What to do with Canada Post?

[TimG]

Pensions are only considered lavish because you choose to believe that.

Ah - no. The entire concept of a company sponsored defined benefit pension is a scam designed to allow union bosses to claim they got rich settlements when all they did is permanently shackle their members retirement plan to future performance of the company. If union bosses actually cared about the best interests of their members they would have insisted on a 100% employee funded and managed pension fund. They did not because to make such a plan viable they would have had to made significant concessions in wages/benefits.

IOW - if pensions are underfunded then unions deserve a large part of the blame.

Edited August 28, 2013 by TimG

[cybercoma]

Now businesses are paid by check in many cases and why should they have to wait longer to get there money. And then there is the story just a week ago, that a eldery lady can't get her mail delivered because her step is 14 inches high, and the posties only do 13. It is no different then any other lazy ass union government outfit.

And how many mail carriers deliver the mail on properties far more dangerous than that on a regular basis? Stop with the knee-jerk emotional anecdotes. They don't make for a good argument.

[PIK]

And how many mail carriers deliver the mail on properties far more dangerous than that on a regular basis? Stop with the knee-jerk emotional anecdotes. They don't make for a good argument.

Well tell me, how many??? I highly doubt it ,unless he is one of the few that does'nt mind doing it. And how much does the taxi's cost the taxpayer to drive them around?? The lady has to go down the street to get her mail, if it happened to her how many others has it happened to?? How much did it cost the taxpayer to measure every rural mail box in the country and many people had to move them inches and others have to walk down the road now to get mail. Great for the elderly in winter time. Or did you even know they did that?

[guyser]

The lady has to go down the street to get her mail,

First off, it was an elderly couple, second it was 13 inches, 1 more than it should be, and third, they get their mail every day in the mailbox which is now at the bottom of the steps.

Good try tho.

[PIK]

First off, it was an elderly couple, second it was 13 inches, 1 more than it should be, and third, they get their mail every day in the mailbox which is now at the bottom of the steps.

Good try tho.

Glad they fixed that up. So what about the money wasted on measuring every rural box in canada.

[Boges]

Glad they fixed that up. So what about the money wasted on measuring every rural box in canada.

What about the money wasted paying people union wages to deliver flyers and coupons 5-days a week?

[guyser]

. So what about the money wasted on measuring every rural box in canada.

What? Link?

[guyser]

What about the money wasted paying people union wages to deliver flyers and coupons 5-days a week?

Er....no?

Private enterprise paying Posties to do this is fine, its their money.

Most ,overwhelmingly most, flyers and coupons are not sent thru mail, they hire private contractors to do that, and pay a pittance to boot. Free eneterpirse

[g_bambino]

Personally, I don't think mail delivery should be run for profit. I think it should be publicly owned and funded for the important purpose that it serves. You can't expect a private entity to deliver to remote areas where it will lose money, but as Canadians, those people that live in remote areas should have access to mail delivery.

That's what I thought the other night, too. Though, I didn't think people in remote areas would not have access to mail delivery, but it would be gossly more expensive for them to send stuff out and for people to send stuff to them; the principle of 'same price for everyone' would be gone.

That said, I'm of the opinion the postal service should not be delivering junk mail; we shouldn't be paying taxes to give ourselves the unnecessary work of carrying bags of unwanted flyers or advertising to the curb or bin for recycling (a service that costs us again in taxes).

[Icebound]

At least the post office never read my mail (well hardly ever)... and then used the information inside it in order to target me with ads.

The real problem is that we allowed one of Canada Post's primary functions to be usurped by a faulty system that has no privacy controls. We let ourselves be f***ked by glitzy technology and we loved it.

The CONVENIENCE, we said. or at least... somebody said.

[Icebound]

Most ,overwhelmingly most, flyers and coupons are not sent thru mail, they hire private contractors to do that, and pay a pittance to boot. Free eneterpirse

I doubt it.

Its done for a pittance, all right, but the "bulk mail" rate is probably way cheaper than hiring their own contractor.

[Icebound]

Then they should pay for them not me.

Oh, YOU WILL pay.

You will either pay to allow employees a decent wage and a comfortable pension.... OR

You will have to pay to look after them on the welfare rolls and/or government handouts..... OR

You will pay when they burn down your gated community in desperation.

But there is no such thing as "not me".... You WILL pay.

I will submit that option 1 is the most comfortable for you and also the most productive for society. I suggest accepting it.

.

[TimG]

You will either pay to allow employees a decent wage and a comfortable pension.

Except government employees are largely paid by people who make less and have don't have a government sugar daddy backstopping their pension. So your argument that failure to provide these inflated benefits will lead to social unrest is nonsensical.

The basic economics of the free market system requires that the majority of people be paid less than the average and no amount of social engineering can change that reality. The only objective that makes sense are social programs to ensure no one ends up destitute and that everyone has access to the education needed to improve their position.

Edited August 29, 2013 by TimG

[cybercoma]

Except government employees are largely paid by people who make less and have don't have a government sugar daddy backstopping their pension. So your argument that failure to provide these inflated benefits will lead to social unrest is nonsensical.

those people should be paid more then. We should be demanding that companies look after their employees.

