Can Any Dem/lib Tell Us What Agency The Govt Has Run Efficiently?

[Harry Dresden]

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume....

obozo was a senator. how did he vote? or was that one of his non-votes?

i have no idea.....the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by 1 Republican and 2 Democrats....as i have been telling many Democrats here for the last few years in the postal threads....their party is just as responsible for the PO's finacial problems as are the Republicans....

OK, but earlier you and carbon head were blaming republicans for the PO losing money. I guess you are backing away from that foolish claim.

show me the post....because i have always blamed both parties.....i wanna see what you say i said....

 

[Redfish]

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

I'm not going to repost the article.

Either read it or don't.

But you are lying or stupid.

Can't figure out which.

was obama elected in 2008? look at the data, fool. The big loses were on him. or are only republican presidents responsible for what happens during their terms?

The loses were the result of legislation not a business model.

And funny you guys chalk up every loss to Obama and every gain to some magical other thing.

is the president responsible for what happens during his term (good or bad) or not?

i say yes they are.....if its their policy then obviously yes....if they added or subtracted from a previous policy yes.....at this point in time Obama should be getting accolades as well as criticism for the things happening in this country.....but all i see is many on the right not giving him credit when he may deserve it,but giving him grief for just about everything he does or says.....and many on the left never criticizing him even when he deserves it..... and it was the same for Bush in his second term only the roles reversed.....now mind you, there are many out there who give the guy both and who realize....Bush aint President anymore....

please list obama's praise worthy accomplishments.

you are right ,Bush is no longer president, but the libs still hold him responsible for what happened 6 years after obama took over.

 

[Redfish]

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume....

obozo was a senator. how did he vote? or was that one of his non-votes?

i have no idea.....the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by 1 Republican and 2 Democrats....as i have been telling many Democrats here for the last few years in the postal threads....their party is just as responsible for the PO's finacial problems as are the Republicans....

OK, but earlier you and carbon head were blaming republicans for the PO losing money. I guess you are backing away from that foolish claim.

show me the post....because i have always blamed both parties.....i wanna see what you say i said....

you implied it, carbon stated it. If I misread you, my error.

 

[AmericanGirl05]

In other words, you can't produce a quote of redfish saying what you claim he said.

Thanks for playing!

hey Bri.....post no.410.....Redfish said...."Ok, lets make it simple. one dollar over budget is inefficient, one dollar under budget is efficient-----------as long as the product is delivered as contracted".....so a company that has even the smallest bit of waste is too Redfish..... INEFFICIENT....yea i know its tough .....

A company can have a bit of waste and still complete its project within budget. I know that you libs really struggle with the definition of "efficient". I guess because the concept of efficiency is so foreign to your way of thinking.

so lets move those goalposts.....now because someone is questioning what you said.....lets change it...when your balls come down Fish....maybe you will stand by what you originally said....

my definition remains valid. complete the project within budget = efficient. overrun the budget = inefficient.

you can have some waste and make it up in other places and still complete under budget (efficiently). When has the government ever done that? Wake up, we are almost 18 trillion dollars in debt because of government inefficiency. But yet, those on the left want to turn more of the economy over to the government.

What an incredibly simplistic view point.

First off, the government not only does things more cheaper than the private sector, it actually gets things done. Additionally it does things that the private sector doesn't want to be involved in, at all.

Secondly, the government funds it's projects through taxation. When batshit crazy, voodoo economics, pie in the sky, kill the government conservatives come along..they cut taxes and leave massive deficits as a result. IN FACT, they get RID of programs like PAYGO so they can further fleece the federal government they "hate".

By the way, government employee, have you given up your government goodies yet?

The first rule of government is "We always do things on the cheap." That doesn't mean we do them better, it just means we do it the cheapest way possible.

Does the roll back rack at Walmart equal a Chanel jacket?

As far as government getting things done, huh?

About as slowly as a Red Sox pitcher with men on base.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm not going to repost the article.

Either read it or don't.

But you are lying or stupid.

Can't figure out which.

was obama elected in 2008? look at the data, fool. The big loses were on him. or are only republican presidents responsible for what happens during their terms?

The loses were the result of legislation not a business model.

