Categories
$MONEY$ alpha males atlas shrugged beta males evil women I'm totally being sarcastic marriage strike MGTOW misogyny MRA

Ladies: He’s Going Galt — and it’s all your fault

Screw you, sister! I'm Going Galt!

Ladies! Better move fast if you want to sink your talons into some hard-working, high-earning beta man-wallet! Men’s Rights Redditor ShinShinGogetsuko is on to you ladies and your devious ways, and he’s taking his video games and going home. By which I mean: he’s GOING GALT!

Men are choosing to reject the culture that is being forced upon them which tells them to be anything but MEN. What they want us to be is slaves, to throw away our souls and toil away while women get to do whatever they want in the name of “female empowerment” and with a court system that will side with them. Equality is the ideal, but it’s not about equality–it’s about control. Men are going Galt.

When society takes a stand against the destruction of men’s character, then men will return to being men. Until then, Xbox 720.

See, I wasn’t kidding about the video games bit.

LINK and SCREENSHOT.

Thanks to tim-buckles on ShitRedditSays for the link (and the screenshot).

 

 

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

235 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Pecunium: I am not denying that credit card companies aren’t responsible for bad business practices (e.g the entire debt collection process). However you have made some errors:

1) If you don’t like the contract, you don’t have to sign up for the card.
2) Terms can be negotiated. I recently did this with a few of my cards and had my interest rate drop. One of my cards went from 15% to 11%…all with a phone call.
3) Just as they can change their policies, you can change being their customer. Yes, they create contracts to serve their best interests, but not all credit cards are treated equal.
4) You don’t have to have a bank account. In fact, I went without one for a few years with no serious issues. Instead of paying $5-10 bucks a month for my checking account, I cashed my checks at Walmart for something like $2-3 bucks a whack.
5) I have never had a credit card cancel my cards because of non-usage. Although, I specifically look for that in any credit card contract I review.

If you don’t like BoA, then you did the correct thing my moving your money elsewhere.

Most regulation is actually in favor of big business and not small business. Large corporations have the resources to comply with those regulations where smaller businesses don’t have the capital to comply. Hence more regulations actually snuffs out smaller business which further allows big business to become monopolies.

Most regulation doesn’t even give the corresponding agencies foresight into current industry trends.

Did the SEC, the Fed and other congress subcommittees have the foresight into the current recession? Nope…they got up and said “Everything is A OK” right before the crash.

Did the MMS have the foresight into the BP oil disaster? Nope.

Does the FDA keep medication in limbo for years which could save thousands of people even though other first world countries are supplying them? Yup.

Small businesses are needed to help keep bigger businesses in check. Small businesses help force bigger businesses to not exploit customers because smaller businesses can offer better service, prices and other variables to siphon customers away from exploitative businesses. Small businesses basically act as a system of checks and balances to larger businesses. They also provide customers with more choices which is a good thing.

I propose creating a larger barrier between businesses and government like no corporate funds for political campaigns and other like-minded initiatives. The larger the rift between the two, the safer and better off people will be.

Ah yes Medicare. It is easy to be number one in customer support when they have the power of the government to undercut prices. Of course you are going to like the cheaper service better. Government agencies have the benefit of using taxpayer money to lower their prices while other private insurers don’t have that luxury.

Businesses that use offshore accounts and corporations is just a form of tax competition. Sometimes it’s easier to comply with Isle of Man’s tax regime as opposed to the US tax regime (which is a mess).

Floppies and CD’s? What is this the 90’s? Data can be stored on RAID hard drive servers that create redundancy. And cost per GB is extremely cheap. Also data on the web is far easier to convert into newer formats. Once data is made into plain text, it is easily converted to HTML, TeX and tons of other formats. Also it is a relatively simple process to convert old formats to newer formats. Gone are the days of tedious and time intensive file conversions.

Lastly, file formats are far easier to convert (.doc to .html to .pdf) than medium conversions (floppies to magnetic tape to CD’s). But even still…if the files are saved in non-proprietary file formats, the conversion is easy.

Degradation? Unlikely with RAID servers. Failed hard drives can be easily swapped and the other drives have enough data parity to re-populate the new hard drive.

Also, database corruption is solved by database replication. The government just has to do what large corporations do already: Replicate data to another location.

Practically all software is free of charge by using a simple LAMP setup: Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP. So they wouldn’t even have to pay for software.

@Cynikal: The USPS also gets government money and they are still running in the red:
http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-reports/fy2010.pdf

Look under “The Past Year In Review” Their operating losses are growing even while “Capital Contributions of U.S Government” are growing.

