle of [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality]externalities[/url]. If a $1B investment produces a $3B economic boost, then it is more than worth it. Viewed another way, the $7B deficit the USPS is currently running (I'm going to assume that number is true, for now) is entirely justifiable if that $7B creates more than that in economic benefits. Contrary to what many capitalists believe, running an organization at a loss is NOT necessarily a bad thing. How come you numbered your points #2 and 6? :scratch: "No competition"? Despite the fact that [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Parcel_Service#History]UPS has been around since 1907[/url]? :scratch: Can you please post some non-biased evidence to support all these claims? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
"UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It's the Post Office that's always having proble
Top
Bottom