Is $25 an hour for a mailman too much compare to the money Wall st makes?

63 posts / 0 new

All the economic rules that make the 1% vs 99% need another "Look"?? You can be blind and see something is "Ass Backwards"!!

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Comments

Considering what comparable manual labor, unskilled high school diploma employees make and the fact that USPS is losing business and money-yes, $25/hr is high. Plus factor in the union perks like getting paid for more than your actual hours and the lucrative OT and double OT pay. The Postmaster himself said they can't raise stamp prices high enough to cover costs-$1.08 per stamp is the figure he gave.

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am

Is $25 an hour for a mailman too much compare to the money Wall st makes?

Not in a more sane and just world....

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Here in SoCal, there are Customer Service positions where you have to deal with people all day and require a college degree that pay $12/hr. They also prefer bilingual. You can't compare what happened to pay on Wall Street in the past 20 years with what the average working person has experienced. Clinton signed all the free trade agreements which screwed workers and also signed the elimination of Glass-Steagall which sent financial pay into the heavens.

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am
Quote DynoDon:

Considering what comparable manual labor, unskilled high school diploma employees make and the fact that USPS is losing business and money-yes, $25/hr is high. Plus factor in the union perks like getting paid for more than your actual hours and the lucrative OT and double OT pay. The Postmaster himself said they can't raise stamp prices high enough to cover costs-$1.08 per stamp is the figure he gave.

What's more healthy for a consumer based economy? 20 Postal workers making $50K each, or 1 Wall Street dirtbag making $1 Million? That's 20 families that need 20 families' worth of stuff vs. 1 family that gorges on 2-3 families' worth of stuff +19 families working at Wal Mart or McDonalds, and partially on the public dole. Raise the effing stamp price to $1.08, and it's still a huge bargain. UPS or FedEx charge $7-$8 for a letter.

al3's picture
al3
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Of course you are right in theory-but we live in a real world. Raise the stamp price to $1.08 and watch USPS business fall off a cliff. Spending an extra dollar to pay a bill will drive most people to online paying.

Our current economic system does not account for a consumer based economy. We operate on the trickle down theory.

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am

Wages, of course, are all relative to the standard of living. The US standard of living has been inflated, undeserved and based on credit for about 30 years. The last time the economy and standard of living was in balance was in the 1970s.

And as far as the USPS goes we may need to be thinking up some new models. More and more things are electronics. 50 years ago there were still probably people who didn't want a phone. My how times change. Don't have a phone line? One can even get a smartphone cheap and use one of the pay as you go no contract services.

Times and technologies change. I don't use autopay but now my credit union and one bank will let me just transfer funds to pay my credit card with them. Two stamps saved. For this emerging technology broadband access in the US needs to be in the commons not run by greedy telecoms (and we can pay for it by leasing them access).

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Actually, $25 an hour would only be about double the purchasing power of the minimum wage in the 60's. Such incomes were common. They were considered the norm rather than excessive.

A min. wage equivalent to a min. wage in the 60's would be about $11 an hour..

$25 isn't a whole lot over the 60's purchasing power doubling point.....once common.

If we're going to keep pushing purchasing power lower every year, I suppose most wages should follow suit and plunge accordingly. Non-wage income, of course, should be encouraged to grow exponentially as banksters and financiers suggest.

"For one to have more, another has to have less" - Friedman, "Money Mischief". The financier/bankster's more has to come from somewhere.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

I have to laugh at many of you libs blaming the 1%. Many of your are the same ones that go to see Julia Roberts in a movie, watch A-rod hit home runs, cheer for Tom Brady to throw a touchdown pass. You have no problem with them being in the 1%....because if you did, you would not be doing anything to help them stay there. How many of you watched Beyonce at halftime of the Super Bowl or Cheered for a team on the field last Sunday? If you did, you were cheering on some 1%'ers.

Hippocrites

jpohl
Joined:
Jan. 8, 2013 11:44 am

There is another side to your song. Do you think that billionaire puts her money in a sock and buries it in the back yard? They invest it in the hopes of making more money. That provides capital and liquidity to the economy. It also keeps the makers of Mercedes-benz and Porsche in business as they sell high end products. Your middle income workers make money in those industries as well. In most cases, I doubt the USPS worker would be able or want to make the same decisions a CEO makes. So we need to pay the CEO more. How much more....we found out because the market tells us.

jpohl
Joined:
Jan. 8, 2013 11:44 am

Fort Lauderdale International Airport Security jobs pay $5.00/hr.

leighmf's picture
leighmf
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Osama Bin Laden is laughing from his grave at the formation of Homeland Security and the TSA. What an economic hit!

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am
Quote jpohl:

So we need to pay the CEO more. How much more....we found out because the market tells us.

