[cctop]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

[cctop]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

[cardcrimson]

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I live in a relatively conservative area of the East Bay (key word, relatively). The powers that be merged all the polling centers into one, and a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

[cardcrimson]

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I live in a relatively conservative area of the East Bay (key word, relatively). The powers that be merged all the polling centers into one, and a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

[chrisk]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I guess we can assume you don't live in a poor neighborhood. In California, absentee voting and mail-in voting have become very prevalent. In some states, absentee voting is very difficult to qualify for and mail-in voting is rudimentary. You can guess that voting tends to be much more difficult in states where Republicans control the statehouse.

[chrisk]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I guess we can assume you don't live in a poor neighborhood. In California, absentee voting and mail-in voting have become very prevalent. In some states, absentee voting is very difficult to qualify for and mail-in voting is rudimentary. You can guess that voting tends to be much more difficult in states where Republicans control the statehouse.

[cctop]

a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Maybe straying too far into politics here...

I've been in the Bay Area most of my voting life. 

I might chalk up a 15 minute wait to a sudden influx of voters arriving at the same time of me, though I'd be irritated.

Anything more than 30 minutes I would attribute to underfunding, incompetence, or malice.

But actually my wife & I registered as a permanent absentee voters a few years ago.  Now we can take our time to fill out the ballot at home and just drop off a sealed envelope at our polling station the morning of the election.

The main downside of absentee voting is missing late-breaking developments, such as Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out a day or two before the election and endorsing Biden.

[cctop]

a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Maybe straying too far into politics here...

I've been in the Bay Area most of my voting life. 

I might chalk up a 15 minute wait to a sudden influx of voters arriving at the same time of me, though I'd be irritated.

Anything more than 30 minutes I would attribute to underfunding, incompetence, or malice.

But actually my wife & I registered as a permanent absentee voters a few years ago.  Now we can take our time to fill out the ballot at home and just drop off a sealed envelope at our polling station the morning of the election.

The main downside of absentee voting is missing late-breaking developments, such as Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out a day or two before the election and endorsing Biden.

[chrisk]

a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Maybe straying too far into politics here...

I've been in the Bay Area most of my voting life. 

I might chalk up a 15 minute wait to a sudden influx of voters arriving at the same time of me, though I'd be irritated.

Anything more than 30 minutes I would attribute to underfunding, incompetence, or malice.

But actually my wife & I registered as a permanent absentee voters a few years ago.  Now we can take our time to fill out the ballot at home and just drop off a sealed envelope at our polling station the morning of the election.

The main downside of absentee voting is missing late-breaking developments, such as Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out a day or two before the election and endorsing Biden.

In Santa Clara County, ballots were mailed to everybody, whether or not they asked for them.

[chrisk]

a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Maybe straying too far into politics here...

I've been in the Bay Area most of my voting life. 

I might chalk up a 15 minute wait to a sudden influx of voters arriving at the same time of me, though I'd be irritated.

Anything more than 30 minutes I would attribute to underfunding, incompetence, or malice.

But actually my wife & I registered as a permanent absentee voters a few years ago.  Now we can take our time to fill out the ballot at home and just drop off a sealed envelope at our polling station the morning of the election.

The main downside of absentee voting is missing late-breaking developments, such as Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out a day or two before the election and endorsing Biden.

In Santa Clara County, ballots were mailed to everybody, whether or not they asked for them.

[cardcrimson]

a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Maybe straying too far into politics here...

I've been in the Bay Area most of my voting life. 

I might chalk up a 15 minute wait to a sudden influx of voters arriving at the same time of me, though I'd be irritated.

Anything more than 30 minutes I would attribute to underfunding, incompetence, or malice.

But actually my wife & I registered as a permanent absentee voters a few years ago.  Now we can take our time to fill out the ballot at home and just drop off a sealed envelope at our polling station the morning of the election.

The main downside of absentee voting is missing late-breaking developments, such as Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out a day or two before the election and endorsing Biden.