And funny you guys chalk up every loss to Obama and every gain to some magical other thing.

is the president responsible for what happens during his term (good or bad) or not?

i say yes they are.....if its their policy then obviously yes....if they added or subtracted from a previous policy yes.....at this point in time Obama should be getting accolades as well as criticism for the things happening in this country.....but all i see is many on the right not giving him credit when he may deserve it,but giving him grief for just about everything he does or says.....and many on the left never criticizing him even when he deserves it..... and it was the same for Bush in his second term only the roles reversed.....now mind you, there are many out there who give the guy both and who realize....Bush aint President anymore....

please list obama's praise worthy accomplishments.

you are right ,Bush is no longer president, but the libs still hold him responsible for what happened 6 years after obama took over.

ask Dean or Franco.....im sure they will have quite a few.....im too disenchanted with the guy.....he aint impressing me like he is them.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume....

obozo was a senator. how did he vote? or was that one of his non-votes?

i have no idea.....the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by 1 Republican and 2 Democrats....as i have been telling many Democrats here for the last few years in the postal threads....their party is just as responsible for the PO's finacial problems as are the Republicans....

OK, but earlier you and carbon head were blaming republicans for the PO losing money. I guess you are backing away from that foolish claim.

show me the post....because i have always blamed both parties.....i wanna see what you say i said....

you implied it, carbon stated it. If I misread you, my error.

well i wont know unless you tell me what post it is....

 

[Flopper]

ok Dean....i hear ya.....

In other words, you can't produce a quote of redfish saying what you claim he said.

Thanks for playing!

hey Bri.....post no.410.....Redfish said...."Ok, lets make it simple. one dollar over budget is inefficient, one dollar under budget is efficient-----------as long as the product is delivered as contracted".....so a company that has even the smallest bit of waste is too Redfish..... INEFFICIENT....yea i know its tough .....

A company can have a bit of waste and still complete its project within budget. I know that you libs really struggle with the definition of "efficient". I guess because the concept of efficiency is so foreign to your way of thinking.

so lets move those goalposts.....now because someone is questioning what you said.....lets change it...when your balls come down Fish....maybe you will stand by what you originally said....

my definition remains valid. complete the project within budget = efficient. overrun the budget = inefficient.

you can have some waste and make it up in other places and still complete under budget (efficiently). When has the government ever done that? Wake up, we are almost 18 trillion dollars in debt because of government inefficiency. But yet, those on the left want to turn more of the economy over to the government.

Balancing the budget does not mean government is running efficiently. It just means the executive branch is spending and collecting money as congress planned. If congress budgets $25,000 for hammers that can be purchased for $5 and the administration spends $25,000/hammer, that's efficient government?

 

[Redfish]

In other words, you can't produce a quote of redfish saying what you claim he said.

Thanks for playing!

hey Bri.....post no.410.....Redfish said...."Ok, lets make it simple. one dollar over budget is inefficient, one dollar under budget is efficient-----------as long as the product is delivered as contracted".....so a company that has even the smallest bit of waste is too Redfish..... INEFFICIENT....yea i know its tough .....

A company can have a bit of waste and still complete its project within budget. I know that you libs really struggle with the definition of "efficient". I guess because the concept of efficiency is so foreign to your way of thinking.

so lets move those goalposts.....now because someone is questioning what you said.....lets change it...when your balls come down Fish....maybe you will stand by what you originally said....

my definition remains valid. complete the project within budget = efficient. overrun the budget = inefficient.

you can have some waste and make it up in other places and still complete under budget (efficiently). When has the government ever done that? Wake up, we are almost 18 trillion dollars in debt because of government inefficiency. But yet, those on the left want to turn more of the economy over to the government.

Balancing the budget does not mean government is running efficiently. It just means the executive branch is spending and collecting money as congress planned. If congress budgets $25,000 for hammers that can be purchased for $5 and the administration spends $25,000/hammer, that's efficient government?

of course not, that would be waste i.e. inefficient.

 

[Redfish]

obozo was a senator. how did he vote? or was that one of his non-votes?

i have no idea.....the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by 1 Republican and 2 Democrats....as i have been telling many Democrats here for the last few years in the postal threads....their party is just as responsible for the PO's finacial problems as are the Republicans....

OK, but earlier you and carbon head were blaming republicans for the PO losing money. I guess you are backing away from that foolish claim.

show me the post....because i have always blamed both parties.....i wanna see what you say i said....

you implied it, carbon stated it. If I misread you, my error.

well i wont know unless you tell me what post it is....

you said
"when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume...."

does that not imply that the republicans were responsible? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM?

 

[Harry Dresden]

i have no idea.....the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by 1 Republican and 2 Democrats....as i have been telling many Democrats here for the last few years in the postal threads....their party is just as responsible for the PO's finacial problems as are the Republicans....

