This is bush ecconomics

[fishbane]

Read this article.
http://www.oregonlive.com/search/ind...egonian?yedcsn


Even you country folks will feel this.
Pay the execs more and cut services and wages to the workers. It is whole basis of the republican regime.

[Hoosier Daddy]

[ampersat]

what it's really about is pumping up fedex, ups and the other private carriers. in short, favoritism for big business at the expense of everyone else. that's been bush's legacy so far. some presidency.

[skrimmy]

[Adofish]

Don't blame me...I voted with the majority!

[Pilar]

No rural post offices?

[Thumper]

Easy there, folks. A little light, rather than heat, might be in order.

First off, the proposal in question has nothing to do with the Bush Administration. The proposal that is being touted; i.e., the "Transformation Plan", was developed by the U.S. Postal Service itself (a quasi-independent but federally owned and subsidized organization) and is being proposed TO the Bush Administration and TO the Congress by the Postal Service itself. This is not a Bush concept. It is the recommendation of the Postal Service's own best thinkers, and a committee named by the Administration is reviewing those recommendations. Both the Congress and the Administration must approve any changes in the way the Service operates.

Despite the liberal Oregonian reporter's claims, there are real issues that need to be dealt with, and soon. They are simple --- In fiscal Year 2001 the Postal Service ran up a $1.68 billion deficit which was $200 million worse than the previous year. The Oregonian reporter states that the Service "made a profit", but that was only after the U.S. taxpayer subsidized operations by donating some $2 billion dollars (about $72 per American). Most economists would agree that the long-term structural, financial and operational elements of the Service guarantee continuing financial disaster.

Three approaches are suggested in the Service's plan, varying from leaving the Service as it is now (a "commercial government enterprise") to converting it to a fully private corporation.

Under the "commercial enterprise" approach there would still be several modifications, including several new rules that would have Service managers operate under more businesslike conditions, including implementing market-based pricing and business-based financing.

A major sticking point with the plan's recommendations is the criticism of proposed working rules by the American Postal Workers Union. The union predictably opposes any outsourcing strategies and is fighting to avoid imposition of the collective-bargaining elements of the Railway Labor Act. Basically the union is adamantly opposed to having the Congress or the President be able to block strikes by imposing a settlement on deadlocked labor negotiations if the public interest is threatened.

This is a complex issue, and simplifying it as is being done in the Oregonian, on Oregon Live, and by Ifish members here is hardly a constructive solution.

One thing is sure. The bleeding can't continue to increase as it has in recent years. "Business as usual" isn't an option that the U.S. Congress will tolerate.

[ 09-02-2003, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: Thumper ]

[WheresMyBobber]

This is a complex issue, and simplifying it as is being done in the Oregonian, on Oregon Live, and by Ifish members here is hardly a constructive solution.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">The same can be said for the PERS issue for those who seem to have strong opinion about what they have no real understanding of. Including the Oregonian and it's writers.

[lost_sailor]

www.deanforamerica.com

[freespool]

LS,you might just have something there. What do think about Keery?

[DanS]

One thing is sure. The bleeding can't continue to increase as it has in recent years. "Business as usual" isn't an option that the U.S. Congress will tolerate.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Oh..........so they'll tolerate $8 billion a year to occupy Iraq, but won't tolerate $2 billion a year to maintain postal and parcel service for rural residents around the country?

Nice.

[lost_sailor]

Kerry seems about as phony as a politician can be. That's just my initial impression. I don't think the Dems will win by playing to the middle of the road, Kerry seems like a real road-middler.

[Stratocaster]

Kerry seems like a real road-middler

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Who cares? Hes a liar. He stumped the other day that he authorized "threat of force" not the use of force when he voted for the use of force in Iraq. I used to think he was an honorable guy. As far as Dean goes, i like his views on gun-control...none, he believes in the right to bear arms. He also has a favorable rating in the NRA. So he seems to be a guy that upholds the Constitution as a whole, and not try to erode it like some other do.

[Cool Texan]

The question is, can that Democrat keep his pants on?? :shocked: :grin:

[lost_sailor]

Yeah that's a real important question.

Forget unemployment, education, international terrorism, air, water ... what matters is what he does with his wiener. geeeez

[Cool Texan]

Just trying to lighten the mood a little. :smile:

[Stratocaster]

what matters is what he does with his wiener.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Dont forget, Hillary is probably running. Unless she has a....

[lingslayer]

Geez, You guys crack me up. You start a Bush bashing thread, and when you get "shown the light" about the issue you change the subject, hi-jack-ing the thread. And then when CT throws a little humor on your party you jump all over his comments, when what you're talking about is completely off-topic!!

Jamie

[ 09-03-2003, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: lingslayer ]

[Cool Texan]

Dont blame them Ling. They're Democrats...they cant help it.


(yes, that is pure sarcasm)

[Stratocaster]

Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" - Ronald Reagan -

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Actually i am, thanks very much. Good health(knock on wood), good fishing and money in the bank. :grin: