72% of Americans support government run healthcare

[Harry Dresden]

I am not calling for the privatization of the USPS, the Postmaster General stated that.

no....he did not....

 

[Care4all]

Do you think more doctors and hospitals will be free? This cost would be in addition to the 1 trillion dollar price tag being floated around....

increasing the number of medical and nursing schools, both private and public, would be a good start in lowering the cost of medical school and that outrageous cost of such being passed on to us via higher prices.... due to the competition, and create more medical doctors as well...which are greatly needed.

what are your ideas on how to reduce costs long term jr?

care

This is my biggest practical complaint in proposed government run health care. Some here don't seem to understand basic economics. When the price of something decreases, supply demanded increases. And just to cut anybody off at the pass that may try the ridiculous argument that health care is not like other goods and services, then why are we doing this? The goal is to reduce cost so that the people not using it because of the high cost now will. Increased demand on the system is a given folks. Is there someone here naive enough to tell me they think the supply of doctors and facilities we currently have can meat that demand?

So getting back to what you're saying care, I agree in principle that supply will need to increase to meet demand. But I'm sure the answer is more medical schools. After all that solution is predicated on the assumption that there is a shortage of schools for students qualified to become doctors. Ultimately is more practitioners that we need but they still must meet the current criteria to become so. I don't think lowering standards as a means of increasing supply is the way to go. More demand meat with lower quality supply is a recipe for disaster.

i agree, i don't think the standards should be reduced, but more schools would reduce the cost of medical school due to competition and more qualified, intelligent, people could attend at the lower cost that were unable to afford it previously....

we have to increase our supply....hospitals, doctors, nurses, med techs...the boomers alone will demand it, and a shortage of such will keep prices higher than the market can truly afford.

 

[jreeves]

and yea you would have to show me a link too Jr...the Postmaster and MANY and i mean MANY of the upper managers would be the first guys to lose their jobs if that happened.....i would really be kinda shocked if he indeed said that

Is It Time to Privatize the Postal Service?
Dr. Gene Del Polito has served as the president of the Association for Postal Commerce for the past 20 years. Dr. Del Polito is highly regarded as an effective advocate on behalf of those who use mail for business communication and commerce. He has received several awards and is often sought as a speaker at postal conferences.
Marvin Runyon: You talk about privatization. Well, we're being "privatized" every day by our competition--letter by letter, package by package. Competition is giving us plenty of incentive to improve. It's making us realize that if we're to be an innovative leader in the communications industry, we've got to get out there and compete for every postal dollar we get.

The only way to do that is to become more like a private company--in effect, to "corporatize" ourselves. And that is exactly what we're doing. When it comes to running a business, I learned a lot in my years at Ford and Nissan. I came to government, first to the Tennessee Valley Authority and then to the Postal Service, because I wanted to prove that the same practices could work in the public sector.

They do. TVA is a customer-driven, top-performing organization. It hasn't had a price increase since 1987 and has pledged to keep prices steady for a full decade, until at least 1997. It's proving that an organization that's part government and part business can be successful and competitive.

The Postal Service is also more businesslike than ever. We got a good start 25 years ago, when the Postal Reorganization Act combined our mission to serve everyone, everywhere, every day, with a mandate to operate like a business. And we've delivered.

We've become more businesslike as the act envisioned. Political affiliations no longer determine who gets what jobs. Postal management, with help from a board of directors similar to ones in the private sector, determines our strategic directions and capital investments. And we're self- supporting. Today, when it comes to postage rates, what you see is what you get. There's no longer a 25 percent hidden subsidy in the price of a stamp. No tax dollars fill our coffers. And the real price of a stamp when adjusted for inflation is about the same today as it was back in 1971.

Clearly, it's time to take the next step in postal reform. In recent weeks, as this subject has been discussed around the nation, a broad range of actions has been recommended. You will hear some more today. They've run the gamut from minor legislative changes to selling off the Postal Service lock, stock, and barrel to a private company.