So even with more money from the government…they can’t even break even. Nevermind turn a profit. I can live without quasi-govt/private companies not making a profit (since they are funded by taxpayers). But they should at least break even.

The USPS also has exclusive rights to certain deliverables, mainly standard US Letters. This is why you don’t see UPS, FedEx or DHL accepting standard letters.

@Rutee: Do you also know that even with the increase of money per pupil, test scores aren’t increasing. As the old saying goes, “If money was the solution, the problem would already be solved”

You do know that UPS, FedEX and DHL ship globally? When I was younger, I worked for a Mailboxes Etc… I never once had a problem helping people ship packages to countries like Haiti using UPS or FedEx.

@Elizabeth: Yes magic elves run everything and it somehow gets done…Amazing huh?

Sarcasm aside:

1) There are automated book scanners that can pretty much automate much of the process. This is what large companies like Amazon and Google use to scan books into their libraries.

2) Nothing has to be destroyed. However the physical archives could be stored more compactly which means they would require less space to house them.

3) If the government can do one thing…it has the resources to undertake massive projects. See: moon landing, highway creation in the 50’s, the census, etc… They could hire a bunch of people temporarily to handle the backlog until it is finished. Just like all the temporary workers for the Census.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
8 years ago

1) There are automated book scanners that can pretty much automate much of the process. This is what large companies like Amazon and Google use to scan books into their libraries.

Several points, the Feds are already having the assistance of dozens of companies (including Google) and agencies to help scan their materials. And they still cannot manage to put into storage all the papers that the Feds have created in the 235 years of our existence. Plenty of those documents are not easily scanned like books are as well. Nor are they easy to read in the way they are scanned now so having an opportunity to look at the originals is pretty important.

To quote from the National Archives:

“The volume grows at about 1.4 billion pages per year. Creating copies for our web site, and preserving those copies, simply exceeds our resources at this time.”

So yeah, surprisingly it is not as simple as you assume it is. And even with all the help Google is getting in their book project (which is only books so is limited to the 130 million known), they still are going to to take ten years.

2) Nothing has to be destroyed. However the physical archives could be stored more compactly which means they would require less space to house them.

Probably not going to be able to do much more then what we have now-the various libraries and repositories have been doing this for a long time, they know how to pack it in pretty tightly. And again, some of this stuff has to be looked at in the original because of the poor quality of the scanning, documents themselves and other reasons.

3) If the government can do one thing…it has the resources to undertake massive projects. See: moon landing, highway creation in the 50′s, the census, etc… They could hire a bunch of people temporarily to handle the backlog until it is finished. Just like all the temporary workers for the Census.

I worked on the census in 2000, the difference between that operation and scanning something from 1813 is pretty stark. 100% of the census documents were designed specifically to be scanned so you could stack ’em mile high (even managed to have most of them returned in scannable condition.) However no one knew in 1813 that in 2011 someone was going to want to scan permissions to sail from 1812-1815 so they made no effort to make them easy to scan. Which is why when you look at that you squint and go “I cannot read that.” *proceed to pick up the phone to make an appointment to see if you can get a copy of the original or to go look at it.*

So again, there is simply no way of having only a few people sitting in DC keeping an eye on the massive databanks that will one day have most of these documents. Even with all the resources that keep being diverted away from the project spent on it.

Or as 13 just pointed out to me: scan everything, create a massive AI system that can sort everything instantly, fire everyone, wait for apocalypse when the AI figures you gave it a crummy job and starts killing people.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Elizabeth: I am not saying that it wouldn’t be a huge undertaking. However, it would vastly modernize and preserve those documents. Also, it would make those documents more easily accessible, thus making government more transparent and open.

The issue isn’t the difference between census paperwork (which is modernized) vs old documents. It is about the governments ability to fund massive projects. I am not talking about a few clerks scanning documents. I am talking about temporarily hiring thousands of people to do it. They would do the backlog, while any new documents would be digitized/scanned right from the start so that we wouldn’t end up with another massive warehouse of paper later on.

Pecunium
8 years ago

Brandon: Ah yes Medicare. It is easy to be number one in customer support when they have the power of the government to undercut prices. Of course you are going to like the cheaper service better.

No. One likes the service that provides the better service. Penny wise, and pound foolish, and all that.

And scale is one of those, “negotiating tools” you were just talking about in other contexts.

Most regulation doesn’t even give the corresponding agencies foresight into current industry trends.

Have you heard of regulatory capture? Are the SEC able to enforce laws congress repeals? Explain to me why there were no major financial crises from the time of Glass-Steagall until its repeal, but a real doozy in the two industries that had it repealed (the Savings and Loan Crisis, and the present banking mess)?

