You cannot be an environmentalist and support the Post Office.

[ChickenTendies]

Excellent late night schizo posting

 

[Deuce]

Then you would kill the post office, because junk mail is where it makes most of its money. It's an institution which profits by needlessly destroying the environment, and leftists here are tripping over each other to defend it.



See post #12.

LOL.

"Junk mail keeps the post office going"

Also

"taxpayers subsidize junk mail!"

Stop pretending you're an environmentalist, it's sad.

 

[Antiwar]

Yep, the construction is past its day in the sun too.

Why do you hate the construction?

 

[aociswundumho]

One can support the post office and support reforms to the post office to make it more environmentally friendly.

There are no "reforms" which would make the post office environmentally friendly, because the post office relies on junk mail (and the destruction of 100 million trees per year) in order to survive. The only way to get rid of junk mail is to get rid of the post office.

 

[aociswundumho]

Stop pretending you're an environmentalist,

I will if you will.

 

[Slartibartfast]

There are no "reforms" which would make the post office environmentally friendly, because the post office relies on junk mail (and the destruction of 100 million trees per year) in order to survive. The only way to get rid of junk mail is to get rid of the post office.

The vast majority of paper comes from tree farms or is replanted.

 

[aociswundumho]

The vast majority of paper comes from tree farms or is replanted.

What's the excuse for filling up landfills with literally 1 billion pieces of junk mail per year?

What's the excuse for the emissions caused by government drones driving 200,000 trucks to deliver junk mail? Or the emissions involved in making the trucks to deliver junk mail?

No matter how you slice it, the post office is an environmental disaster.

 

[Slartibartfast]

What's the excuse for filling up landfills with literally 1 billion pieces of junk mail per year?

People should recycle more

What's the excuse for the emissions caused by government drones driving 200,000 trucks to deliver junk mail? Or the emissions involved in making the trucks to deliver junk mail?

We need better vehicles

No matter how you slice it, the post office is an environmental disaster.

It can be reformed

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

For 4 years Trumpsters cheered and applauded every time Trump tore up an environmental regulation.. Some were decades old...

Now all of a sudden Republicans care about the environment and endangered species... Lol

They are a hypocritical and dishonest bunch..

 

[aociswundumho]

People should recycle more

We need better vehicles

It can be reformed

This is the perfect leftist rationale for the post office. Hundreds of millions of trees being turned into junk mail in order to fill up landfills is fine, because the leftist priority is always to increase the size and scope of the state, no matter what the cost.

 

[Slartibartfast]

This is the perfect leftist rationale for the post office. Hundreds of millions of trees being turned into junk mail in order to fill up landfills is fine, because the leftist priority is always to increase the size and scope of the state, no matter what the cost.

I already pointed out what reforms could be made which is consistent with my original assertion.

 

[longview]

The vast majority of paper comes from tree farms or is replanted.

I wonder in a carbon credit world, do the paper companies get a carbon debit or credit?
They are after all capturing carbon, that could be sequestered for many centuries.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I wonder in a carbon credit world, do the paper companies get a carbon debit or credit?
They are after all capturing carbon, that could be sequestered for many centuries.

That’s actually an excellent question. I’ve wondered if there was a loophole that needs to be closed myself.

 

[j brown's body]

Many leftists claim to be environmentalists, while at the same time supporting the Post Office. I say those two views are incompatible. Let's consider the environmental costs of the Post Office:

1. 90% of mail is junk mail. I own some multifamily properties, and I always have to put a garbage barrel right next to the mailboxes so the tenants can take their mail out of the box and drop it in the barrel. From there it goes to the landfill. The few letters they keep could have been sent via email, as everyone has a phone today.

2. Trees are extremely vital to the environment. They absorb CO2 which helps the climate. They also clean the air by absorbing nitrogen oxides and ozone. They create oxygen for us. They allow wildlife to flourish. They provide shade and help to prevent soil erosion. I'll stop there, but you get the idea.

Guess how many trees are destroyed every year in order to create junk mail?

View attachment 67385837
View attachment 67385838

3. The Post Office has over 200,000 vehicles, which are all spewing pollution six days a week in order to deliver junk mail. Those shitboxes they drive around in get 8 mpg:

View attachment 67385840


4. If you support the Post Office, you support environmental destruction.

Believe it or not, life involves compromise.

 

[aociswundumho]

Believe it or not, life involves compromise.

lol, really? What's the benefit of junk mail?

 

[Deuce]

This is the perfect leftist rationale for the post office. Hundreds of millions of trees being turned into junk mail in order to fill up landfills is fine, because the leftist priority is always to increase the size and scope of the state, no matter what the cost.

Again, the Post Office isn't creating that junk mail.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Many leftists claim to be environmentalists, while at the same time supporting the Post Office. I say those two views are incompatible. Let's consider the environmental costs of the Post Office:

1. 90% of mail is junk mail. I own some multifamily properties, and I always have to put a garbage barrel right next to the mailboxes so the tenants can take their mail out of the box and drop it in the barrel. From there it goes to the landfill. The few letters they keep could have been sent via email, as everyone has a phone today.