But there is growing consensus that the answer lies between those two extremes. There is agreement that it's not time to get the government out of the business of delivering the mail. It's time to get the Postal Service into business for the American people by freeing it to compete.

Recent surveys affirm that point. A recent Lou Harris poll says that competition is good for the Postal Service. However, the survey results indicate that more than three-quarters of both business executives and consumers feel that, despite some flaws, the Postal Service is "the best way to provide mail delivery for everyone at a reasonable price."

A recent national survey by Opinion Research Corporation also found that the majority of Americans favor government delivery of the mail. Seventy-six percent favored keeping the current organization but making it more flexible. I've heard the same thing from business customers in a variety of sectors and in meetings with members of Congress and representatives of the administration. America doesn't want a different Postal Service--it wants the one it has to be more businesslike and responsive to its needs.
Former PMG Marvin Runyon Dies at 79

Marvin Runyon, U.S. postmaster general from 1992 to 1998, died May 3. He was 79.

um Jb.....you said the PMG of right now,John Potter said this, to Congress recently....where is that quote?....Marvin Runyon was for letting the post office run like a Private Business and be able to make as much money as they can and use it to keep the place up to date with the new technology instead of having to go through the hoops it has too get what it needs.....this article says nothing about he wanting to privitize the PO....

The only way to do that is to become more like a private company--in effect, to "corporatize" ourselves. Maybe you missed this line Harry.


Here's what I said earlier Harry, can you point out where I said the current PMG?

I guess if I showed a quote from the US postmaster general calling for the privatization of the USPS so that they could compete, that wouldn't mean anything to you either, huh?

 

[Harry Dresden]

Is It Time to Privatize the Postal Service?
Dr. Gene Del Polito has served as the president of the Association for Postal Commerce for the past 20 years. Dr. Del Polito is highly regarded as an effective advocate on behalf of those who use mail for business communication and commerce. He has received several awards and is often sought as a speaker at postal conferences.
Marvin Runyon: You talk about privatization. Well, we're being "privatized" every day by our competition--letter by letter, package by package. Competition is giving us plenty of incentive to improve. It's making us realize that if we're to be an innovative leader in the communications industry, we've got to get out there and compete for every postal dollar we get.

The only way to do that is to become more like a private company--in effect, to "corporatize" ourselves. And that is exactly what we're doing. When it comes to running a business, I learned a lot in my years at Ford and Nissan. I came to government, first to the Tennessee Valley Authority and then to the Postal Service, because I wanted to prove that the same practices could work in the public sector.

They do. TVA is a customer-driven, top-performing organization. It hasn't had a price increase since 1987 and has pledged to keep prices steady for a full decade, until at least 1997. It's proving that an organization that's part government and part business can be successful and competitive.

The Postal Service is also more businesslike than ever. We got a good start 25 years ago, when the Postal Reorganization Act combined our mission to serve everyone, everywhere, every day, with a mandate to operate like a business. And we've delivered.

We've become more businesslike as the act envisioned. Political affiliations no longer determine who gets what jobs. Postal management, with help from a board of directors similar to ones in the private sector, determines our strategic directions and capital investments. And we're self- supporting. Today, when it comes to postage rates, what you see is what you get. There's no longer a 25 percent hidden subsidy in the price of a stamp. No tax dollars fill our coffers. And the real price of a stamp when adjusted for inflation is about the same today as it was back in 1971.

Clearly, it's time to take the next step in postal reform. In recent weeks, as this subject has been discussed around the nation, a broad range of actions has been recommended. You will hear some more today. They've run the gamut from minor legislative changes to selling off the Postal Service lock, stock, and barrel to a private company.

But there is growing consensus that the answer lies between those two extremes. There is agreement that it's not time to get the government out of the business of delivering the mail. It's time to get the Postal Service into business for the American people by freeing it to compete.

Recent surveys affirm that point. A recent Lou Harris poll says that competition is good for the Postal Service. However, the survey results indicate that more than three-quarters of both business executives and consumers feel that, despite some flaws, the Postal Service is "the best way to provide mail delivery for everyone at a reasonable price."