@Elizabeth: I am not saying that it wouldn’t be a huge undertaking.

Yes, you are.

1) There are automated book scanners that can pretty much automate much of the process. This is what large companies like Amazon and Google use to scan books into their libraries.

2) Nothing has to be destroyed. However the physical archives could be stored more compactly which means they would require less space to house them.

3) If the government can do one thing…it has the resources to undertake massive projects. See: moon landing, highway creation in the 50′s, the census, etc… They could hire a bunch of people temporarily to handle the backlog until it is finished. Just like all the temporary workers for the Census.

Dismissive in tone, and failing to take the scale into account, some automated scanners and some temporary labor and it’s all done. Which is wrong, on so many levels.

Scanning documents isn’t all that trivial an undertaking. It requires some skills which take some time to learn. Archivists aren’t hired in off the street, it’s a specialty for a reason. Those, “automated scanners” are narrow in their function. They aren’t built for things published in folio, or elephant; and they aren’t able to do things published in doudecimo, much less the smaller sizes very well.

But as with so many things, certainty trumps facts, and actual expertise is dismissed as irrelevant.

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

@Rutee: Do you also know that even with the increase of money per pupil, test scores aren’t increasing. As the old saying goes, “If money was the solution, the problem would already be solved”

We’re sending the money to schools that are already doing fine. You do know how NCLB works, right?

You do know that UPS, FedEX and DHL ship globally? When I was younger, I worked for a Mailboxes Etc… I never once had a problem helping people ship packages to countries like Haiti using UPS or FedEx.

So does USPS, and I never had a problem shipping globally with them. I’m willing to bet they all do it the same way; Fob final delivery off on public mail service in that country.

Shit, son, you already had it shown to you that they do this in Merika. Why do you think it’s suddenly different when they ship to, let’s say, Britain?

I said a lot more to you that detailed your stupidity, you should actually respond to it. Again: WHAT KIND OF MORON GIVES A FLYING FUCK ABOUT THE USPS’ PROFITABILITY AS PROOF OF ITS DOING WELL OR NOT. It’s not a company out to make a profit. Blackhawk out-earns the USAF, but it’s still a horrific thing. You didn’t even fucking respond to my point that part of that profitability is DIRECTLY AT WORKERS’ EXPENSE.

Oh right, you’re not a UPS worker, you’re a Brandon, and Brandon only cares about Brandon.

3) If the government can do one thing…it has the resources to undertake massive projects. See: moon landing, highway creation in the 50′s, the census, etc… They could hire a bunch of people temporarily to handle the backlog until it is finished. Just like all the temporary workers for the Census.

Oh please, you won’t even support highways and the USPS, why should we believe you actually support the spending increase in the short term, especially given that it doesn’t actually save much money in the long?

katz
8 years ago

1) If you don’t like the contract, you don’t have to sign up for the card.
2) Terms can be negotiated. I recently did this with a few of my cards and had my interest rate drop. One of my cards went from 15% to 11%…all with a phone call.
3) Just as they can change their policies, you can change being their customer. Yes, they create contracts to serve their best interests, but not all credit cards are treated equal.
4) You don’t have to have a bank account. In fact, I went without one for a few years with no serious issues. Instead of paying $5-10 bucks a month for my checking account, I cashed my checks at Walmart for something like $2-3 bucks a whack.
5) I have never had a credit card cancel my cards because of non-usage. Although, I specifically look for that in any credit card contract I review.

Ye gods.

1. And just…not buy things? This is the 21st century, dude. Not everything can be bought with cash. Or are you imagining that there’s a magical perfect credit card out there somewhere else?

2. Good for you?

3. Contracts. They mean you can’t change being their customer. If there’s money on your card, you’re stuck until you pay it off. Also, see #1.

4. Check cashing: Paying money to get the money you already earned. Also, you now no longer have a debit card, and, as per point #1, you don’t have a credit card either. Also, you do realize that there are services that require you to have a bank account, right?

5. This point is true.

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

@Cynikal: The USPS also gets government money and they are still running in the red:

Way to miss the point completely. I gave you the reason WHY the USPS is losing money and all you do is repeat your talking point.

If you were any dumber you’d lose arguments to Mac & Cheese.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Pencunim:

Medicare: Better service? I read that and see “Pays for everything with ridiculously low co-pays, pays for services that aren’t needed, doctors love it cause they can overcharge medicare but not the patient, etc…

Archiving: No…I am saying it would be a massive undertaking, yet a lot of the process can be automated. You would need a large temporary work force to do all the backlog.