30 years ago average CEO pay was 20-30 times avg worker pay (as it continues to be in much of the civilized world) today it is 300-1000 times avg worker pay... or much more... all while real wages and benefits continue to decline. The top 1% love people such as yourself...

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily
embarrassed millionaires." John Steinbeck

That... and the usurpation of the rules and laws which benefit the 1% by the 1%...

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

$25/hr for a mailman is not high enough for someone who actually puts in the hours and works for a living. we should work on raising the minimum wage to such levels.

tomas.savage's picture
tomas.savage
Joined:
Dec. 27, 2011 10:29 am

Are you expecting the US to turn into the Netherlands? Don't hold your breath.

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am

A expatriate friend who is living in Europe says that socialism was more popular there because over the last 100 years they've seen a lot of turmoil and are wary of capitalist ideologues and their solutions. It may take longer for the American public to wake up and see they have no feet left because they shot them off believing that some day they would be one of the 1%.

Jpohl, you are talking to the wrong folks here. Most of us "libruls" here are of the educated class and don't watch Nash Car, Julia Roberts movies. IOW, we are elitist intellectual snobs. We may not mind there being millionaires but we really don't need billionaires. My guess is you don't even know any real millionaires and certainly no billionaires. Many of the tech billionaires are "accidental." IOW, in the right place at the right time to win that "lottery" prize. Others with the same ideas many not have been so lucky including those who had the idea "too early." Might want to spend some time on finding out how the real world works rather than what Faux Nooz tells you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_Ed6SlrUYQ

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Do you pay any attention to the comments on economics and why returning unproductive assets to productivity is the recipe for paying off debts? The simple idea is that you reduce costs and up revenues when you put people back to work, and you keep your economic "circulatory system" working to serve the economy (the body with all its parts) when you eliminate the clogs and gaps. It may require a transfusion at times, but the idea is to design system stability into the economy as it is legislated and regulated.

You want taxes that encourage investment instead of hoarding. You want investments to be in the "real economy" instead of in the Casino of currency gambling, and you want a barrier between the two. I would settle for the integrity of Vegas on Wall St. at this point, but there are deeper arguments about the relationship of finanicialism and useful investing.

We have seen what billionaire hedge fund abuse has done. We watch the computers whirl out the garbage market suck that fixes the game. Then there is LIBOR. OMG! The mob would put out a contract on anyone who messed up their legal gambling racket like this.

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 12:15 pm

Out of all the posts except #2,9, and 10, i have agreement with. But the most agreement i have is with #11, this post explain the best how "ass backward our economics are". This country is suppose to be at war with terrorism and they pay airport security $5.00/hr,that says a lot right there, and can you imagine what the 1% pay for security? Thanks to the GOP, may God bless America with $5.00/hr security for the 99% and the 1% get $700 billion/yr for defense of its empire. How can we turn a ass backward economic system around? Everything start from trade, where does the tail start wagging the dog? Is it when private interests start controlling the trading units of the community? PS Drc2 can the "mob" put a hit on evolution and climate change? I would think evolution & climate change is getting ready to make the mob say "their last prayers"! These people are on their last bubble, "printing money". That bubble is gone as far as i`m concern, "i will not support a Fed that only bailout the 1% at the 99% expense". The party is really over when the public get over the dumbdown & divide & conquer tactics and start trusting themselves to control the economy. "The dog wagging the tail"!

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

I wonder why $25 dollars an hour wasn't too much just a few years ago before the Post Office was required to fully fund it's future retirement plans up to 75 years in advance. I wonder why the Post Office was actually quite profitable and running smoothly before that little bit of legislation. I wonder how self sustaining the US Navy would be if it were required to fund all future retirement plans 75 years in advance. How about Congress itself? It's pretty obvious to me that the problems with the USPS have nothing to do with how much it pays it's workers.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am
Quote jpohl:

There is another side to your song. Do you think that billionaire puts her money in a sock and buries it in the back yard? They invest it in the hopes of making more money. That provides capital and liquidity to the economy. It also keeps the makers of Mercedes-benz and Porsche in business as they sell high end products. Your middle income workers make money in those industries as well. In most cases, I doubt the USPS worker would be able or want to make the same decisions a CEO makes. So we need to pay the CEO more. How much more....we found out because the market tells us.

I think you've been drinking a bit of kool aid. The Fed has been pumping liqudity into the economy because the financiers are disappearing it into financial paper faster than the Fed can replace it.

The 650 TRILLION+ dollars in global derivatives doesn't produce one grain of wheat or one drop of oil, not one factory and certainly not economic growth. What it does do is inflate paper assets. Paper wealth. Phantom wealth.. Bubbles. Bubbles pop.

