Members RA1 Posted February 8, 2013 Members Posted February 8, 2013 Thanks for the clarification. Did you help him write any of his poetry? After all you were about 3-4 when he died, so you could have. Best regards, RA1 Quote
BiBottomBoy Posted February 9, 2013 Posted February 9, 2013 He was gay. "Dare I eat a peach" is about how much he hates eating pussy. Quote
AdamSmith Posted February 9, 2013 Posted February 9, 2013 He was gay. "Dare I eat a peach" is about how much he hates eating pussy. Dear heart. I can make the case for 99 out of 100 poets being gay. (E.g., possibly the best blow job of my life was administered by one Stephen Spender, in of all places Wallace Fowlie's bathroom. Going to Duke did have one or two advantages, one has to admit.) But ol' Tom Eliot was alas straighter than Hemingway. Even took a few boxing lessons -- imagine! Quote
AdamSmith Posted February 9, 2013 Posted February 9, 2013 Thanks for the clarification. Did you help him write any of his poetry? After all you were about 3-4 when he died, so you could have. Best regards, RA1 It had not occurred to me to claim such, but let me work on it. Quote
Guest FourAces Posted February 10, 2013 Posted February 10, 2013 what a fucking mess the post office is. How can tax payers continue to control and support this relic of the past? What business still runs like a 1960 communist project? We pay about 45 cents a letter whether it goes to NYC or nowhere Montana. Can you imagine UPS or FEDEX using this price model .... they would close their doors immediately. Mail delivery should be 3 or 4 days a week. The actual cost should be reflected in mailing a letter. If you want additional delivery days then you pay for it. The post office needs a major visual update. Needs trucks from at least this decade and employees who are free of all zombie like characteristics. If it cannot be run as a actual business then it should be closed! Quote
Guest EXPAT Posted February 10, 2013 Posted February 10, 2013 And they shouldn't be forced by Congress to fund their pension fund for the next 75 years. No other commercial company has to do that. Quote
Guest hitoallusa Posted February 10, 2013 Posted February 10, 2013 It's just poorly managed. And there are some impolite workers there. I try to avoid the post office as much as I can. Quote
AdamSmith Posted February 10, 2013 Posted February 10, 2013 It is not poorly managed. What EXPAT said is the root problem. And contra Four Aces, it has not received taxpayer dollars since the early 1980s, with very minor exceptions. Quote
Guest hitoallusa Posted February 10, 2013 Posted February 10, 2013 Actually FourAces is right... The Post Office gets government subsidy although the post office tries to play it down. And it is poorly managed mainly because they are so many political voices inside and outside the organization... Quote
Members RA1 Posted February 10, 2013 Members Posted February 10, 2013 Isn't one of the problems that the post office did morph into a bureacracy as mandated and supported by the Congress and then when the public didn't like all the "cost over runs", Congress "invented" a quasi public corportation pretty much unique in the form of the present day USPS? Of course, Congress still has its' franking privileges and oversight of the operation, when it chooses to do so. As a result, the USPS is the leading example of all that is wrong with government run entities with none of the "benefits" in law to "wiggle out" so to speak. GM, Chrysler, all the flag carrriers (airlines) and many others simply ducked their responsibilities (legally) when their labor and/or other costs got out of control. Congress won't let the USPS do that. At least not so far. The US taxpayer cannot presently support these kinds of schemes. There is a whole long list of same either already proposed or just waiting in the wings for a moment when we are vulnerable to allowing such. Best regards, RA1 Quote
AdamSmith Posted February 10, 2013 Posted February 10, 2013 This piece is a good reminder of how the P.O. (still can't get used to its current name) is more central to the American experiment than sometimes acknowledged: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/09/opinion/how-the-post-office-made-america.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130209&_r=1& I also remain puzzled about the commentary here that the organization soaks up tax dollars. Can anyone document that? I will confess a bias. Papa was a mail sorter (having to learn the dread Scheme each February was his bane -- every sorter before automation had to learn the address structure and ZIP codes of the entire area served by that P.O., so they could take over anyone else's lettercase when someone was sick.) And his brother ran the local Post Office garage, maintaining the mail trucks. So one has some attachment. Quote
Members RA1 Posted February 10, 2013 Members Posted February 10, 2013 Of course it is central to the "American experiment". How could the US have survived without the Post Office to include the Pony Express and other notable "experiments" ? There are many folks who should be appreciated for their service to the Post Office to include your family members and my grandmother's second husband. That in and of itself does not eliminate any blame (or credit) for those "managers" who have taken the USPS to its' present position; that does not exempt the Congress for their transgressions. The worker bees always take the blame and the brunt of the criticism and the economic burden. I am afraid such if life as we know it. Best regards, RA1 Quote
