Fake news for a fake president. Sort of a double-negative thing.
Besides, even if the USPS charged more, how many of you would bet that Amazon wouldn't just simply pass the rate hike on to consumers? Any businessman worth half his salt would do that.
It may actually be a good point that the USPS should be charging Amazon more, but that common sense approach would have to apply to EVERY company and individual that ships a package via USPS.
Amazon is on track to provide its own delivery system. including the last mile.
The monopolistic ambiance of commerce regulators will allow it and USPS, UPS, and FedEx will hurt like hell, just as retail has, because of the "Amazon Effect."
Fuck the USPS, what we need is a last mile solution. And how we need to get that is to [literally?] hold the telco execs' feet to the fire until they give us what we paid for. Seriously, all this snail mail is dumb. It should just be packages.
I've yet to see a country with a functional postal system. Pretty much all of them seem to deliver more junk than actual mail. That's pretty dysfunctional.
Congress should allow USPS to specifically charge Amazon more than others, on the grounds of preventing monopoly. Unfortunately that would be unpopular with consumers (and would violate Postal Neutrality). Maybe Trump's attempt of shaming USPS publicly into feeling stupid for helping Amazon would have some effect.
seriously? USPS operates at a loss, Trumps says they should charge more then to be profitable (or not run at a loss) and its an attack on fake news from a left-wing news site?
Maybe he's more interested in the fiscal issues of subsidising the postal service and hitting the near-monopoly (and tax avoiding) user of the service is a good soundbite. But I guess it doesn't matter what he does, you're so indoctrinated Trump will always be bad. He could hand out free puppies to all children, and you'd scream and co
I know they are going to mod you down so I'll say it a little more softly.
President Trump tweets something bizarre in order to distract everyone from other news less favorable to him.
His behavior towards his daughter is creepy.
He's accused by over a dozen women of sexually assaulting them and he said on tape that he sexually assaults women ("grabs them by the pussy") because he can get away with it because he's rich and famous.
I disagree on Russia. Mr. Trump has screamed in fear a couple times now includin
Works OK in the UK, to a point. Businesses that send a lot of post get a preferential rate, hence all the junk mail we enjoy (well, I enjoy putting it in the shredder). I guess that's not "neutral" as it charges differently to different customers.
Selling stuff in bulk doesn't break neutrality, at least as long as they sell it to any legal business that wants to buy in bulk.
Only if by "bulk" you mean shipping containers instead of parcels. Delivering 1000 packages for Amazon should cost exactly the same as delivering 1000 packages for 1000 different individuals (assuming they all dropped off their packages at the same post office). Doing anything else does not conform to neutrality, as that would punish the smaller players simply due to their inability to negotiate a deal. This is highly anti-competitive and it's exactly what net neutrality is supposed to prevent.
Volume discounts are normal in most any business. Here there is network neutrality but it doesn't stop my ISP from doubling my bandwidth for 30% more cost even though I'd be using 2 households of regular bandwidth. Likewise the post office here gives deals if you buy a bunch of stamps at once. As long as they aren't playing favourites, it's neutral. Likewise as long as everyone who shows up with a thousand packages gets the same deal, it's neutral.
It would be 100% unconstitutional for Congress to pass a bill allowing the USPS to charge Amazon more than others. That's called a Bill of Attainer. At best Congress would have to pass a bill identifying a class of customers, but doing so is likely to cement Amazon's dominance, not reduce it, as it would impact all Amazon's competitors.
Also worth noting: just because the USPS makes a loss doesn't mean they make a loss on everything. Their contract with Amazon is almost certainly a major profit center: wh
it's unconstitutional. It's against the law to write laws that single out an individual or individual group. That was expressly forbade in our constitution, and for damn good reason.
Fake News (Score:4, Interesting)
While they probably should, Trump feels this way because Jeff Bozo, who owns Amazon, also owns the NYT - or as Trump says "Fake News"...
Re: (Score:1)
Fake news for a fake president. Sort of a double-negative thing.
Besides, even if the USPS charged more, how many of you would bet that Amazon wouldn't just simply pass the rate hike on to consumers? Any businessman worth half his salt would do that.
Re:Fake News (Score:5, Insightful)
It's worse than that.
It may actually be a good point that the USPS should be charging Amazon more, but that common sense approach would have to apply to EVERY company and individual that ships a package via USPS.
Amazon is on track to provide its own delivery system. including the last mile.
The monopolistic ambiance of commerce regulators will allow it and USPS, UPS, and FedEx will hurt like hell, just as retail has, because of the "Amazon Effect."
Re: Fake News (Score:1)
Don't worry, net neutrality will stop them from doing that.
