The USPS is more than a service. It's a symbol of a functioning society

[NWRatCon]

What aspirations are you talking about? If you are assigning thoughts to me that I do not think then you are making an error.

Quote: "despite your moralizing" - that's just an ad hominem having nothing to do with my comments. (I think you mean "aspersions." I do have aspirations, but I consider those a good thing. I aspire to treat others with dignity and respect. Some just make it more difficult than others.)

 

[CLAX1911]

Quote: "despite your moralizing" - that's just an ad hominem having nothing to do with my comments.

no it's not.

When you try to make it out as though I'm thinking about myself and not other people you are moralizing.

If yo attribute to me thoughts that I do not have, you are making a logical mistake.

(I think you mean "aspersions." I do have aspirations, but I consider those a good thing. I aspire to treat others with dignity and respect. Some just make it more difficult than others.)

I think I meant what I typed and I would know better than you what I meant.

 

[NWRatCon]

no it's not.

When you try to make it out as though I'm thinking about myself and not other people you are moralizing.

If yo attribute to me thoughts that I do not have, you are making a logical mistake.

I think I meant what I typed and I would know better than you what I meant.

Jeez it's hard to get through that ego. YOU SAID:

I haven't gotten anything in the mail in the past 3 years that I needed.

Literally talking about your personal experience, implying that it is universal. I replied:

What you are demonstrating, my friend, is the attitude that leads to the effort to dismantle it. "It's all about me, and my experience", rather than "what's in the interest of 'us'."

Do You Follow? No moralizing, just a direct response and logical construction. Now, wanna get down from your high horse?

(And if you can't admit to a typo, I'm not sure there is hope of getting through. )

 

[CLAX1911]

Jeez it's hard to get through that ego.

instead of making it personal just worry about what you're saying and not reinterpreting what I said.

If you are having a hard time that's on purpose focus on the subject not me.

YOU SAID:

I know what I said I know what I meant I don't need you to tell me what I said and I don't need you to reinterpret it.

Thank you.

(And if you can't admit to a typo, I'm not sure there is hope of getting through. )

I fully admit to making typographical errors. But it was not an error when I said moralizing I meant to type that.

 

[NWRatCon]

instead of making it personal just worry about what you're saying and not reinterpreting what I said.

If you are having a hard time that's on purpose focus on the subject not me.
I know what I said I know what I meant I don't need you to tell me what I said and I don't need you to reinterpret it.

Thank you.

I fully admit to making typographical errors. But it was not an error when I said moralizing I meant to type that.

You wrote "aspiration" when I said "aspersion". You do know the difference, right?

You've left the subject entirely and made it entirely personal. Remember Rule 4.

 

[JMaximus]

Where in the Constituion is the US Postal Service "mandated"?

If you want to make an argument, make it. Don't troll.

My question is the argument.

Can you answer it?

(It's okay if you can't - or don't want to - the question wasn't directed at you and may not even address a position you hold.)

 

[CLAX1911]

You wrote "aspiration" when I said "aspersion". You do know the difference, right?

first time you pointed out that error, I apologize.

You've left the subject entirely and made it entirely personal. Remember Rule 4.

No you did you started crying about my ego. You applied feelings to me that you thought I was having.

That's what I referred to as moralizing.

 

[NWRatCon]

My question is the argument.

Can you answer it?

(It's okay if you can't - or don't want to - the question wasn't directed at you and may not even address a position you hold.)

Apparently you're not following the thread. Quelle surprise!

 

[CLAX1911]

My question is the argument.

Can you answer it?

(It's okay if you can't - or don't want to - the question wasn't directed at you and may not even address a position you hold.)

I got accused of ad hominem for arguing against him.

 

[NWRatCon]

I got accused of ad hominem for arguing against him.

No, your comment was correctly identified as an ad hominem. Please be honest. You didn't really make an argument.

 

[NWRatCon]

first time you pointed out that error, I apologize.

No you did you started crying about my ego. You applied feelings to me that you thought I was having.

That's what I referred to as moralizing.

Here's an honest suggestion. Go back and read the exchange objectively. Identify the first personal comment. It may change your perspective.

 

[CLAX1911]

Apparently you're not following the thread. Quelle surprise!

apparently the only way you can follow the thread is agree with you or ad hominem or trolling.

you spend no time making points and loads of time accusing people of this or that it's because your argument is poor.

Play victim to your heart's content I don't feel any pity for you.

 

[CLAX1911]

Here's an honest suggestion. Go back and read the exchange objectively. Identify the first personal comment. It may change your perspective.

The first personal comment was where you attributed to me thoughts and feelings as if you would know.

 

[Marcus1124]

I have never heard the notion that a postal service is a prerequisite for a functioning civilization. Perhaps you could show some evidence this belief is widespread and accepted. From before last week.

And **** off with your name-calling. Grow up.

One could argue that back in the day before commercial worldwide delivery that it was a useful thing, but now it is a crumbling monument to the stupidity of liberals. A legal monopoly that loses money hand over fist.