The real world, the entire planet, produces $47 trillion annually in real stuff. The $650 trillion in paper wealth is bogus...backed by nothing but I.O.U.'s. There isn't enough money on the planet to pay them...not enough stuff on the planet to spend it on.. Pouring more money into the nonsense serves exactly what purpose?

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease".

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote jpohl:

I have to laugh at many of you libs blaming the 1%. Many of your are the same ones that go to see Julia Roberts in a movie, watch A-rod hit home runs, cheer for Tom Brady to throw a touchdown pass. You have no problem with them being in the 1%....because if you did, you would not be doing anything to help them stay there. How many of you watched Beyonce at halftime of the Super Bowl or Cheered for a team on the field last Sunday? If you did, you were cheering on some 1%'ers.

Hippocrites

We-the consumers- don't determine how much Beyonce or A-rod earn. I never called my representative to demand that Hollywood types and athletes be over paid. Enjoying sports and movies is not the same as bribing congressmen to create a tax system that favors the wealthy, though. There is no hypocrisy. This is about politics, not entertainment.

When Tayl talks about the 1%, he is talking about the contradiction between what our constitution says and the way it has manifest itself as a government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich. If you disagree that that's the case, I'd love to hear why you think that, but you're wrong.

I sincerely hope you're rich enough to take the time to defend the 1%, but you're probably not. Where would the ultra-wealthy be in our democracy, after all, if they didn't have a enough sycophants to worship and vote them into existence. I'm sure they appreciate you as much as you appreciate them...not!

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

i don't see what the big deal is. mit romeny can sleep in for two days and he sucks up ~$40,000 out of the economy. someone has to pay for that. like the postal worker..

a veteran post office worker has to work for a year to make something close to that after taxes. most of that will be spent on paying rent, utilities, insurance, perhaps education for children.. and some left over for fun gadgets. most of that money will go right back into the economy.

romeny's $40,000 will go to some offshore tax haven.

tomas.savage's picture
tomas.savage
Joined:
Dec. 27, 2011 10:29 am

This thread heading would be better as Is $25/hr too much compared to what other non skilled manual labor jobs that only require a high school education.

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am

We wouldn't be asking that question if the private-sector wages had kept pace with inflation, COLAs, and if we still had strong unions. In fact, minimum wage, if it kept pace with inflation, would be approximately $17/hour.

hshipman's picture
hshipman
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Bush_Wacker:

I wonder why $25 dollars an hour wasn't too much just a few years ago before the Post Office was required to fully fund it's future retirement plans up to 75 years in advance. I wonder why the Post Office was actually quite profitable and running smoothly before that little bit of legislation. I wonder how self sustaining the US Navy would be if it were required to fund all future retirement plans 75 years in advance. How about Congress itself? It's pretty obvious to me that the problems with the USPS have nothing to do with how much it pays it's workers.

This is what is called a myth. Actually, it has been repeated enough times to have graduated to old wives tell status. The USPS is only required to fund the retirement and medical care funds for its current employees by the end of each fiscal year. They are required to repeat this process for the next 75 years after the law was enacted. There is not now, nor has there ever been a requirement to fund employees not yet hired. All the pertinent links and excerpts from the law have been posted in this board the last time this old wives tell was pushed as if real.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

#19 has some very good questions that answer themselves, "something is very wrong with them" pictures. #20 add a bigger picture and have a answer for them, "the 1% is drinking the kool-aid". #21 D_NATURED, you seen where i`m coming from again, but this is the "root of so many of today problems". The conflict between human rights/morals(constitution/religion) and a economic system that`s base on "numbers". The ruling class/criminals have corrupted the idea of basic trading of needs to the "twilight zone" of derivatives & paper wealth. To add insult to injury(an understatement) the 1% use this "twilight zone" to over-rule human rights & morality. How can a democracy survive in a economic system that see people as "capital"?? And a economic system that`s "Corrupted". Anybody who think a mailman is only worth $25/hr and Bill Gates at $50 billion, believes in "Voodoo"!

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Everyone is missing the point. I am concerned about what is-not what everyone would like it to be. In the current job market, and for the forseeable future, where clerk type jobs without a degree such as retail, customer service, etc, are paying about $10/hr, how do you justify the $25/hr pay? Also factor in the issues with profitability the USPS has-it's not some booming tech company with money spilling out the doors. Other than showing how unions raise pay-how is $25/hr for that type of job justified in a company that is hurting for current and future profits?

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am
Quote norske:

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily
embarrassed millionaires." John Steinbeck

[/quote]

What a wonderful quotation. I think it speaks to the very nature of being an American. We may be poor now, but because of the opportunity this country provides, we still believe there's a chance to not only survive but to thrive.

