A few words on the American Postal Office and medical care

Day 1,964, 00:26 Published in USA USA by 2503830

It was recently announced that the post office would stop delivery of mail on Saturday. We as a nation cannot afford mail service as we used to anymore, as we cannot afford a lot of things anymore.
The GOP (Republican Party) is doing its best to destroy a national institution that provides hundreds of thousands of unionized jobs. (The Democratic Party is doing nothing, perhaps waiting for a signal from its corporate benefactors.)
Merely reading “unionized” in front of “jobs” leads to the conclusion that ideology is behind this latest attack on working people, and surely a Right-wing desire to eliminate large unions and drive down wages further is a significant motivation. And we all know that there is a long standing 'theme' of attacking the unions in this country.


Privatization is a polite word for corporate interest. When you hear someone talk about "it needs to be privatized", then someone big sees profits there, or has interests there and doesn't care what happens in the process.
But "unionized jobs" is not the sole motivation, however. Privatizing the Postal Service would mean big new business for delivery services and companies that supply postal products.( Hello ! )
Advocates of privatization recently sought to inject more wind into their sails with the release of a study by a “think tank” with the bland-sounding name of National Academy of Public Administration. The “study” has yet to published in full, but its four authors, described as “postal industry thought leaders,” have published their conclusion — a call for a near total privatization.
Is anyone reminded of the "global warming" *studies* i spoke about? You should.
But who are the people behind this "think-tank" anyway? Well, most of them except one are vastly interested in privatization for personal gain ( no surprise there , it's America ):
Ed Gleiman, a former member of the Postal Rate Commission, has since become a lobbyist for the Direct Marketing Association, a group representing large mailers.

John Nolan, a deputy postmaster general during the Bush II/Cheney administration, is currently a board member for Streamlite, a business-to-consumer lightweight package delivery service. He is also a senior advisor to The Western Union Co., another corporation that stands to benefit from dismantling the Postal Service.
Edward Hudgins is a director of the Atlas Society (“Atlas” as in Ayn Rand) and previously worked for the Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation. The latter two organizations are manically dedicated to destroying all protections for employees, while the phantasmagorical absurdity of Ayn Rand’s novels bear as much relation to reality as an elephant that flies.
George Gould, a former political director for the National Association of Letter Carriers union, doesn’t appear to have an ideological axe to grind as do the other three “leaders” and perhaps is guilty of nothing more than absorbing neoliberal ideology. Critics of the NALC say that the union has failed to fight for its membership, and Mr. Gould’s participation in this “study” might provide those critics additional fuel.

To end the farce the company who funds the "study" ( notice i said COMPANY, not INSTITUTION ) is Pitney Bowes Inc.
For those of you who do not know who they are, i'll use the quote from Greg Bell, executive director of American Postal Workers Union which says:
"Pitney Bowes, the company that is funding the review, stands to be a major beneficiary. The company is widely known as a provider of mailing equipment, but it is also a major mail ‘pre-sorter.’ The company takes advantage of generous pre-sort discounts offered by the Postal Service to provide outsourced services to high-volume mailers. In 2011, Pitney Bowes operated 41 mail processing facilities and generated $5.3 billion in revenue. Pitney Bowes would certainly snatch up a major portion of USPS revenue if it were given the chance.”

Getting the big picture now? Gooood.
Backlash has been timid, and nowhere near the size it should have been. By comparisson France a country with only 50 mil. population has had almost 12 million in the streets to protest such measures meant to make the rich richer and you all, poorer.
The US has had nothing. Nothing...
Yes there was Occupy but let's be frank several thousands having their say over the hundreds of millions watching Oprah or Kardashian's ass or whatever - that ain't gonna change much.
There were a lot of political and financial analysts on TV lately and there was this insanity that "we are recovering" "America is recovering" and the worse of all "It's good that the we as a nation have cut down on medical spending!".
Stop. STOP !
There's a very simple explanation why the expenditures for medical care have gone down.
WE'RE IN A RECESSION ! We're spending LESS on everything !
People avoid going to the doctor they CAN'T AFFORD IT ! They 'll go into debt, they'll have financial problems, etc


And this is considered a good thing. Is it ?
Think a bit with me here: If you don't go to a doctor to get treated, the problem gets ...WORSE. And you are going to save now but spend 100 times later ( or simply die depending on your condition ).
We shouldn't be celebrating this. This is a disaster. Health and education impact society for DECADES.

But as i said, in a country that wants to believe that "we're in a recovery! Hurray !" it is very hard to show reality and not be called a pessimist.


Material use😛
NYT.com
WashingtonPost
Wikipedia.org
naturalnews.com