I'd chalk it up to sarcasm.

[cardcrimson]

a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Maybe straying too far into politics here...

I've been in the Bay Area most of my voting life. 

I might chalk up a 15 minute wait to a sudden influx of voters arriving at the same time of me, though I'd be irritated.

Anything more than 30 minutes I would attribute to underfunding, incompetence, or malice.

But actually my wife & I registered as a permanent absentee voters a few years ago.  Now we can take our time to fill out the ballot at home and just drop off a sealed envelope at our polling station the morning of the election.

The main downside of absentee voting is missing late-breaking developments, such as Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out a day or two before the election and endorsing Biden.

I'd chalk it up to sarcasm.

[JustAnotherFan]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

Yeah, it's the latter. Disproportionately happens in poor areas, where students vote, or where black and brown people vote.

In my rich white suburb I've never had to wait more than 10 minutes on election day, and in early voting I never have to wait. But there were stories of people waiting four hours past polls closing on primary day in my state. I'd say it pays to live in these neighborhoods, but technically the people living in these neighborhoods are paying quite handsomely to have ease of access to the political process.

---

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I live in a relatively conservative area of the East Bay (key word, relatively). The powers that be merged all the polling centers into one, and a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Oh my, I hope you're joking. A 15 minute wait is nothing.

[JustAnotherFan]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

Yeah, it's the latter. Disproportionately happens in poor areas, where students vote, or where black and brown people vote.

In my rich white suburb I've never had to wait more than 10 minutes on election day, and in early voting I never have to wait. But there were stories of people waiting four hours past polls closing on primary day in my state. I'd say it pays to live in these neighborhoods, but technically the people living in these neighborhoods are paying quite handsomely to have ease of access to the political process.

---

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I live in a relatively conservative area of the East Bay (key word, relatively). The powers that be merged all the polling centers into one, and a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Oh my, I hope you're joking. A 15 minute wait is nothing.

[2006alum]

Returning to the topic of the thread,

1. House Dem bill proposes $1,500 per person (both adult and child, unlike Senate bill), and while the amount also scales down for those making above $75k like the Senate bill, the $1,500k rebate will go out to every American now, and then the means-test will be calculated against future tax liabilities, which can be offset for any of the next three tax years. From everything I've read, that seems like the most reasonable way to do it. It allows for up to $7.5k in immediate outlay per family, and it means there's no need to means-test it now, which would slow down payments and risk hurting folks whose 2018 taxable income does not represent their 2020 economic state. I say let's worry about that down the road once we have an economy again and get those checks out ASAP.

2. Trying to target it specifically to the uninsured will slow down disbursal in many cases. See California - because of staggering 4000% increase in jobless claims, they are estimating a 3-week wait just to get on unemployment benefits due to overload of new applicants. I am sure this is true throughout the country. If you target it only to those unemployed, those folks won't be getting benefits for at least a month, possibly longer.

[2006alum]

Returning to the topic of the thread,

1. House Dem bill proposes $1,500 per person (both adult and child, unlike Senate bill), and while the amount also scales down for those making above $75k like the Senate bill, the $1,500k rebate will go out to every American now, and then the means-test will be calculated against future tax liabilities, which can be offset for any of the next three tax years. From everything I've read, that seems like the most reasonable way to do it. It allows for up to $7.5k in immediate outlay per family, and it means there's no need to means-test it now, which would slow down payments and risk hurting folks whose 2018 taxable income does not represent their 2020 economic state. I say let's worry about that down the road once we have an economy again and get those checks out ASAP.

2. Trying to target it specifically to the uninsured will slow down disbursal in many cases. See California - because of staggering 4000% increase in jobless claims, they are estimating a 3-week wait just to get on unemployment benefits due to overload of new applicants. I am sure this is true throughout the country. If you target it only to those unemployed, those folks won't be getting benefits for at least a month, possibly longer.

[cardcrimson]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

Yeah, it's the latter. Disproportionately happens in poor areas, where students vote, or where black and brown people vote.