Now, I know that's not how the left views the quotation. Instead, a left leaning person might read the quote and determine the underlying theme to be that Americans are simply stupid. Too stupid to realize they are being duped.

Sorry, I just don't see it that way. Some of you may not like my next comment, but I truly believe that no one in this country has to remain poor. If you are willing to work hard and take some chances, there is still a great deal of opportunity here to move up economically. Yes, some people get a headstart. Some don't deserve a headstart. Some not only dont get a headstart, they start in the hole. Even so, I stand by my comment. If you want it, you can do it.

Conservative_Th...
Joined:
Jun. 15, 2012 12:01 pm
Quote Conservative_Thom_Fan:

Sorry, I just don't see it that way. Some of you may not like my next comment, but I truly believe that no one in this country has to remain poor. If you are willing to work hard and take some chances, there is still a great deal of opportunity here to move up economically. Yes, some people get a headstart. Some don't deserve a headstart. Some not only dont get a headstart, they start in the hole. Even so, I stand by my comment. If you want it, you can do it.

And just what kind of work is that? You really are living in a fantasyland. The same one the 43% do who just "happen" to have a job at the moment and are too nearsighted to believe that job might not just be there two years from now. And then what will they do? It ain't the 1950s anymore.

This guy (the World Bank President) doesn't agree with you either:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOwZwkhFemQ

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote DynoDon:

Everyone is missing the point. I am concerned about what is-not what everyone would like it to be. In the current job market, and for the forseeable future, where clerk type jobs without a degree such as retail, customer service, etc, are paying about $10/hr, how do you justify the $25/hr pay? Also factor in the issues with profitability the USPS has-it's not some booming tech company with money spilling out the doors. Other than showing how unions raise pay-how is $25/hr for that type of job justified in a company that is hurting for current and future profits?

You are correct. If we strip away all the feelings and deal only hard realities, there is no way to justify $25 a hour for someone who puts a piece of paper in slots. Unfortunately, liberals let emotion overrule reality so you are not likely to get a strait answer from any of them.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Paleo-con:
Quote Bush_Wacker:

I wonder why $25 dollars an hour wasn't too much just a few years ago before the Post Office was required to fully fund it's future retirement plans up to 75 years in advance. I wonder why the Post Office was actually quite profitable and running smoothly before that little bit of legislation. I wonder how self sustaining the US Navy would be if it were required to fund all future retirement plans 75 years in advance. How about Congress itself? It's pretty obvious to me that the problems with the USPS have nothing to do with how much it pays it's workers.

This is what is called a myth. Actually, it has been repeated enough times to have graduated to old wives tell status. The USPS is only required to fund the retirement and medical care funds for its current employees by the end of each fiscal year. They are required to repeat this process for the next 75 years after the law was enacted. There is not now, nor has there ever been a requirement to fund employees not yet hired. All the pertinent links and excerpts from the law have been posted in this board the last time this old wives tell was pushed as if real.

You really need to do a little home work. Even just a little tiny bit .

In 2006, Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. This law requires the Postal Service to do something that no other business or government agency has to do–pre-fund its FUTURE retiree health care benefits. This is a 75 year liability that has to be paid in 10 years. The Postal Service makes a payment of approximately $5.5 billion on September 30 at the end of every fiscal year to meet this obligation. The Post Office has been paying these benefits the past four years into a trust fund for employees who have not even been born yet. This is the burden that is creating the “financial crisis” for the Post Office. The recession that has gripped America the past few years has undoubtedly affected the Postal Service, but even in the worst economic times since the great depression, the USPS has had a net profit of $611 million dollars. Unfortunately, the red ink associated with the post office is the mandated pre-funding since 2006.

http://my.firedoglake.com/kaytillow/2011/09/26/whats-the-real-story-behind-the-postal-crisis/

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am

There is plenty of work out there. I work at a place that has been trying to hire for a solid year with little success. If you have some basic math skills, can pass a drug test and are willing to start at the bottom, you can have a nice career here with benefits making a decent wage for the area in a safe environment. All of the above is the problem - basic math skills - eliminate half the applicates. Drug test - eliminate half of the remaining group. Start at the bottom? How dare you expect anyone from the entitled generation to start there.

I travel all over North America and here the same story over and over at other facilities. I personally know of one applicant that turned down $27/hr with benefits and shift premium because he didn't think he should have to work shift work. Instead he chose to stay on unemployment.

As for for your other "point", what if my job is gone in two years? I'll find another. I'll move. I'll work two jobs. I'll day labor if I have to. Whatever is necessary to support my family. If I can't work, I've prepared for the worst. I'll be fine. But I do appreciate your concern.

Conservative_Th...
Joined:
Jun. 15, 2012 12:01 pm
Quote Bush_Wacker:

You really need to do a little home work. Even just a little tiny bit .