OK, but earlier you and carbon head were blaming republicans for the PO losing money. I guess you are backing away from that foolish claim.

show me the post....because i have always blamed both parties.....i wanna see what you say i said....

you implied it, carbon stated it. If I misread you, my error.

well i wont know unless you tell me what post it is....

you said
"when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume...."

does that not imply that the republicans were responsible? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM?

no it doesnt.....you were saying that what i posted implied that the PO started having problems when Obama was President.....i said in 06 Obama was not President ,thats when it was signed into law...if you remember what i posted here....i said the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by a Republican and 2 Democrats and i stated that i have said quite a few times in postal threads that the Democrats are just as responsible for that bill as are the Republicans....and i have also said in other threads that in the 8 years since..... they have not done a dam thing about it except say how fucked that bill has been on the PO....and yet no matter how many times i have posted the bill with the Democrats names right there in black and white.....MANY of the Democrats/Liberals in the thread will STILL say the Republicans are responsible for the PO's financial situation...some party people just dont believe their little party ***** people over....

 

[Flopper]

You, like the OP, would buttress your case by providing something in the way of benchmarks and/or metrics..

Like say:

-Spacely Sprockets, in 2014, was able to produce 10,000 sprockets a week, at a cost of $1 dollar a sprocket.

-Government Sprockets, in 2014, was able to produce 8,000 sprockets a week, at a cost of $2 dollars a sprocket.


Given the sprockets were of the same quality, obviously Spacely was more efficient.

If you believe a government agency should run a profit like a private business,


USPS vs Fedex and UPS on package delivery----------------------nuff said.

and?......

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

If you believe government agencies should operate at a profit, then you lack a basic misunderstanding of the roles of the private and public sector.

The primary concern of private business is economic values such as profits, asset value, and competitive advantage. Government's primary concern is social values such as health and safety, justice, national security, equal opportunity, Individual rights, and freedoms. You can't operate government like a business and still delivery the social values that people want because social values can not be equated to economic value.

 

[Redfish]

OK, but earlier you and carbon head were blaming republicans for the PO losing money. I guess you are backing away from that foolish claim.

show me the post....because i have always blamed both parties.....i wanna see what you say i said....

you implied it, carbon stated it. If I misread you, my error.

well i wont know unless you tell me what post it is....

you said
"when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume...."

does that not imply that the republicans were responsible? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM?

no it doesnt.....you were saying that what i posted implied that the PO started having problems when Obama was President.....i said in 06 Obama was not President ,thats when it was signed into law...if you remember what i posted here....i said the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by a Republican and 2 Democrats and i stated that i have said quite a few times in postal threads that the Democrats are just as responsible for that bill as are the Republicans....and i have also said in other threads that in the 8 years since..... they have not done a dam thing about it except say how fucked that bill has been on the PO....and yet no matter how many times i have posted the bill with the Democrats names right there in black and white.....MANY of the Democrats/Liberals in the thread will STILL say the Republicans are responsible for the PO's financial situation...some party people just dont believe their little party ***** people over....

Ok, thanks for clarifying. I would like to see the vote on that bill however. It would be interesting to see how obozo and hillybilly voted.

 

[Redfish]

If you believe a government agency should run a profit like a private business,


USPS vs Fedex and UPS on package delivery----------------------nuff said.

and?......

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

If you believe government agencies should operate at a profit, then you lack a basic misunderstanding of the roles of the private and public sector.

The primary concern of private business is economic values such as profits, asset value, and competitive advantage. Government's primary concern is social values such as health and safety, justice, national security, equal opportunity, Individual rights, and freedoms. You can't operate government like a business and still delivery the social values that people want because social values can not be equated to economic value.

I never said the govt should operate at a profit. How about a budget surplus once in a while? how about not engaging in deficit spending every year? How about reducing our 18 trillion dollar debt?

and WTF do you mean by the govt "delivering" social values? Social values are determined by the people, not the fricken government. Damn, man, I think you would really love north korea.

 

[Flopper]

and?......

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

If you believe government agencies should operate at a profit, then you lack a basic misunderstanding of the roles of the private and public sector.

The primary concern of private business is economic values such as profits, asset value, and competitive advantage. Government's primary concern is social values such as health and safety, justice, national security, equal opportunity, Individual rights, and freedoms. You can't operate government like a business and still delivery the social values that people want because social values can not be equated to economic value.

I never said the govt should operate at a profit. How about a budget surplus once in a while? how about not engaging in deficit spending every year? How about reducing our 18 trillion dollar debt?

and WTF do you mean by the govt "delivering" social values? Social values are determined by the people, not the fricken government. Damn, man, I think you would really love north korea.

