Disclaimer

I think we should just ban sheep all together.

That is baller, but for $200k... I think I'd have to have total "F U" money to spend it on something so frivolous.

Scott Tenorman chili?

We should really have a "Current Events" forum section to post misc crap like that. Made me think of my DTC crew. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/6225269/Motorcyclist-billed-for-damaging-road-after-accident-with-sheep.html Poor sheep.

Once again, I go to my question of- How high do you think a stamp has to go before private industry will take over and think they'll make a profit? Obviously we haven't hit that mark yet. Furthermore, the USPS doesn't ALWAYS run a deficit, as indicated by 2006 ~$900M operating margin. Right, but your argument is that the cost skyrocketed because of early retirement and buyouts (of which I still haven't found any information on a mass exodous from the USPS in 2007 and 2008 - so that's in question). Given that the specific line item is "Retiree Health Benefits" - for your argument to be valid, all you need to look at is compensation+benefits in 2006 and see a proportional change in 2007 in the "Retiree Benefits". This is not the case. http://www.usps.com/financials/anrpt08/pg66.htm Unless you're suggesting that as soon as you retire, the insurance premium skyrockets 6x what it used to be for the insuree. Just because you're designated/labeled as "retired" regardless of your age and past health history. Is that what you're suggesting? Once again, looking at the financials... they only LOST money in 2007 and 2008, and even though they LOST money in 2007, they only started running a deficit in 2008. Even without the gov't subsidy, they would've had a positive ending balance in 2004, 2005, and 2006. So I can assume you're just pulling information out of thin air, you're guided by your emotions and not facts and logic. The gov't can decide how GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota...all run their companies. NHTSA, the EPA, CARB, etc... they don't need a stake in any company to make decision affecting how they're run. So the sky isn't falling, it'll be ok. It's temporary. Also, for the THIRD TIME, the gov't isn't controlling the press, they're PROPOSING to let newspapers restructure into non-profits. I'm convinced you have reading comprehension issues, or maybe you don't know what 'majority' means? This Rasmussen poll? http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_froma_harrop/what_americans_really_want_is_health_care_reform If I spit in your coffee, you wouldn't care? You may or may not taste it, that wouldn't bother you that someone didn't have the common courtesy to NOT spit in your drink? What about if I dragged my ballsack across your pizza? http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm Just compare US cost per capita to Japan.

It's not... Cleveland is #12, with a reputation of 7.6% and score of 35.7 http://health.usnews.com/health/best-hospitals/cancer-hospital-rankings/ I'm not doubting that you heard anecdotal stories from people. But how accurate are their accounts? This says the median wait time is 2 weeks.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada#Wait_times Don't trust wiki... here's the source they got it from: http://www.healthcoalition.ca/index-eng.pdf And here's a paper written by a student fellow of the AMSA: http://www.amsa.org/studytours/WaitingTimes_primer.pdf I'm trying to find the US median wait time for a CT scan, but can't get that figure. Also, note there is a difference between an EMERGENCY CT scan, and a non-emergency diagnostic. Godwin's Law... you lose.

Where did you read this? Or what credible information do you have to backup your 6 month waiting list in Canada claim. Along with some evidence that no one in the US has ever waited longer than 6 months for a procedure or service? Because if someone in the US had to wait that long, then our system isn't better. Side notes from the anonymous rep fairy: Yay! more bailouts!!! 09-24-2009 10:31 PM being a douche and having a nasty GF Yay! more bailouts!!! 09-24-2009 11:28 PM your a lib fag You are a very clever one, personal attacks not only on me, but my GF. The rep fairy has class for sure. Yet, the pesky your/you're thing still eludes them.

No, but why dredge it up again like it's something new? Just another thing to pin on ol' BHO. After all those past bailouts the country has obviously gone to hell - for god sakes it's controlled by liberal heathens now. And that's your prerogative to think that. Stalemate. Obviously, to have an intelligent debate, you have to read the articles presented. You apparently, have not. ZOMFG!! The gov't would let the paper media restructure? Gov't controlled presses! Why, there's NO other way people get their news, what will we do!? Once again, if you READ the article, it's letting newspaper companies restructure into non-profits... NOT that they'd be controlled by the gov't. Once again, they have their prerogative. There is nothing in the first amendment that the press has to be truthful. And that's a shame. Quoted for future reference. Crow doesn't taste good. I could go through numerous examples to prove your statement about you not caring if they 'care' is untrue, but you can dig your own hole I don't need to get your a backhoe when you're just working with a shovel. The terms cheap, fast, and reliable are relative in this case. The system, at present, is none of those 3 as compared to other countries... yet, the math works out for them, at a higher level of service. Interesting.