In 2006, Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. This law requires the Postal Service to do something that no other business or government agency has to do–pre-fund its FUTURE retiree health care benefits. This is a 75 year liability that has to be paid in 10 years. The Postal Service makes a payment of approximately $5.5 billion on September 30 at the end of every fiscal year to meet this obligation. The Post Office has been paying these benefits the past four years into a trust fund for employees who have not even been born yet. This is the burden that is creating the “financial crisis” for the Post Office. The recession that has gripped America the past few years has undoubtedly affected the Postal Service, but even in the worst economic times since the great depression, the USPS has had a net profit of $611 million dollars. Unfortunately, the red ink associated with the post office is the mandated pre-funding since 2006.

http://my.firedoglake.com/kaytillow/2011/09/26/whats-the-real-story-behind-the-postal-crisis/

Okay, that was a funny joke. Do you seriously want us to believe that after all the homework you did, all you can come up with is an opinion piece in a liberal site? I can't believe you are asking others to do "just a little tiny bit" of homework.

Postal Civil Service Retirement and Health Benefits Funding Amendments of 2006

‘(c) The Secretary of the Treasury shall immediately invest, in interest-bearing securities of the United States such currently available portions of the Fund as are not immediately required for payments from the Fund. Such investments shall be made in the same manner as investments for the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund under section 8348.
Myth busted: No other business or government agency is held to the same standard.

‘(d)(1) Not later than June 30, 2007, and by June 30 of each succeeding year, the Office shall compute the net present value of the future payments required under section 8906(g)(2)(A) and attributable to the service of Postal Service employees during the most recently ended fiscal year.
Myth busted: Payments are for future employees not even born yet.

‘(B) Not later than June 30, 2017, the Office shall compute, and by June 30 of each succeeding year shall recompute, a schedule including a series of annual installments which provide for the liquidation of any liability or surplus by September 30, 2056, or within 15 years, whichever is later, of the net present value determined under subparagraph (A), including interest at the rate used in that computation.
Myth busted: This is a 75 year liability.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Paleo-con:
Quote Bush_Wacker:

You really need to do a little home work. Even just a little tiny bit .

In 2006, Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. This law requires the Postal Service to do something that no other business or government agency has to do–pre-fund its FUTURE retiree health care benefits. This is a 75 year liability that has to be paid in 10 years. The Postal Service makes a payment of approximately $5.5 billion on September 30 at the end of every fiscal year to meet this obligation. The Post Office has been paying these benefits the past four years into a trust fund for employees who have not even been born yet. This is the burden that is creating the “financial crisis” for the Post Office. The recession that has gripped America the past few years has undoubtedly affected the Postal Service, but even in the worst economic times since the great depression, the USPS has had a net profit of $611 million dollars. Unfortunately, the red ink associated with the post office is the mandated pre-funding since 2006.

http://my.firedoglake.com/kaytillow/2011/09/26/whats-the-real-story-behind-the-postal-crisis/

Okay, that was a funny joke. Do you seriously want us to believe that after all the homework you did, all you can come up with is an opinion piece in a liberal site? I can't believe you are asking others to do "just a little tiny bit" of homework.

Postal Civil Service Retirement and Health Benefits Funding Amendments of 2006

‘(c) The Secretary of the Treasury shall immediately invest, in interest-bearing securities of the United States such currently available portions of the Fund as are not immediately required for payments from the Fund. Such investments shall be made in the same manner as investments for the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund under section 8348.
Myth busted: No other business or government agency is held to the same standard.

‘(d)(1) Not later than June 30, 2007, and by June 30 of each succeeding year, the Office shall compute the net present value of the future payments required under section 8906(g)(2)(A) and attributable to the service of Postal Service employees during the most recently ended fiscal year.
Myth busted: Payments are for future employees not even born yet.

‘(B) Not later than June 30, 2017, the Office shall compute, and by June 30 of each succeeding year shall recompute, a schedule including a series of annual installments which provide for the liquidation of any liability or surplus by September 30, 2056, or within 15 years, whichever is later, of the net present value determined under subparagraph (A), including interest at the rate used in that computation.
Myth busted: This is a 75 year liability.

Now if you only knew what you just wrote. No myth busted here.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am

Senator Bernie Sanders has been screaming at the top of his lungs about this "myth" for a long time now. Here is a letter written to Senator Sanders from the Post Office Inspector General about a year ago. It's a short letter but if you can actually "comprehend" what's written then maybe you'll rethink your "myth".

http://www.scribd.com/doc/80707420/USPS-OIG-Letter-to-Senator-Sanders

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am

Bush_Wacker, you`re wasting your time/energy with these regressives. They have replace the "welfare queen with the mailman", what could be next for people with no shame? They can attack a mailman, but it`s no problem for the biggest gap between the 1% and 99% in history. These people are so regressive they will be looking for "The revolution will be televise"! What will they do when the mailman is ruling the wortd? "THEY WILL BECOME A MAILMAN"!