Of course social values come from the people, but in this country government is "of the people by the people for the people."

 

[Redfish]

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

If you believe government agencies should operate at a profit, then you lack a basic misunderstanding of the roles of the private and public sector.

The primary concern of private business is economic values such as profits, asset value, and competitive advantage. Government's primary concern is social values such as health and safety, justice, national security, equal opportunity, Individual rights, and freedoms. You can't operate government like a business and still delivery the social values that people want because social values can not be equated to economic value.

I never said the govt should operate at a profit. How about a budget surplus once in a while? how about not engaging in deficit spending every year? How about reducing our 18 trillion dollar debt?

and WTF do you mean by the govt "delivering" social values? Social values are determined by the people, not the fricken government. Damn, man, I think you would really love north korea.

Of course social values come from the people, but in this country government is "of the people by the people for the people."

it was originally, now, not so much. Orwell and Rand were accurate in their predictions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Redfish said: ↑

“I never said the govt should operate at a profit. How about a budget surplus once in a while? how about not engaging in deficit spending every year? How about reducing our 18 trillion dollar debt?”


Government shouldn't operate like a business, either; where there are times that deficits are perfectly appropriate, such as during recessions. And as the economy and job market continue to improve, the debt can be addressed with more workers contributing to payroll taxes.

Redfish said: ↑

“and WTF do you mean by the govt "delivering" social values? Social values are determined by the people, not the fricken government. Damn, man, I think you would really love north korea.”


Everyone else thinks you're hyperbolic and ridiculous, where references to 'North Korea' are inane and unwarranted, as no one is advocating any such government or economic system.

 

[bripat9643]

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

If you believe government agencies should operate at a profit, then you lack a basic misunderstanding of the roles of the private and public sector.

The primary concern of private business is economic values such as profits, asset value, and competitive advantage. Government's primary concern is social values such as health and safety, justice, national security, equal opportunity, Individual rights, and freedoms. You can't operate government like a business and still delivery the social values that people want because social values can not be equated to economic value.

I never said the govt should operate at a profit. How about a budget surplus once in a while? how about not engaging in deficit spending every year? How about reducing our 18 trillion dollar debt?

and WTF do you mean by the govt "delivering" social values? Social values are determined by the people, not the fricken government. Damn, man, I think you would really love north korea.

Of course social values come from the people, but in this country government is "of the people by the people for the people."

That's propaganda, not reality.

 

[Harry Dresden]

If you believe a government agency should run a profit like a private business,


USPS vs Fedex and UPS on package delivery----------------------nuff said.

and?......

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

If you believe government agencies should operate at a profit, then you lack a basic misunderstanding of the roles of the private and public sector.

The primary concern of private business is economic values such as profits, asset value, and competitive advantage. Government's primary concern is social values such as health and safety, justice, national security, equal opportunity, Individual rights, and freedoms. You can't operate government like a business and still delivery the social values that people want because social values can not be equated to economic value.

what if that agency is the Post Office?......it sells things and can make a profit if they would let it....

 

[Harry Dresden]

show me the post....because i have always blamed both parties.....i wanna see what you say i said....

you implied it, carbon stated it. If I misread you, my error.

well i wont know unless you tell me what post it is....

you said
"when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume...."

does that not imply that the republicans were responsible? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM?

no it doesnt.....you were saying that what i posted implied that the PO started having problems when Obama was President.....i said in 06 Obama was not President ,thats when it was signed into law...if you remember what i posted here....i said the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by a Republican and 2 Democrats and i stated that i have said quite a few times in postal threads that the Democrats are just as responsible for that bill as are the Republicans....and i have also said in other threads that in the 8 years since..... they have not done a dam thing about it except say how fucked that bill has been on the PO....and yet no matter how many times i have posted the bill with the Democrats names right there in black and white.....MANY of the Democrats/Liberals in the thread will STILL say the Republicans are responsible for the PO's financial situation...some party people just dont believe their little party ***** people over....

Ok, thanks for clarifying. I would like to see the vote on that bill however. It would be interesting to see how obozo and hillybilly voted.

it was a voice only vote..... There were no recorded votes......The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 was passed in less than 48 hours......Representative Pence (R-IN) asked for the yeas and nays but was denied......and it appeared that the Democrats had no objections.....

Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act 2006 109th Congress H.R. 6407 - GovTrack.us

 

[NYcarbineer]

I get two pensions. One public sector, one private sector. They are both awesomely efficient.