 

[CLAX1911]

No, your comment was correctly identified as an ad hominem. Please be honest. You didn't really make an argument.

It was falsely identified as ad hominem.

My argument is the utility of the post office has dwindled. The only thing you said contrary to that it is "nuh uh." Then you went on about the victim complex.

This is because you are wrong and you know you are wrong.

 

[jimbo]

Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) has noted about the USPS that "It's not a business, it's a service. And this whole notion that you've got to get rid of the post office because they've been losing money — the post office ain't losing money. ... You're paying for a service to keep this country together." Clyburn bashes Postal cuts: It's a service, not a business (the Hill). He's not alone in that sentiment:
The USPS is more than a service. It's a symbol of a functioning society (CNN, Opinion)

So why did I start this thread here? Because the Postal Service is a Constitutional creation. Indeed, the US Post has existed longer than the nation itself. It was one of the first "national" institutions established to separate "the colonies" from its mother country. (CNN)

When Trump (and Republicans) try to dismantle the USPS they are not just making a "business decision" - they are ****ing with the Constitution. It has been a Republican effort going back more than a decade to dismantle the Post Office, and it needs to stop. (CNN)

Why do Republicans hate the Post Office? Because of " its central role in establishing democratic ideals." Democracy, we can't have that!

Clyburn is one of the original anti Trump nut jobs. The purpose of the USPS is to deliver the mail. Replace it with brown trucks, in a year you'd never notice a difference.

 

[jimbo]

Well for sure, they hate ANY and ALL functioning government backed goods and services altogether.
Public schools, post offices, libraries, federal tax supported highways, corrections, municipally owned utilities...they even tried privatizing fire departments in a few small towns, with disastrous results.

ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, is also bent on privatizing as much of government as possible.

Nothing wrong with privatizing as much as possible of government services.

 

[CLAX1911]

Here's an honest suggestion. Go back and read the exchange objectively. Identify the first personal comment. It may change your perspective.

It is inarguable that the usefulness of the post office has dwindled. At one point the only way to communicate with people that were away from you was by letter. Now we have phones so people aren't mailing as many letters.

At one time the best way to pay a bill by having it mailed to you writing a check putting it in the envelope and sending it back, now online bill pay is incentivised.

If you deny this reality and there's nothing to talk about you simply exist in an alternate reality.

 

[NWRatCon]

It is inarguable that the usefulness of the post office has dwindled. At one point the only way to communicate with people that were away from you was by letter. Now we have phones so people aren't mailing as many letters.

At one time the best way to pay a bill by having it mailed to you writing a check putting it in the envelope and sending it back, now online bill pay is incentivised.

I guess you never noticed I never disagreed with that. Hmm. A little too self absorbed, wot?

 

[NWRatCon]

It was falsely identified as ad hominem.

My argument is the utility of the post office has dwindled. The only thing you said contrary to that it is "nuh uh." Then you went on about the victim complex.

This is because you are wrong and you know you are wrong.

I can't live in your fantasy world, since it's in your head. But, I can avoid it. Ta ta.

 

[CLAX1911]

I guess you never noticed I never disagreed with that. Hmm.

You disagreed when I said that the usefulness of the post office has dwindled.

 

[NWRatCon]

You disagreed when I said that the usefulness of the post office has dwindled.

Read for comprehension, my friends. I didn't.

 

[CLAX1911]

Read for comprehension, my friends. I didn't.

Post number 42 yes you did the first sentence.

Here's a quote of you saying it.

Except its usefulness has never dwindled.

 

[NWRatCon]

Post number 42 yes you did the first sentence.

Here's a quote of you saying it.

OKAY, technically, but what's the rest of the context?

Yes, some of the FUNCTIONS of the post can be replicated, but the post office is still as useful to a vast swath of the population as ever.

Ironically, you keep demonstrating the merits of my comments every time you try to quibble.

 

[CLAX1911]

OKAY, technically, but what's the rest of the context?

Okay so let's look at it in full context.

Except its usefulness has never dwindled. It's just been misinterpreted. Will UPS or FEDEX deliver magazines anywhere in the US at the same cost? Can one get Grandma's cookies via email? Does UPS deliver to Antarctica? Rural Alaska? APO to service members around the world? It's about all of us being in this together.

Most magazines don't even print out a paper edition they used to. so they don't need the Post office and mail it anywhere in the US.

Yes, some of the FUNCTIONS of the post can be replicated, but the post office is still as useful to a vast swath of the population as ever.

okay you must have misunderstood because I never argued that they are completely useless I said their usefulness has dwindled.
Not entirely disappeared. so for the few magazine companies that actually print out a paper magazine it's still there.

Ironically, you keep demonstrating the merits of my comments every time you try to quibble.

I pointed out that you typed a bold-faced lie. It damn sure disagree with me and argued with me the usefulness of the post office has dwindled.