Shake out a few each month
to support Free Republic
Sponsors will contribute $10 for each new monthly sign-up
Posted on 01/09/2012 11:41:58 AM PST by jazusamo
“So would people who live in remote areas, where the cost of delivering all mail is higher. But if people who decide to live in remote areas don’t pay the costs that their decision imposes on the Postal Service, electric utilities and others, why should other people be forced to pay those costs?
A society in which some people make decisions, and other people are forced to pay the costs created by those decisions, is a society where a lot of decisions can be made despite their costs being greater than their benefits.”
I’m gonna miss you all, but I cannot WAIT to be off the grid...where I won’t be a BURDEN to any of my fellow Freepers. :) *SMOOCH*
>> The real answer to the question whether the Postal Service is worth what it is costing can be found only when various indirect government subsidies stop and when the government stops forbidding others from carrying the mail — if that ever happens.
The direct source of revenue for USPS comes through postal sales, and not taxation. Certainly the ‘indirect’ benefits provided through regulation is worthy of discussion; however, in comparison to the abusive agencies and departments we normally hold in contempt, the USPS is a worthwhile facet of the United States that does not deserve priority evaluation. Congress places a high allocation demand on USPS revenue — this if anything should be scrutinized.
Regarding Kodak, the company has been asleep at the wheel for at least the last 3 decades.
>> The USPS also failed to adapt to a changing technology and should also go away as their services are obsolete.
It’s a tired rant you got there. You may not like USPS, but it’s an operation that survives on postal revenue, not the taxes you’re forced to pay.
The Chinese had a canon when Europeans were still living in caves gnawing old auroch bones.
Businesses need vision. They need people in charge who have a sense of where the market is going and can follow it. All too often, Wall Street puts accountants in charge for whom everything is just a numbers game. Someone who has never ventured outside of financial matters can't possibly develop a vision for where film or tractors or airplanes need to go next. All they can do is hope nothing changes while they are in charge.
True visionaries can drive the change, and create a new company where none existed before or change an existing company to adapt to the market.
He still could be!
He's 81 years old. Still, he could do a better job than Obama even if someone hid his glasses.
It’s true they aren’t comparable, and one major reason they they are not comparable is the government subsidies the PO receives. I know you don’t really believe it only costs 45 cents for the PO to deliver a first class letter. That’s just what they charge you, not the true cost. Why shouldn’t you as the shipper pay what it really costs? I think that is Sowell’s point.
That very brilliance is probably why he didn't ever run. "Brilliance" doesn't seem to be a criteria for the Presidency nowadays.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.