Interesting; thank you (Score:2)
One can only assume that Americans regarded this as from outside the USA and so insignificant to real people ;)
Congress has the power - but not the duty (Score:2)
So it's legitimate to suggest that the Federal government stops doing a post office, just as it doesn't hand out privateer licences any more.
Re: (Score:1)
Why don't you take your anarcho-capitalism and fuck off to some country where this is appreciated. Somalia maybe?
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck the USPS, what we need is a last mile solution. And how we need to get that is to [literally?] hold the telco execs' feet to the fire until they give us what we paid for. Seriously, all this snail mail is dumb. It should just be packages.
Re: (Score:2)
Americans have no appreciation for having a functional postal system.
Re: Fake News (Score:2)
I've yet to see a country with a functional postal system. Pretty much all of them seem to deliver more junk than actual mail. That's pretty dysfunctional.
Re: (Score:2)
Americans have no appreciation for having a functional postal system.
It was awesome once. Now it's stupid. What year is it? We're still sending information back and forth on slips of paper?
Re: (Score:2)
Congress should allow USPS to specifically charge Amazon more than others, on the grounds of preventing monopoly. Unfortunately that would be unpopular with consumers (and would violate Postal Neutrality). Maybe Trump's attempt of shaming USPS publicly into feeling stupid for helping Amazon would have some effect.
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe you missed the goddam point that the pussy grabbing asshat was taking a jab at WaPo.
Re: (Score:3)
It's true that I never grabbed you.
Re: (Score:2)
seriously? USPS operates at a loss, Trumps says they should charge more then to be profitable (or not run at a loss) and its an attack on fake news from a left-wing news site?
Maybe he's more interested in the fiscal issues of subsidising the postal service and hitting the near-monopoly (and tax avoiding) user of the service is a good soundbite. But I guess it doesn't matter what he does, you're so indoctrinated Trump will always be bad. He could hand out free puppies to all children, and you'd scream and co
Re: (Score:1)
USPS doesn't operate at a loss because of Amazon you insensitive clod.
Goddammit pay attention to TFA.
Re: (Score:1)
I know they are going to mod you down so I'll say it a little more softly.
President Trump tweets something bizarre in order to distract everyone from other news less favorable to him.
His behavior towards his daughter is creepy.
He's accused by over a dozen women of sexually assaulting them and he said on tape that he sexually assaults women ("grabs them by the pussy") because he can get away with it because he's rich and famous.
I disagree on Russia. Mr. Trump has screamed in fear a couple times now includin
Re: (Score:2)
Now that Net Neutrality is gone, can Postal Neutrality be far behind?
Re: (Score:2)
Works OK in the UK, to a point. Businesses that send a lot of post get a preferential rate, hence all the junk mail we enjoy (well, I enjoy putting it in the shredder). I guess that's not "neutral" as it charges differently to different customers.
Re: (Score:2)
Selling stuff in bulk doesn't break neutrality, at least as long as they sell it to any legal business that wants to buy in bulk.
Re: (Score:2)
Selling stuff in bulk doesn't break neutrality, at least as long as they sell it to any legal business that wants to buy in bulk.
Only if by "bulk" you mean shipping containers instead of parcels. Delivering 1000 packages for Amazon should cost exactly the same as delivering 1000 packages for 1000 different individuals (assuming they all dropped off their packages at the same post office). Doing anything else does not conform to neutrality, as that would punish the smaller players simply due to their inability to negotiate a deal. This is highly anti-competitive and it's exactly what net neutrality is supposed to prevent.
Re: (Score:2)
Volume discounts are normal in most any business. Here there is network neutrality but it doesn't stop my ISP from doubling my bandwidth for 30% more cost even though I'd be using 2 households of regular bandwidth.
Likewise the post office here gives deals if you buy a bunch of stamps at once. As long as they aren't playing favourites, it's neutral.
Likewise as long as everyone who shows up with a thousand packages gets the same deal, it's neutral.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be 100% unconstitutional for Congress to pass a bill allowing the USPS to charge Amazon more than others. That's called a Bill of Attainer. At best Congress would have to pass a bill identifying a class of customers, but doing so is likely to cement Amazon's dominance, not reduce it, as it would impact all Amazon's competitors.
Also worth noting: just because the USPS makes a loss doesn't mean they make a loss on everything. Their contract with Amazon is almost certainly a major profit center: wh
It's not just common sense (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
it's unconstitutional. It's against the law to write laws that single out an individual or individual group.
Really?
Felons, as a group and as individuals can't own or be in possession of guns.
Prisoners, as a group or an individuals, are not free to assemble or roam about the country.
Children, as a group and as individuals, cannot own a beer joint
You make extend the list