Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire USPS subisdies to rural Alaska cost taxpayers billions

I have no problem with them living wherever they want; I do have a problem with subsidizing air delivery of Coca Cola.

Interesting point. I was involved in the development (planing) of the Interstate highway system and raised this issue in the mid-1960's. My boss, Ross Kruser (father of the Highway Trust Fund) just looked at me and said "The nation needs a continuous highway system, not a patchwork. Products are shipped across the nation and they need to be moved expeditiously. If we don't fund a continuous highway system, commerce will grind to a slow march"

So - are YOU the asswhipe that is responsible for I-80 taking the shortest route through a horrible vortex of wind at Arlington, Wyoming rather than following the path of the railroad further north, resulting in the most-closed section of interstate in the country?

Fish, really?

Nope, the Bureau of Public Roads (now Federal Highway Administration) just outlined destinations between major cities that the states needed to connect. The individual states picked the actual routes based on state/local politics and costs (environmental considerations were not considered at the time). If you have a problem with the I-80 routing in Wyoming, take it up with your state highway department.

My role was to analyze the estimated costs and ensure that the Interstates would link up at state borders. You'd be amazed at some of the proposed alignments; many were off by dozens of miles; a lot of negotiating was required (in which I did not participate in).

My brother is an engineer with WYDOT. He's said many times how stupid it was to put the road there. It cost much more trying to keep it open that going an extra 15 miles north.

We don't, keep those IRS forms and Alaska Magazines in Seattle where they belong.

Well, it'd be delivered by truck, except there ain't any roads. Alaska has minimal, at best, infrastructure, and as such most rural communities are serviced via air.
We kinda like the remoteness up here, and as Uncle Ted once said, we're about 100 years behind the Lesser 48 in regards to roads and public services. Hell, there are villages up here with honeybuckets as there is no sewage system available, and you've got your thong in a twist over subsidized USPS service?
Tell ya what, we'll sell our oil to the highest bidder, as opposed to the U.S at their set prices, and then we'll be happy to cut the USPS subsidy.
There's a chit load of gubbiment waste, and programs, ain't no argument here. But bitching about folks who've lived Out There since before Alaska was even on a map getting a basic service like mail sure do show your inability to grasp much....

Federal Mineral Mining Act has taken more than 50 Billion out of Alaska. They tax the gross oil revenues and not the net that Alaska taxes. They have taken much more than they have given.

Sincerely,
Thomas

No argument there, however, how would you suggest they control that? Would you be okay with presenting any or all of your mail for inspection upon request?

BTW, I have a much greater problem with the fact that "food stamps" funds things like Coca-Cola and other soda, along with a whole bunch of other virtually worthless items that some people consume and call food. There are plenty of places where waste could be cut. The US Postal Service is not where I'd start; and yes, I'd be more than content with mail a couple times per week. It wouldn't be much of a savings out here however and they'd need a bigger building to store the mail.

BTW, the "hazardous, perishable, liquids" deal only references a line of questioning that can be pursued. There are limitations and restrictions, not an all-out ban just because they fall into one of those categories.

Damned straight. Then it will be just me and the musk-ox out there . Feck the Natives!

Although I have to say, I am all in favor of eliminating soda from the by-pass mail subsidies. As a ramper in Kotzebue, I'd estimate that nearly 40% of the bypass mail weight of "food products" is soda-pop, which is an unnecessary and unhealthy "food product". Heavy. And often tipped over, so require restacking, which galls all our butts...

While we are at it, lets eliminate subsidies to ports, airports, and interstate highways all across America. Who needs food delivery and interstate commerce anyway?

After all, those bananas, coffee, tea, and kiwi fruit just majically appears in the Safeways.... Those Mezkins will happily tote it across the desert regions on their backs...

Again DJS, what about the $30 billion + a year to Puerto Rico?

I do take comfort in knowing DJS is much older and I'll be breathing air LONG after he's gone.

Billions of taxpayer dollars are spent annually to keep the USPS in operation, regardless of where they deliver.

Hell, lets stop all city deliveries so that rural will be less expensive
City folk can just walk to the post office and pick up their mail.

Pretty simple ain't it? Besides, they have all the public transportation so imagine how much of a green impact it will make to have all city f*cks, I mean folks, walk or take the electric street cars to the post office.

No sweat Keith. I was just questioning the fact that 12 packs of soda pop are actually shipped to someone's front door via USPS.
As FUBAR as the postal system is I'd have to see some proof on that one before I believed it.

It is kind of irritating when an airline worker comes in and mails a couple pallets of water for 50 cents a pound. Then a little while drives around the back and picks it up and ships it to whatever village and gets paid $1.50 per pound to dump it out on the runway.

Something tells me that djs feeds rather heavily at the federal trough himself. Of course, don't gore that ox, as it's most important.

That makes way the Hell too much sense.

Good morning Steelhead:

I agree with you on the subsidies to Puerto Rico and oppose them also.

As for longevity, my dad lived to 101, so I might have 28 years to go; you might have a heart attack before I'm gone! Let me know if you do and I'll plan to attend the funeral.

While we may not look at sending a 12 pack of Cokes as being the most prudent thing to do, WHO are you going to put in charge of censorship about what is shipped and not shipped?

Have we not had enough of this kind of vilification out of the USPS with shipping guns or ammo, or primers?

While we may scoff at someone getting Cokes, how many people are out there that don't think we ought to be mailed firearms?

What is next? Mom can't send you cookies? Your buddy can't mail you a half gallon of your favorite bourbon?

Who the hell do you trust to be the censor on this?

Some of you that are normally conservative are sure starting to sound pretty "liberalish" on this issue.

Who really GAF if someone gets a 12 pack of Cokes in the mail? I sure think it beats the alternative...