A recent national survey by Opinion Research Corporation also found that the majority of Americans favor government delivery of the mail. Seventy-six percent favored keeping the current organization but making it more flexible. I've heard the same thing from business customers in a variety of sectors and in meetings with members of Congress and representatives of the administration. America doesn't want a different Postal Service--it wants the one it has to be more businesslike and responsive to its needs.
Former PMG Marvin Runyon Dies at 79

Marvin Runyon, U.S. postmaster general from 1992 to 1998, died May 3. He was 79.

um Jb.....you said the PMG of right now,John Potter said this, to Congress recently....where is that quote?....Marvin Runyon was for letting the post office run like a Private Business and be able to make as much money as they can and use it to keep the place up to date with the new technology instead of having to go through the hoops it has too get what it needs.....this article says nothing about he wanting to privitize the PO....

The only way to do that is to become more like a private company--in effect, to "corporatize" ourselves. Maybe you missed this line Harry.


Here's what I said earlier Harry, can you point out where I said the current PMG?

I guess if I showed a quote from the US postmaster general calling for the privatization of the USPS so that they could compete, that wouldn't mean anything to you either, huh?

do you know the difference between CORPORATIZE and PRIVATIZE?...what he said had nothing to do with PRIVATIZING the PO....he wanted to run it more like a private Co....not have to go through Congress to raise rates,buy new equipment etc....thats what he meant by CORPORATIZE ...and when you tell us that the PMG is calling for PRIVITIZING of the PO....gee yea i guess we would think its the guy in charge right now not a guy from 10-15 years ago...now show me a quote from the current PMG John Potter calling for privitization...ill be waiting....

 

[jreeves]

um Jb.....you said the PMG of right now,John Potter said this, to Congress recently....where is that quote?....Marvin Runyon was for letting the post office run like a Private Business and be able to make as much money as they can and use it to keep the place up to date with the new technology instead of having to go through the hoops it has too get what it needs.....this article says nothing about he wanting to privitize the PO....

The only way to do that is to become more like a private company--in effect, to "corporatize" ourselves. Maybe you missed this line Harry.


Here's what I said earlier Harry, can you point out where I said the current PMG?

I guess if I showed a quote from the US postmaster general calling for the privatization of the USPS so that they could compete, that wouldn't mean anything to you either, huh?

do you know the difference between CORPORATIZE and PRIVATIZE?...what he said had nothing to do with PRIVATIZING the PO....he wanted to run it more like a private Co....not have to go through Congress to raise rates,buy new equipment etc....thats what he meant by CORPORATIZE ...and when you tell us that the PMG is calling for PRIVITIZING of the PO....gee yea i guess we would think its the guy in charge right now not a guy from 10-15 years ago...now show me a quote from the current PMG John Potter calling for privitization...ill be waiting....

nice strawman...I never asserted that

I guess a private company is actually a public agency...silly me

 

[Harry Dresden]

The only way to do that is to become more like a private company--in effect, to "corporatize" ourselves. Maybe you missed this line Harry.


Here's what I said earlier Harry, can you point out where I said the current PMG?

I guess if I showed a quote from the US postmaster general calling for the privatization of the USPS so that they could compete, that wouldn't mean anything to you either, huh?

do you know the difference between CORPORATIZE and PRIVATIZE?...what he said had nothing to do with PRIVATIZING the PO....he wanted to run it more like a private Co....not have to go through Congress to raise rates,buy new equipment etc....thats what he meant by CORPORATIZE ...and when you tell us that the PMG is calling for PRIVITIZING of the PO....gee yea i guess we would think its the guy in charge right now not a guy from 10-15 years ago...now show me a quote from the current PMG John Potter calling for privitization...ill be waiting....

nice strawman...I never asserted that

I guess a private company is actually a public agency...silly me

Jr....if you dont understand the quotes that you post....why post them?