In my rich white suburb I've never had to wait more than 10 minutes on election day, and in early voting I never have to wait. But there were stories of people waiting four hours past polls closing on primary day in my state. I'd say it pays to live in these neighborhoods, but technically the people living in these neighborhoods are paying quite handsomely to have ease of access to the political process.

---

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I live in a relatively conservative area of the East Bay (key word, relatively). The powers that be merged all the polling centers into one, and a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Oh my, I hope you're joking. A 15 minute wait is nothing.

Apparently you missed the post just above this one. Why am I not surprised. . . .

[cardcrimson]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

Yeah, it's the latter. Disproportionately happens in poor areas, where students vote, or where black and brown people vote.

In my rich white suburb I've never had to wait more than 10 minutes on election day, and in early voting I never have to wait. But there were stories of people waiting four hours past polls closing on primary day in my state. I'd say it pays to live in these neighborhoods, but technically the people living in these neighborhoods are paying quite handsomely to have ease of access to the political process.

---

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I live in a relatively conservative area of the East Bay (key word, relatively). The powers that be merged all the polling centers into one, and a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Oh my, I hope you're joking. A 15 minute wait is nothing.

Apparently you missed the post just above this one. Why am I not surprised. . . .

[2006alum]

And for those questioning why the House bill has anything in it related to the Post Office, here's why:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1242268652411420672?s=20[/tweet]

If the Post Office goes bankrupt, how do we vote by mail?

Incidentally, one of the best podcasts I've listened to lately was an Ezra Klein interview with Ron Klain on the lessons he learned from the last financial crisis in 2009 and from his handling of the Ebola task force in 2015. One of the most striking things Klain said was that when legislating a major bailout/stimulus effort, you should not assume you'll have a second chance to do more later. By the time the Obama economic advisors realized in late 2009 that the first bailout/stimulus was insufficient to get Americans back on their feet quickly, the political momentum for another stimulus package had passed and they were unable to get another bill through.

I can't be sure of it, but since the Dem leadership in both the House and Senate is the same folks who were involved in 2008, I would not be surprised if they have internalized this lesson and are not assuming it will be easy to get another package through any time soon, especially with the possibility that large numbers of elected representatives may need to be quarantined, deal with sick family members etc. In that sense, the Nancy Pelosi wishlist makes a lot more sense, and some of the items, like the no-excuse absentee voting and mandatory early voting windows, make a lot of sense to include now.

[2006alum]

And for those questioning why the House bill has anything in it related to the Post Office, here's why:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1242268652411420672?s=20[/tweet]

If the Post Office goes bankrupt, how do we vote by mail?

Incidentally, one of the best podcasts I've listened to lately was an Ezra Klein interview with Ron Klain on the lessons he learned from the last financial crisis in 2009 and from his handling of the Ebola task force in 2015. One of the most striking things Klain said was that when legislating a major bailout/stimulus effort, you should not assume you'll have a second chance to do more later. By the time the Obama economic advisors realized in late 2009 that the first bailout/stimulus was insufficient to get Americans back on their feet quickly, the political momentum for another stimulus package had passed and they were unable to get another bill through.

I can't be sure of it, but since the Dem leadership in both the House and Senate is the same folks who were involved in 2008, I would not be surprised if they have internalized this lesson and are not assuming it will be easy to get another package through any time soon, especially with the possibility that large numbers of elected representatives may need to be quarantined, deal with sick family members etc. In that sense, the Nancy Pelosi wishlist makes a lot more sense, and some of the items, like the no-excuse absentee voting and mandatory early voting windows, make a lot of sense to include now.

[cardcrimson]

And for those questioning why the House bill has anything in it related to the Post Office, here's why:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1242268652411420672?s=20[/tweet]

If the Post Office goes bankrupt, how do we vote by mail?