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Conservative_Thom_Fan:

There is plenty of work out there. I work at a place that has been trying to hire for a solid year with little success. If you have some basic math skills, can pass a drug test and are willing to start at the bottom, you can have a nice career here with benefits making a decent wage for the area in a safe environment. All of the above is the problem - basic math skills - eliminate half the applicates. Drug test - eliminate half of the remaining group. Start at the bottom? How dare you expect anyone from the entitled generation to start there.

I travel all over North America and here the same story over and over at other facilities. I personally know of one applicant that turned down $27/hr with benefits and shift premium because he didn't think he should have to work shift work. Instead he chose to stay on unemployment.

As for for your other "point", what if my job is gone in two years? I'll find another. I'll move. I'll work two jobs. I'll day labor if I have to. Whatever is necessary to support my family. If I can't work, I've prepared for the worst. I'll be fine. But I do appreciate your concern.

Sounds like a government or defense contractor job. The drug test thing shows the hand. "Entitled generation?" You mean folks who have paid their dues? Also your company might not like to hire someone WAY overqualified for these jobs. They know they will be gone in a minute if something that is REALLY in their field shows up. And what if no one wants to hire you as a day laborer? Times have changed. Not only is it not the 1950s it isn't the 1870s when Nicolai Tesla dug ditches. Even in the early 1980s employers were already filtering the overqualifed.

Look the banksters screwed up and we shouldn't pay their bill. That is the bottom line.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

My employer is not government or defense contractor related. Many, if not most, private companies drug test. As for the overqualified comment, false. They would gladly, and have hired over qualified people, knowing they may leave. Some don't. Our average years of service is about 17. We have many employees with over 25 years.

I don't understand your concern with my employment. All I can say is I have invested, saved and developed enough to survive without my current job. It would not be pleasant or easy, but it's workable. So, I suppose I'll hire myself as a laborer If disaster strikes. There is always work to be done. I hire people all the time. You'd be shocked at the number of people who simply won't work. Before you say it, I pay we'll above the local going rate.

Conservative_Th...
Joined:
Jun. 15, 2012 12:01 pm
Quote Bush_Wacker:

Senator Bernie Sanders has been screaming at the top of his lungs about this "myth" for a long time now. Here is a letter written to Senator Sanders from the Post Office Inspector General about a year ago. It's a short letter but if you can actually "comprehend" what's written then maybe you'll rethink your "myth".

http://www.scribd.com/doc/80707420/USPS-OIG-Letter-to-Senator-Sanders

I read the letter twice just to make sure. There is nothing in it the counters what is in the actual law; including the sections I posted. The Inspector General is simply stating what all us non-myth believers already know. The money they are required to pay for the purpose of backfilling the pension fund is hurting their bottom line, and they would like some way out of it. Was there a specific sentence that you feel supports your myths?

Also, does this really have anything to do with the $25/hr question?

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

There's 44 billion in the fund now. If that's for ongoing operating costs then there would be no 44 billion in a fund for the future. If they didn't have to dump 5.5 billion a year into future retirement and healthcare funds then there wouldn't be a shortfall, there would be a surplus.

As far as the $25 dollar question goes it's pretty simple. You and the other conservatives on this board continually ask the question "Who decides how much money a CEO can make?" "How dare anyone decide if a billionaire is making too much money". In the same breath you take it upon yourselves to decide how much money is too much for a mailman, cop or a firefighter. You scream that $25 dollars an hour is waaayyy too much for a mail carrier. Can't you see the hypocracy?

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am
Quote Bush_Wacker:

There's 44 billion in the fund now. If that's for ongoing operating costs then there would be no 44 billion in a fund for the future. If they didn't have to dump 5.5 billion a year into future retirement and healthcare funds then there wouldn't be a shortfall, there would be a surplus.

Here is a little history that may have been missed. The USPS was "borrowing" money from the funds and replacing it with iou's (sound familiar? think SS), then using the money to offset operational cost. The USPS wanted the Federal Government to be responsible for the military portion of their employee's years towards retirement. These two issues were worked out in the 2006 law. The government, via OPM (Office of Personnel Management) would agree to pay the military portion as long as they got to place the entire fund under the same controls as the rest of civil service employees. In other words, transfer the USPS retirement fund to Government control. Part of the agreement was for the USPS to replace the iou's with real money. Thus the $5.6 billion payments were born. The USPS only has three more payments to make, and they will be considered paid up. This is why the USPS and their Unions agreed to the terms. They would suffer a little pain now, but in the long run, they get to hand off long term retirement and health care to the Government.