 

[jreeves]

do you know the difference between CORPORATIZE and PRIVATIZE?...what he said had nothing to do with PRIVATIZING the PO....he wanted to run it more like a private Co....not have to go through Congress to raise rates,buy new equipment etc....thats what he meant by CORPORATIZE ...and when you tell us that the PMG is calling for PRIVITIZING of the PO....gee yea i guess we would think its the guy in charge right now not a guy from 10-15 years ago...now show me a quote from the current PMG John Potter calling for privitization...ill be waiting....

nice strawman...I never asserted that

I guess a private company is actually a public agency...silly me

Jr....if you dont understand the quotes that you post....why post them?

I get it, a private company is in fact a public agency. My bad...

 

[Harry Dresden]

now show me a quote from the current PMG John Potter calling for privitization...ill be waiting..[/B]..

nice strawman...I never asserted that

yes you did.....post no. 384......your quote....

I wonder why the Postmaster General called for the privatization of the USPS so they could compete better?

now when i read this im thinking the current PMG not some former PMG........if you meant some guy 15 years ago you should have said so.....

 

[jreeves]

now show me a quote from the current PMG John Potter calling for privitization...ill be waiting..[/B]..

nice strawman...I never asserted that

yes you did.....post no. 384......your quote....

I wonder why the Postmaster General called for the privatization of the USPS so they could compete better?

now when i read this im thinking the current PMG not some former PMG........if you meant some guy 15 years ago you should have said so.....

I understand, Runyon wasn't PMG....understood

 

[Harry Dresden]

nice strawman...I never asserted that

I guess a private company is actually a public agency...silly me

Jr....if you dont understand the quotes that you post....why post them?

I get it, a private company is in fact a public agency. My bad...

Jr.....the guy wanted to RUN the Co. like a private one....not with all the red tape that binds the PO to all the govt. Regulations.....to CORPERATISE it ....to PRIVATISE it means to sell it to a private concern....like UPS for instance.....there is a difference....

 

[jreeves]

Jr....if you dont understand the quotes that you post....why post them?

I get it, a private company is in fact a public agency. My bad...

Jr.....the guy wanted to RUN the Co. like a private one....not with all the red tape that binds the PO to all the govt. Regulations.....to CORPERATISE it ....to PRIVATISE it means to sell it to a private concern....like UPS for instance.....there is a difference....

That was my point was it not, he wanted to eliminate the bureaucratic red tape of a public agency and make it like a big business or private company.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I get it, a private company is in fact a public agency. My bad...

Jr.....the guy wanted to RUN the Co. like a private one....not with all the red tape that binds the PO to all the govt. Regulations.....to CORPERATISE it ....to PRIVATISE it means to sell it to a private concern....like UPS for instance.....there is a difference....

That was my point was it not, he wanted to eliminate the bureaucratic red tape of a public agency and make it like a big business or private company.

ok lets let it go at that....a Govt owned Corp. run like a Private one....is that good?...dam your tough dude...

 

[jreeves]

Jr.....the guy wanted to RUN the Co. like a private one....not with all the red tape that binds the PO to all the govt. Regulations.....to CORPERATISE it ....to PRIVATISE it means to sell it to a private concern....like UPS for instance.....there is a difference....

That was my point was it not, he wanted to eliminate the bureaucratic red tape of a public agency and make it like a big business or private company.

ok lets let it go at that....a Govt owned Corp. run like a Private one....is that good?...dam your tough dude...

Sounds good.

 

[Yukon]

I just bought a new car from GM which is owned by the US Government.

 

[Bern80]

I just bought a new car from GM which is owned by the US Government.

Owning and operating/managing are two 'slightly' different things. What is your point?

 

[Chris]

I just bought a new car from GM which is owned by the US Government.

Owning and operating/managing are two 'slightly' different things. What is your point?

His point is that corporate greed destroyed the American economy.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I just bought a new car from GM which is owned by the US Government.

Owning and operating/managing are two 'slightly' different things. What is your point?

His point is that corporate greed destroyed the American economy.

You mean government greed and regulations combined with corporate greed and bad decision making destroyed the economy.

After all if the politicians were not receiving millions in campaign contributions from these same companies maybe they wouldn't have passed such sweethart regs for them.