Incidentally, one of the best podcasts I've listened to lately was an Ezra Klein interview with Ron Klain on the lessons he learned from the last financial crisis in 2009 and from his handling of the Ebola task force in 2015. One of the most striking things Klain said was that when legislating a major bailout/stimulus effort, you should not assume you'll have a second chance to do more later. By the time the Obama economic advisors realized in late 2009 that the first bailout/stimulus was insufficient to get Americans back on their feet quickly, the political momentum for another stimulus package had passed and they were unable to get another bill through.

I can't be sure of it, but since the Dem leadership in both the House and Senate is the same folks who were involved in 2008, I would not be surprised if they have internalized this lesson and are not assuming it will be easy to get another package through any time soon, especially with the possibility that large numbers of elected representatives may need to be quarantined, deal with sick family members etc. In that sense, the Nancy Pelosi wishlist makes a lot more sense, and some of the items, like the no-excuse absentee voting and mandatory early voting windows, make a lot of sense to include now.

If the postal workers weren't unionized, wouldn't it make sense to deliver the mail three days a week, tops?

[cardcrimson]

And for those questioning why the House bill has anything in it related to the Post Office, here's why:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1242268652411420672?s=20[/tweet]

If the Post Office goes bankrupt, how do we vote by mail?

Incidentally, one of the best podcasts I've listened to lately was an Ezra Klein interview with Ron Klain on the lessons he learned from the last financial crisis in 2009 and from his handling of the Ebola task force in 2015. One of the most striking things Klain said was that when legislating a major bailout/stimulus effort, you should not assume you'll have a second chance to do more later. By the time the Obama economic advisors realized in late 2009 that the first bailout/stimulus was insufficient to get Americans back on their feet quickly, the political momentum for another stimulus package had passed and they were unable to get another bill through.

I can't be sure of it, but since the Dem leadership in both the House and Senate is the same folks who were involved in 2008, I would not be surprised if they have internalized this lesson and are not assuming it will be easy to get another package through any time soon, especially with the possibility that large numbers of elected representatives may need to be quarantined, deal with sick family members etc. In that sense, the Nancy Pelosi wishlist makes a lot more sense, and some of the items, like the no-excuse absentee voting and mandatory early voting windows, make a lot of sense to include now.

If the postal workers weren't unionized, wouldn't it make sense to deliver the mail three days a week, tops?

[BostonCard]

USPS was making a fair bit of money delivering for Amazon.  Alas, Amazon would not be satisfied with three day a week deliveries. Even as Amazon moves to its own logistics/distribution model, other delivery companies would be happy to use USPS, but you’d need to deliver in a time competitive with Amazon.

BC

[BostonCard]

USPS was making a fair bit of money delivering for Amazon.  Alas, Amazon would not be satisfied with three day a week deliveries. Even as Amazon moves to its own logistics/distribution model, other delivery companies would be happy to use USPS, but you’d need to deliver in a time competitive with Amazon.

BC

[cardcrimson]

Perhaps the problem was that "shovel ready" wasn't really shovel ready. So great to see Obama and Immelt chuckle about it later. Distrust in government is a learned trait. . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPO777FueO8

Incidentally, one of the best podcasts I've listened to lately was an Ezra Klein interview with Ron Klain on the lessons he learned from the last financial crisis in 2009 and from his handling of the Ebola task force in 2015. One of the most striking things Klain said was that when legislating a major bailout/stimulus effort, you should not assume you'll have a second chance to do more later. By the time the Obama economic advisors realized in late 2009 that the first bailout/stimulus was insufficient to get Americans back on their feet quickly, the political momentum for another stimulus package had passed and they were unable to get another bill through.

---

USPS was making a fair bit of money delivering for Amazon.  Alas, Amazon would not be satisfied with three day a week deliveries. Even as Amazon moves to its own logistics/distribution model, other delivery companies would be happy to use USPS, but you’d need to deliver in a time competitive with Amazon.

BC

Not according to Trump. The deal was selling delivery at pennies on the dollar. . . .