If you reread the letter you posted, the IG is not trying to get out of the payments, just get more favorable terms.

Quote Bush_Wacker:As far as the $25 dollar question goes it's pretty simple. You and the other conservatives on this board continually ask the question "Who decides how much money a CEO can make?" "How dare anyone decide if a billionaire is making too much money". In the same breath you take it upon yourselves to decide how much money is too much for a mailman, cop or a firefighter. You scream that $25 dollars an hour is waaayyy too much for a mail carrier. Can't you see the hypocracy?

No, I can't see any hypocrisy in an apples to oranges comparison. CEO pay should be compared to what other CEO's are making. The pay for someone who puts paper in a slot should be compared to others who put paper in a slot. So the only true comparison is what is the FedEx delivery person getting compared to the USPS delivery person. See? Apples to apples.

Secondly, nobody has tried to decide how much can be earned. We have just been discussing if it was worth it. If the USPS wants to pay that much, then they have every right. See, no hypocrisy. On the other hand, the USPS has no right to complain about not making enough money because their costs are too high due to their own choices.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

If you are talking about a business, then the business model determines wages. Would you shop at a grocery store that paid it's workers $30/hr and charged prices that were 25% higher than the neighboring stores? If you want to have absolute control and feel you are paid what you are worth-go into sales or start your own business. Until this economy is near full employment, there will be downward pressure on wages. Some employers are still angry over the boom times and the advantage employees had when negotiating pay and benefits and are getting their pound of flesh now. These days, overpaid jobs are limited to those with sweet union contracts-see USPS and longshoremen- or with specialized in demand skills. Mail carriers don't have the specialized skills so it must be the union contract.

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am
Quote Conservative_Thom_Fan:

My employer is not government or defense contractor related. Many, if not most, private companies drug test. As for the overqualified comment, false. They would gladly, and have hired over qualified people, knowing they may leave. Some don't. Our average years of service is about 17. We have many employees with over 25 years.

Well we don't know what your company does. Would they high artists? Sounds like the field is very left brained and not something where they would want "randoms" or right brained people working. Is this field require some creativity? You can't put a round peg in a square hole.

Quote Conservative_Thom_Fan:I don't understand your concern with my employment. All I can say is I have invested, saved and developed enough to survive without my current job. It would not be pleasant or easy, but it's workable. So, I suppose I'll hire myself as a laborer If disaster strikes. There is always work to be done. I hire people all the time. You'd be shocked at the number of people who simply won't work. Before you say it, I pay we'll above the local going rate.

I'm not concerned with your employment. That is a preconceived notion or projection on your part. I bet you haven't even considered that I might be a "jobs creator" myself. And I have been and we even have some other progressives here who have been in senior management. You POV sounds very narrow and naive to me. That may work for some fields but I steer clear of those. I do my own contract work and as I get older need to be inventive. I've been a professional musician (still technically am) and also a software developer (which is a lot like writing music). You don't hire someone like me to balance books but instead develop algorithms that might aid in balancing books (though my main field is entertainment software, i.e. games).

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Not at all, in fact the mailperson is probably underpaid.

Dane's picture
Dane
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 3:39 pm

Paleo, you make one relevant point, "nobody has try to decide how much can be earn"? I was hoping to get to that issue by starting this thread. Anybody have to be 'brain-dead' to follow economic theory that cause the 1% vs 99% situation. Can we agree on that? We all know that trade has help humanity become more civilize, can we agree on that? looking at the present problems of 1% vs 99%, something is out of balance with trading, can we agree on that? What can cause such a inbalance in distribution of wealth, if all men are suppose to be created more or less equal? I think the problem start with "survival of the fittest", the stronger made everything it can & could into commodities with the evolution of humanity with trade. Would sex be the first commodity, and with evolution what would be the latest Wall st product? We can decide how much can be earn, only when we know what's a true commodity and who is the rightful owner, can we agree on that? Should sex be a commodity? Should a democratic vote answer these questions? If humanity could take lessons from other life on this planet, there would be no such thing as "trade"! Is the "Garden of Eve" a utopian dream?

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote captbebops:

Well we don't know what your company does. Would they high artists? Sounds like the field is very left brained and not something where they would want "randoms" or right brained people working. Is this field require some creativity? You can't put a round peg in a square hole.

My primary employment is in manufacturing. To answer your question about hiring artists, we absolutely would hire artists. In fact, I would argue that we already do. Perhaps not in the traditional sense, but our employees are truly craftsmen/women. Creativity and problem solving are key to our business.