2. Trees are extremely vital to the environment. They absorb CO2 which helps the climate. They also clean the air by absorbing nitrogen oxides and ozone. They create oxygen for us. They allow wildlife to flourish. They provide shade and help to prevent soil erosion. I'll stop there, but you get the idea.

Guess how many trees are destroyed every year in order to create junk mail?

View attachment 67385837
View attachment 67385838

3. The Post Office has over 200,000 vehicles, which are all spewing pollution six days a week in order to deliver junk mail. Those shitboxes they drive around in get 8 mpg:

View attachment 67385840


4. If you support the Post Office, you support environmental destruction.

Really now.

You don't send it to recycle?

Stop blaming others till you start doing right.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Then you would kill the post office, because junk mail is where it makes most of its money. It's an institution which profits by needlessly destroying the environment, and leftists here are tripping over each other to defend it.



See post #12.

Paper comes from trees.

A renewable resource.

Please learn the facts.

 

[aociswundumho]

Paper comes from trees.

A renewable resource.

Please learn the facts.

There is still an enormous amount of environmental damage that comes from processing the trees, turning them into paper, having the government drones deliver them, and then dumping the mess into a landfill. Even if 100% of the paper were recycled, it still would produce a huge amount of emissions to turn all that scrap paper into new paper.

No matter how you cut it, the post office is a huge net loss for society and the environment.

 

[Lord of Planar]

There is still an enormous amount of environmental damage that comes from processing the trees, turning them into paper, having the government drones deliver them, and then dumping the mess into a landfill. Even if 100% of the paper were recycled, it still would produce a huge amount of emissions to turn all that scrap paper into new paper.

No matter how you cut it, the post office is a huge net loss for society and the environment.

Your agenda against the USPS is noted.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

Your agenda against the USPS is noted.

Been an agenda against the USPS for about 20 years now...

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Many leftists claim to be environmentalists, while at the same time supporting the Post Office. I say those two views are incompatible. Let's consider the environmental costs of the Post Office:

1. 90% of mail is junk mail. I own some multifamily properties, and I always have to put a garbage barrel right next to the mailboxes so the tenants can take their mail out of the box and drop it in the barrel. From there it goes to the landfill. The few letters they keep could have been sent via email, as everyone has a phone today.

2. Trees are extremely vital to the environment. They absorb CO2 which helps the climate. They also clean the air by absorbing nitrogen oxides and ozone. They create oxygen for us. They allow wildlife to flourish. They provide shade and help to prevent soil erosion. I'll stop there, but you get the idea.

Guess how many trees are destroyed every year in order to create junk mail?

View attachment 67385837
View attachment 67385838

3. The Post Office has over 200,000 vehicles, which are all spewing pollution six days a week in order to deliver junk mail. Those shitboxes they drive around in get 8 mpg:

View attachment 67385840


4. If you support the Post Office, you support environmental destruction.

That's a pretty sad argument really. Junkmail isn't the post office's fault. And there is not enough charging infrastructure to support that many EVs. And mostly your argument is stupid based on your attempt to manipulate the reader with the environmental ploy. You just suck at making an argument.

 

[aociswundumho]

That's a pretty sad argument really. Junkmail isn't the post office's fault.

Yes it is.

1. Junk mail cannot survive without the post office. Without the idiotic post office, you simply remove your mailbox and the junk mail stops.

2. The post office cannot survive without junk mail, because the overwhelming majority of mail today is junk mail. Delivering worthless junk mail is the post office's main business.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Yes it is.

1. Junk mail cannot survive without the post office. Without the idiotic post office, you simply remove your mailbox and the junk mail stops.

2. The post office cannot survive without junk mail, because the overwhelming majority of mail today is junk mail. Delivering worthless junk mail is the post office's main business.

So you are just hating on the post office not actually making a real argument.

Your assertion that the post office would not survive without junk mail is a real naive ignorant argument to make. It takes just a few seconds to realize two things: 1) the post office is not a business and never was. If it is then so is the government and military, but that would be a lie. 2) with 90% of the mail as you say is junk mail, it would be much cheaper to operate without it. All up the chain personnel and machinery would be cut 90% more or less. That means a much more efficient operation.

But then you are just here trying to hate on the p[ost office because of whatever stupid ideology that you subscribe to told you to parrot such crap.

 

[longview]

What's the excuse for filling up landfills with literally 1 billion pieces of junk mail per year?

What's the excuse for the emissions caused by government drones driving 200,000 trucks to deliver junk mail? Or the emissions involved in making the trucks to deliver junk mail?

No matter how you slice it, the post office is an environmental disaster.

I wonder if a paper going into a landfill counts as sequestered CO2?