[cardcrimson]

Perhaps the problem was that "shovel ready" wasn't really shovel ready. So great to see Obama and Immelt chuckle about it later. Distrust in government is a learned trait. . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPO777FueO8

Incidentally, one of the best podcasts I've listened to lately was an Ezra Klein interview with Ron Klain on the lessons he learned from the last financial crisis in 2009 and from his handling of the Ebola task force in 2015. One of the most striking things Klain said was that when legislating a major bailout/stimulus effort, you should not assume you'll have a second chance to do more later. By the time the Obama economic advisors realized in late 2009 that the first bailout/stimulus was insufficient to get Americans back on their feet quickly, the political momentum for another stimulus package had passed and they were unable to get another bill through.

---

USPS was making a fair bit of money delivering for Amazon.  Alas, Amazon would not be satisfied with three day a week deliveries. Even as Amazon moves to its own logistics/distribution model, other delivery companies would be happy to use USPS, but you’d need to deliver in a time competitive with Amazon.

BC

Not according to Trump. The deal was selling delivery at pennies on the dollar. . . .

[BostonCard]

“Not according to Trump”.

Trump lies unashamedly.
Trump has a beef with Jeff Bezos, so he is motivated to lie.

But because I actually in actually care About the truth, here:

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/04/599579232...for-amazon

PLUNKETT: The Postal Regulatory Commission does review the Postal Service's contracts, and they've concluded the opposite - that the Postal Service does make money from its shipping contracts.
NAYLOR: Plunkett says the Postal Service's deal with Amazon is probably unlike what it has arranged with other shippers.
PLUNKETT: Amazon probably looks very different from the rest of the Postal Service's shipping business because they have enough volume in their own network of distribution centers, so the vast majority of their packages are being entered locally, and they're very cost-efficient for the Postal Service to handle for the most part.
NAYLOR: In fact, package deliveries have been the bright spot in the Postal Service's financial picture the last several years. It reported more than $19 billion of revenue from package deliveries last year - an increase of 11 percent.

Did I mention Trump has no credibility?

BC

[BostonCard]

“Not according to Trump”.

Trump lies unashamedly.
Trump has a beef with Jeff Bezos, so he is motivated to lie.

But because I actually in actually care About the truth, here:

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/04/599579232...for-amazon

PLUNKETT: The Postal Regulatory Commission does review the Postal Service's contracts, and they've concluded the opposite - that the Postal Service does make money from its shipping contracts.
NAYLOR: Plunkett says the Postal Service's deal with Amazon is probably unlike what it has arranged with other shippers.
PLUNKETT: Amazon probably looks very different from the rest of the Postal Service's shipping business because they have enough volume in their own network of distribution centers, so the vast majority of their packages are being entered locally, and they're very cost-efficient for the Postal Service to handle for the most part.
NAYLOR: In fact, package deliveries have been the bright spot in the Postal Service's financial picture the last several years. It reported more than $19 billion of revenue from package deliveries last year - an increase of 11 percent.

Did I mention Trump has no credibility?

BC

[chrisk]

Stocks rally as Mnuchin and Schumer deal directly, since Mitch was only able to deliver one Dem vote.

His insistence on voting even though he didn’t have the votes was overplaying his weak hand.

[chrisk]

Stocks rally as Mnuchin and Schumer deal directly, since Mitch was only able to deliver one Dem vote.

His insistence on voting even though he didn’t have the votes was overplaying his weak hand.

[2006alum]

Schumer just said that the emerging bill will pay furloughed workers up to 4 months' salary. Not sure how quickly that will get to people, but if so, that's brobdingnagian in terms of blunting the impact on people's day to day lives for the next few months.

How to pay for it, well, that's a separate question...

[2006alum]

Schumer just said that the emerging bill will pay furloughed workers up to 4 months' salary. Not sure how quickly that will get to people, but if so, that's brobdingnagian in terms of blunting the impact on people's day to day lives for the next few months.

How to pay for it, well, that's a separate question...