Yes, I realize the opportunity cost of raising price on the end consumer, but once again, as with the postal service (that's what we were talking about before you throw other industries in there).... even at $0.89 a stamp (just throwing a number out there), you better believe that people will still be sending first class mail, because it's still the ONLY game in town at that price. How far do you think the price of a first class stamp has to rise before UPS or FedEx or some other private org attempts to take on individual home delivery? Given the figures on the USPS balance sheet, by only a modest increase in price, the postal service could make money at less than the 'going rate' that privatization would raise a first class stamp to. I call bullshit. Just because you retire early doesn't cause your health care costs to automatically skyrocket - what did everyone automatically get sick once they retire? The line item is specifically retiree health benefits. http://www.opm.gov/insure/retirees/index.asp?AnswerId=93 Throw a bigger subsidy? Dude, you still haven't addressed the fact the the gov't subsidy on the financial statements is $3B of a $70B operation.... less than 5%. And the fact that the subsidy hasn't changed for AT LEAST the last 3 years... so WTF are you talking about?

^--- what he said.

Sorry duder. I'm not saying I'm completely out, but I already made plans on Sunday. If they fall through, I'm there.

Remember when we've bailed out more than just GM and Chrysler... in fact Chrysler we bailed out TWICE now (we're just not likely going to get paid back this time). We've bailed out the airlines, we've bailed out Wall street... so what's the 'so what' to that statement? It's nothing new. Why do you have to put things in "quotes" to communicate an untruth. He asked Wagoner to step down, it wasn't a mandate, and he didn't NAME a replacement. If they go non-profit... umm, probably less fear tactics. Until newspapers are non-profit, you'll have big business putting out self-serving propaganda. Kind of like how Fox is a completely conservative network, yet airs the most liberal shows like Family Guy, the Simpsons, and American Dad which are all highly satirical of Fox itself and the neo-conservative stances. They pander the news to conservatives and capture the liberals with the other programming. Win-win $$$$$$$$. People are so worried about the gov't controlling things when they don't even realize they're already being steered by the media - owned by private organizations with their own agendas too. What a load of crap... this goes back to my above point of the media being self-serving. In this case it's the insurance companies. I'm sure they really CARE for their customers, not their pocketbooks It should be illegal to flat out LIE to your customers. Maybe they aren't technically lying because they're playing semantics. It "could" hurt "millions" - if it doesn't they didn't lie because "could" isn't a guarantee. No harm no foul, right? There could be a liberal talking to your son right now about socialism. OMGWTFBBQ!!?? Do something!

http://www.usps.com/financials/anrpt08/pg3.htm So, only going back to 2006 - they were profitable. And, if you look at Gubment capital invested... they subsidize $3B of the entire $70B+ operation each year.. not even 5%. Also funny... if you look here: http://www.usps.com/financials/anrpt08/pg47.htm They've reduced compensation (and headcount) each year while generating more revenue each year. But wait... look at the line that says "Retiree health benefits" - it jumps from $1.6B in 2006 to over $10B in 2007 and settled around $7B in 2008. Hmmm.... those health expenditures sure do have a funny correlation to whether the USPS operates in the BLACK (like in 2006 when benefits only cost $1.6B), or operates in the RED (like in 2007 and 2008, when health care benefit costs were almost 6x and 4x, respectively). So, given that the only way to generate profits are to makes revenue > costs, you either have to increase revenue or reduce costs... well, stamp costs have increased, so they're doing the "increase revenue" part - as the bulk of revenue is generated by first class and standard mail (http://www.usps.com/financials/anrpt08/pg62.htm), so it seems like if we reform healthcare and reduce the cost of that... the USPS would operate in the black.

I don't see a Sunday ride in my forecast

I hope they put them back in the right way!

She said she was going purse shopping with a new friend... did you get that Coach one she said you wanted?