In response to:

MSNBC: Damn These Conservatives for Trying to "Kill the Post Office"

HoovervilleFollies Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 7:06 PM
Regarding the 2006 legislation, Mr. Benson claims that it “requires the Post Office to employ honest accounting on its pension and benefits obligations and fund them in real time, rather than use gimmicks to hide the true cost and shove them off to some future date.” Oh, really? As I understand it, what the legislation did was require the Postal Service (get the name right, Benson) to fund health insurance and retirements for employees for the next 75 years, and get the funding done in the first 10 years. Is that what Benson sees a prudent and sustainable business model? Can he point to any business that would deliberately choose?
Buck O Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 7:11 PM
But then, we know you DON'T understand it, do you?
HoovervilleFollies Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 7:06 PM
It's pretty obvious what the Repubiicans were trying to do in that 2006 lame-duck session: hit the Postal Service – the agency which not coincidentally has the largest empoyee union – with a “poison pill” that would weaken it over time so it could eventually be sold off to private interests. Schultz is right to call for correction of this nonsense – a textbook case of crass, insane conservative policy.
Buck O Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 7:12 PM
A textbook post of idiotic left-wing big gubmint policy.
NW-Res Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 7:12 PM
So being responsible, honest and only spending what you make or save is crass and insane.

That makes no sense to me, but then I am one of those crass, insane conservatives.
Randy195 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 8:43 PM
Communism never works you fool it only blinds fools like you

There's a dastardly conspiracy afoot to shut down the United States Postal Service, Lefty screamer Ed Schultz has informed his MSNBC audience.  The culprits?  Republicans, match.  The USPS recently announced its decision to end Saturday mail service, an attempt to stanch its years-long budget bleeding; the federal entity lost $16 billion in 2012.  Though this move is only projected to save the Post Office roughly $2 billion annually, it's still an important nod to reality.  I discussed this issue on CNBC last night, where even the liberal panelist seemed to agree that major reductions are in order and...