[OutsiderFan]

Stocks rally as Mnuchin and Schumer deal directly, since Mitch was only able to deliver one Dem vote.

His insistence on voting even though he didn’t have the votes was overplaying his weak hand.

But it bought a whole lot of GOP MOC something to fundraise on, and right wing radio its latest outrage to rile the base and keep those ad dollars flowing in.

[OutsiderFan]

Stocks rally as Mnuchin and Schumer deal directly, since Mitch was only able to deliver one Dem vote.

His insistence on voting even though he didn’t have the votes was overplaying his weak hand.

But it bought a whole lot of GOP MOC something to fundraise on, and right wing radio its latest outrage to rile the base and keep those ad dollars flowing in.

[2006alum]

One more reason to make sure this bill gets it right: it's looking likely that the Senate will not be in session for the next THREE WEEKS. If that's true, then this is essentially the only legislative relief we can count until at least late April.

[2006alum]

One more reason to make sure this bill gets it right: it's looking likely that the Senate will not be in session for the next THREE WEEKS. If that's true, then this is essentially the only legislative relief we can count until at least late April.

[JustAnotherFan]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

Yeah, it's the latter. Disproportionately happens in poor areas, where students vote, or where black and brown people vote.

In my rich white suburb I've never had to wait more than 10 minutes on election day, and in early voting I never have to wait. But there were stories of people waiting four hours past polls closing on primary day in my state. I'd say it pays to live in these neighborhoods, but technically the people living in these neighborhoods are paying quite handsomely to have ease of access to the political process.

---

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I live in a relatively conservative area of the East Bay (key word, relatively). The powers that be merged all the polling centers into one, and a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Oh my, I hope you're joking. A 15 minute wait is nothing.

Apparently you missed the post just above this one. Why am I not surprised. . . .

Classy.

[JustAnotherFan]

Many people do not appreciate or are not aware that voting is difficult for many, many Americans. When you hear of states where people get off work and wait in line for hours and hours, even in the rain or snow, often it is because in their state, that’s the only way they can vote (no absentee ballots, no early ballots, all voting done only in their polling place, which can be overwhelmed)

Reading about people standing in line for hours to vote absolutely baffles me.

In my whole life I can't recall waiting more than 5 minutes to vote.

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

Yeah, it's the latter. Disproportionately happens in poor areas, where students vote, or where black and brown people vote.

In my rich white suburb I've never had to wait more than 10 minutes on election day, and in early voting I never have to wait. But there were stories of people waiting four hours past polls closing on primary day in my state. I'd say it pays to live in these neighborhoods, but technically the people living in these neighborhoods are paying quite handsomely to have ease of access to the political process.

---

If people are waiting in line for hours then obviously there are not enough polling stations, which is either a massive failure in governance or an intentional attempt at voter suppression.

I live in a relatively conservative area of the East Bay (key word, relatively). The powers that be merged all the polling centers into one, and a few weeks ago, I had to wait for about 15 minutes. Didn't think about it, but perhaps you're correct, they are trying to suppress conservative votes, even relatively conservative ones at that.

Oh my, I hope you're joking. A 15 minute wait is nothing.

Apparently you missed the post just above this one. Why am I not surprised. . . .

Classy.

[chrisk]

Schumer just said that the emerging bill will pay furloughed workers up to 4 months' salary. Not sure how quickly that will get to people, but if so, that's of immense proportions in terms of blunting the impact on people's day to day lives for the next few months.

How to pay for it, well, that's a separate question...

It’s an income and wealth redistribution plan which will only be felt gradually as long as the US can borrow cheaply.

[chrisk]

Schumer just said that the emerging bill will pay furloughed workers up to 4 months' salary. Not sure how quickly that will get to people, but if so, that's of immense proportions in terms of blunting the impact on people's day to day lives for the next few months.

How to pay for it, well, that's a separate question...

It’s an income and wealth redistribution plan which will only be felt gradually as long as the US can borrow cheaply.