Bobcat1

Thread was a warning to all so im locking this up. Any questions read the top post.

LOL - I know your point in deleting it...Only difference in what I said and what Big Girl said is I didn't beat around the bush....
 
She said if we believe in all that send your family...taking that as she doesn't give a dang about those people lives - well....I did! But sense she apparently doesn't appreciate my families effort - I just stated that maybe we shouldn't protect her and her friends/family if they in fact find themselves in that position!
 
for the record - At no point did I lose my temper, get mad, etc.....

really, it's not a big deal....funny actually.........I just won't talk about not caring if Big Girls head gets lopped off anymore or call her big dummy - sorry - won't happen again!

The name calling is becoming ridiculous - If you can't keep your temper in check, this is not the website for you.  This is a warning to everyone - Use profanity or call another member a name other than their log in name and you will be given a vacation away from the website until we feel you are mature enough to come back.   
 
Also, substituting symbols in for letters is not going to fly either. 

The question in the OP was about private industry operating more efficiently than the USPS. 
 
I fail to see how they can and I think my numbers are correct or nearly so. While the contract carriers may be good at delivering a limit quantity of parcel post items, they hardly deal with anything near the quantity of the USPS. 
 
I see a FedEx truck on my street about 15 times a year and a UPS truck about one a week. Even when I see those, they usually deliver to a single home and then leave. That is a far cry from stopping at virtually every address in the US six days a week. If they can deliver a first class letter at less than the USPS then let them do so, noting that the USPS delivers to all addresses for the same cost so a letter to Guam or Puerto Rico is still 49¢.  I am all for free enterprise and if FedEx, UPS and others can do that, feel free to jump on it. 
 
Lastly, since you are talking about efficiency...................
 
To put it in perspective, $16 Billion per year even at the cost of taxpayer's money (which in this case everyone actually benefits), is 0.004% of our annual budget. So even if you are paying $15,000 a year in income taxes, only $60 goes to the USPS to make up for their shortfall. Just think of it, you will only pay $14,940 instead. I would bet that most people reading this forum are not paying $15K per year in income taxes so their cost for the USPS would be less and sometimes a lots less than $60 per year. So for $60 or less for an entire year (a bit over $1 per week) you get delivery of any number of letters and packages, usually to your front door and six days a week. If we give FedEx $16B a year in tax dollars, can they deliver to every address, six days a week, including Guam, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, etc.? No wait, they would have to do it cheaper so they need to do it for a lot less. 
 
I just don't believe it that it will be any more efficient in this case by contract carriers and even if so, only by a couple of pennies per item.  Out of all the stuff we pay for with our taxes, it seems like the USPS is the least offensive and has a benefit for virtually every person. Compare that to where other places our money is spent. 
 
A comparison with Solyndra is meaningless. Solyndra was a private company that tried to manufacture a product that would be used by a minuscule percentage of people. I got nothing out of Solyndra and likely would not have if had they made it. I benefit from the USPS daily and I would bet that you do also. 
 
And lastly, I ran FexEx for a 10 pound standard rate package from Houston to NY (no overnight or emergency delivery). It was $14.71. The same 10 pound package from the USPS Priority Mail is $10.65. Hmmmm............ 
 
Maybe if the USPS charged "private" for profit rates, they wouldn't be in the red. 

One of the criteria is % of bachelor degrees. I would assume we have a lot higher % of technical degrees in this area with all of the refineries. Most plants don't require a degree or only a 2 year associates so that would skew the numbers some.

Ignore it and it will go away. 

You want a legitimate answer?
 
The Supreme Court said that limiting how much you can donate to a political campaign is an unconstitutional violation of the right to freedom of speech. The Democrats don't like that ruling and want to not create a new law (which would also violate our constitutional rights) but to change the Constitution and limit free speech when it comes to politics. The Democrats say yes to changing the Constitution and limiting free speech when it comes to elections and the Republicans say no. 
 
Ohhhh.... but let's not talk about free speech, let's call it what it has been called in this thread, bribery.
 
If you call it legal bribery as the title of the thread suggests, is less money just "a little bribery"? If you offer a cop $500 to drop a citation it would be a bribe but if you only offer him $250, it isn't? That is what the campaign finance laws say. You can donate to someone (bribe by the claim of this thread) and it is perfectly okay but you can only bribe to a certain extent. Tell me where that makes sense. The Dems don't mind donations and sure aren't turning down any money.... they only mind if you get more than they do. So it is okay to bribe people, just keep the bribing "under control".
 
There have been several such First Amendment cases that have thrown out campaign finance laws and in the most recent case (2014), the law (BCRA) allowed the "bribery"..... but you had to stop it 60 days before the election. Again, tell me where that makes any sense. Yes, you can put your money in electronic (television, radio, etc.) campaigning but you can't do it right at the end. Apparently the Dems think that bribery is perfectly okay to bribe 61 days out from an election but don't do it inside of 60 days.   And for that, they want to change the Constitution. 

I don't mind the spending on elections.  What bugs me more is the lobbying.  There is a place for it.   Congress needs to know what issues are out there, but it shouldn't involve money/vacations/gifts/political donations.

I will never get this time back...... :angry:

I am a law enforcement/criminal justice guru but I can't figure out how to work it into the thread.

I have a Roth IRA if that counts........

wtf is all this?  

Children, please stop arguing.

Beyonce actually won the most Moon Men at the VMA's last night.... :P

The video I watched this morning - I can't remember where I saw it - showed people grabbing at her sign, trying to take it from her. 

http://gawker.com/white-lady-brings-pro-darren-wilson-sign-to-ferguson-pr-1624780365
 
 
She misspelled the governor's name. :D  :lol:  

Politicians gonna politic

To the first, doesn't bother me, he can't do anything about it without full military ops approval, something that will take days if not weeks, and is a process he has absolutely no part of. Better he go play golf than ingolve himself with the military planning.
As to the second, unless he had somehow ng going on he should have been there.

We do.  The ability to read also helps us to know the correct usages of "there," "their," and "they're." 

Yes because it is (maybe for a change) a valid topic. 

I agree, I was enjoying this thread.  :angry:

We are all held accountable, the Media is the Media though. It's easy to point out Race when we don't want to deal with the Facts. Many take the easy way out & throw in Race as a diversion. It works almost every time though. Unfortunate

He won Big Girls' heart

Not really.....I'm 48, already play in a band........if I grew my hair out i would be the poster child for "mid-life crisis" lmao

Yep you do what you have to provide for your family.  Collecting an unemployment check was not an option.   My old job wanted me to stay until Jan. to "train" the offshore people that were taking my job and offered 3 months pay after I was laid off.  My response to that was "then what?"  I was going to miss out on a couple of months of looking for a job while still employed for 3 months of pay after I am laid off?  And then what would I do?  I told them if I get an offer I am gone.   Got a job about a month after I was notified that I was being laid off. They were pissed but I could care less.