[TimG]

those people should be paid more then. We should be demanding that companies look after their employees.

Mathematically not an option. See above.

[GostHacked]

First of all, not every Canadian has a computer and for those who do, there's always a chance of your computer going down for a period of time before one can get it fixed. I think Canada Post will probably get sold off to the private sector with some conditions.

But almost everyone has a smartphone. I hear you can get the Internets and email on it.

[cybercoma]

Mathematically not an option. See above.

Thats what you choose to believe. Sure,

[hitops]

Thats what you choose to believe. Sure,

I think this is your problem, you think it's about what we choose to believe. I'm sorry but there is a real world out there, where you can't just think up a utopia which then starts functioning. Not trying to get in your face too much here, but your series of posts in this thread are possibly the most economically illiterate to date.

Government does not create wealth or create anything at all by employing people, it just shifts wealth from one group to others. It does not recover wealth through taxation of government jobs, unless you believe all government jobs are taxed at 100%. If you employ people without market demand for that service, you are not gaining anything by collecting their 20-30%, you are just losing the other 80% to a pointless position that serves no purpose for Canadians.

The idea that government work exists to provide work, rather than to provide a service, is exactly why numerous European countries are falling apart right now, lurching from crisis to crisis and economically contracting. They are living the results. You have a chance to learn what happens with those policies, right now, in real time. Take advantage of it, you get to watch in unfold instead of just reading about it in history books 50 years from now.

It's a free country. If you want a pension, you are free to apply for any job that offers one. You are not free however, to just demand that because you don't want to apply the input to get to a job that does, that everyone else should pay it for you. That is not only insulting to the average person, but incredibly arrogant and destructive. If you want a pension, work for a job that provides one. If you don't want to, then don't expect one. If you believe a company is terrible for not providing one, then work for yourself and start your own company.

This is not a fantasy land where companies 'should' or 'should not' do x, y or z just because you or some elite believes they should. They have to operate in reality, where profits are required to exist and continue to pay employees. If we force a company to give pensions to everyone, the result is not that everyone in company x lives happily ever after. The results is company x goes out of business, because they get out-competed by company y who operates on a normal, sustainable business model.

I have worked for the city. It is the laziest bunch of half-baked braindeads one could ever meet, I know this absolutely first hand and for a fact. Being a conservatively minded person, my first few weeks I wanted to do a good job and worked really hard. After 2 weeks I was doing roughly double the work the previous crew with 15 years experience had been doing. I received a scolding from others, telling me in not so many words that I better tone it down because was making the previous group look like lazy f*ups (which they were) . Yep......funded by regular market-employed people's property taxes. What a disgrace. People who think gov departments should exists with good wages just for their own sake, do nothing but destroy their societies, and there are many of nation-examples in recent history to illustrate that.

Edited August 29, 2013 by hitops

[cybercoma]

I have worked for the city. It is the laziest bunch of half-baked braindeads one could ever meet

And there it is. I'm "economically illiterate" because of your completely disrespectful biases.

[g_bambino]

...[C]ompletely disrespectful biases.

How do you know it's mere disrespect and not an accurate observation? It doesn't make what he said the truth, but I have heard similar from other people who've worked or currently work in unionised environments; for example, reward and advancement doesn't result from productivity, intelligence, ethic, resourcefulness, and/or creativity; it is based entirely on seniority. Also, it's extremely difficult to get fired; laziness, ineptitude, disrespect, etc. aren't enough to warrant dismissal and thus can be practiced without worry.

[Boges]

How do you know it's mere disrespect and not an accurate observation? It doesn't make what he said the truth, but I have heard similar from other people who've worked or currently work in unionised environments; for example, reward and advancement doesn't result from productivity, intelligence, ethic, resourcefulness, and/or creativity; it is based entirely on seniority. Also, it's extremely difficult to get fired; laziness, ineptitude, disrespect, etc. aren't enough to warrant dismissal and thus can be practiced without worry.

Everyone has heard these stories. It's the most common stereotypes of civil servants or any unionized worker. Any example one can give can simply be dismissed as an anecdote.

But I guess when you have a work environment where Collective Bargaining is hard to try and improve your lot by working harder than the "collective" so why bother.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Boges

[g_bambino]

It's the most common stereotypes of civil servants or any unionized worker...

Don't stereotypes have some grounds in truth? Regardless, what you say might have some weight if what I said I'd heard hadn't come from people who have worked or currently work in unionised environments.

[ed.: c/e, +]

Edited August 29, 2013 by g_bambino

[Boges]

That might have some validity if what I said I'd heard hadn't come from people who have worked or currently work in unionised environments.

ANECDOTAL!!!!!!!!

:-D

I've heard similar things. These "stereotypes" wouldn't exist if people didn't experience the exact same stuff in a variety of civil servant and union environments.

[g_bambino]

ANECDOTAL!!!!!!!!.

The validity of one person's anecdote about their own personal experience doesn't become more sound the more similar anecdotes are recounted by other people about their own experiences; In other words: corroberation?

[Boges]

Sure just like studies that say that absenteeism amongst civil servants is far higher than with private sector counterparts.