You touch on what I believe to be the larger problem. "You say, you can't put a round peg in a square hole". True. However, in today's economoy, if you can't adapt, you aren't marketable. My point is, some people are willing to learn and work in any field. They just want a job, any job. I'll hire that person tomorrow. For the people who aren't taking a job because it's beneath them or not in their field. Instead chosing to stay on the government dole. Shameful.

Quote captbebops:

I'm not concerned with your employment. That is a preconceived notion or projection on your part. I bet you haven't even considered that I might be a "jobs creator" myself. And I have been and we even have some other progressives here who have been in senior management. You POV sounds very narrow and naive to me. That may work for some fields but I steer clear of those. I do my own contract work and as I get older need to be inventive. I've been a professional musician (still technically am) and also a software developer (which is a lot like writing music). You don't hire someone like me to balance books but instead develop algorithms that might aid in balancing books (though my main field is entertainment software, i.e. games).

If the best arguement you can muster is that my POV is narrow and naive, our conversation ends here. I've been on record on this very board, stating that I find the liberal claim of intellectual high ground every bit as offensive as the conservatives claim to the moral high ground.

The, "if you conservatives weren't so ignorant, uneducated and backward, you'd understand" liberal stance is pathetic. Let's assume it's true (which is false), shouldn't the left, as the peaceloving, all people are my brothers, hug a tree intellectual base want to educate the lowly conservative masses? Or is name calling more beneficial?

Conservative_Th...
Joined:
Jun. 15, 2012 12:01 pm
Quote DynoDon:

Everyone is missing the point. I am concerned about what is-not what everyone would like it to be. In the current job market, and for the forseeable future, where clerk type jobs without a degree such as retail, customer service, etc, are paying about $10/hr, how do you justify the $25/hr pay? Also factor in the issues with profitability the USPS has-it's not some booming tech company with money spilling out the doors. Other than showing how unions raise pay-how is $25/hr for that type of job justified in a company that is hurting for current and future profits?

the usps is a government agency to provide affordable information delivery service to all residents of the usa. it does not have to be profitable.

tomas.savage's picture
tomas.savage
Joined:
Dec. 27, 2011 10:29 am

Under your definition, it sounds like the internet and the USPS could be replaced with less expensive and labor intensive universal internet access.

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 10:24 am
Quote tomas.savage:

the usps is a government agency to provide affordable information delivery service to all residents of the usa. it does not have to be profitable.

Sorry, the USPS is not a Government Agency. It is required to be profitable enough to pay its own bills since it recieves no funding from the US Government.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Conservative_Thom_Fan:

If the best arguement you can muster is that my POV is narrow and naive, our conversation ends here. I've been on record on this very board, stating that I find the liberal claim of intellectual high ground every bit as offensive as the conservatives claim to the moral high ground.

The, "if you conservatives weren't so ignorant, uneducated and backward, you'd understand" liberal stance is pathetic. Let's assume it's true (which is false), shouldn't the left, as the peaceloving, all people are my brothers, hug a tree intellectual base want to educate the lowly conservative masses? Or is name calling more beneficial?

Can't help but that's the way you present yourself. You remind me of the "hardliners" of the China of the 1980s. Or the "tough love" Americans of 1980s. All out of touch with reality. Have you ever considered that some people want to take jobs they can do well and avoid ones they aren't so good at? Nothing like haranguing someone who is intellectually superior to his co-workers because he can't sling dirt as well. Keep in mind that someone who is not very athletic but has a bright mind may not be that good at slinging dirt. That can cause some tense situations. And it isn't fair to those whose skills are only good enough to get those kind of jobs. Point is that it makes NO LOGICAL SENSE for well educated people to be unemployed in this country. It is because of the greed and selfishness of a system that has failed us and is WAY BEHIND the realities of the times. Way back in the 1960s Buckminster Fuller pointed out that things needed to change but the establishment was too hell bent to hold onto power to allow a society that favored the people. We now have an establishment that favors only the rich and it deserves to be overthrown and will be eventually. And of course this is something that hardliners don't like.

You are just way off base.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Paleo-con:
Quote tomas.savage:

the usps is a government agency to provide affordable information delivery service to all residents of the usa. it does not have to be profitable.

Sorry, the USPS is not a Government Agency. It is required to be profitable enough to pay its own bills since it recieves no funding from the US Government.

If that were true then there wouldn't be a problem. How can the government tell a private company how to finance it's retirement funds? The post office pays for itself through postage but it's under the full authority of the US Government.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am

Currently Chatting

Time to Rethink the War on Terror

Thom plus logo

When Eric Holder eventually steps down as Attorney General, he will leave behind a complicated legacy, some of it tragic, like his decision not to prosecute Wall Street after the financial crisis, and his all-out war on whistleblowers like Edward Snowden.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system