@Rutee: You made the claim that the USPS accepts all mail as if UPS and FedEx don’t. I have never been denied shipping something from any major mail carrier.

I am not really worried about the USPS being profitable. However, I do expect them to break even (since they are actually charging money for their services). Breaking even allows the USPS to continue operations without having to constantly go back to the tax payer and asking for more money. Hence raising the tax burden on citizens when they don’t have to. It also allows the USPS some protection when services are getting cut. What politician would cut the USPS when they aren’t losing money? Not many.

ummm…I support highways. I have no problems with the government owning the roadways. I am also not opposed to privately managed roads. Both are fine.

If the USPS broke even, I wouldn’t care if they exist. But in the grander scheme of things, the more important money issues regarding the government is making major programs solvent (Social security).

@Katz:

1) Cash does not equal credit. Everything in this country can be bought with cash, hence the whole “This is legal tender” on all the bills. Businesses have to accept it. Debit cards aren’t credit and can be used for purchases where cash can’t be transferred (e.g the Internet).

2) The point was that Pencunim made the claim that terms can’t be negotiated. This is flat out untrue and many people have done it, including myself.

3) You only have to remain their customer if you owe them money. If you don’t like the new terms, go find a 0% Balance Transfer card and transfer the money from the card you don’t like to the one you do. You get the benefit of getting rid of a card you don’t want and not having to pay interest for a set amount of time.

While you can’t get rid of the actual debt, you can shuffle it around to places where you get the best terms.

4) You can live just fine without a bank account. Plus you avoid all those stupid fees they charge. So unless you plan on buying a house, renting a car or borrowing money anytime soon, you can live and work just fine. There are alternative like money orders and check cashing places. And since most banks are getting rid of “free checking” you might actually save money by using check cashing places over depositing it into a bank.

katz
8 years ago

Everything in this country can be bought with cash, hence the whole “This is legal tender” on all the bills.

O RLY? Ever bought something on the Internet? I’m sure Amazon will let you mail them an envelope of bills.

So unless you plan on buying a house, renting a car or borrowing money anytime soon, you can live and work just fine.

Dude, you’re proving my point.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Katz:

1) There are Internet merchants that accept checks and money orders. Amazon also allows you to link checking accounts to your Amazon account. So you don’t need credit to buy things on their site. A bank account, yes. Credit, no.

2) Not really. Besides a few things that require a bank account/credit (e.g renting a car) or payment where physical cash is needed, you can live without a bank account.

The point being was that you don’t need to apply for a credit card, accumulate debt, then pay interest on it for the majority of things in life. Even still a debit card will solve the majority of those problems. And if you don’t really buy things online…you can even live without one of those.

Molly Ren
8 years ago

“You can live just fine without a bank account. Plus you avoid all those stupid fees they charge. So unless you plan on buying a house, renting a car or borrowing money anytime soon, you can live and work just fine.

So anyone that has to work in a town with poor public transportation, or has a job that requires a car is just dumb? Cars are still pretty vital to a lot of people, especially if you don’t live in a large city.

Brandon, I may be remembering this wrong, but I thought you owned your own business. You’re never going to need a loan?

Pecunium
8 years ago

Lets see. No bank account = always carrying cash. It also means going to places which will cash the check for you. If you want to buy something which is a large value item you need to save, and save, and save, to have all the cash on hand.

Nope, that’s not got any detrimental effect on someone’s quality of life.

Debit Card = fees/money tied up in minimum balance. Also, if your bank isn’t one of the big ones, you have to pay fees to use an ATM, or go places which will give you cash back. (and BofA, among others just changed the terms of the contract, debit cards now cost $5 a month). Hit another bank’s ATM and pay them a fee (call it 2.50) and your bank (call it 2.50), suddenly you are paying a 5 percent rate to get at $100 of your money. If you don’t think about it, you might be paying 20 percent to get 20 bucks. That’s your idea of “providing a service”?

No, of course not. You will say it’s the consumer’s fault; it’s not that the companies are “taking” money and giving nothing in return, it’s people being stupid.

Good luck getting a loan for something like a car, at any sort of reasonable rate, if you don’t have a credit card (see above about the problems which come of paying cash).

So you say that businesses can’t just, “take money” while not really providing a service, and yet the system is stacked so that not taking part in the, “service” they provide is only possible if you are willing to live your life in a drastically more inconvenient way.

No matter what you do you will pay more for everything. Those debit cards have a significant amount in the way of fees. In 2010 the hidden tax from using debit cars (interchange fees) was 18.8 billion dollars. That’s money that came from your pocket, in the form of merchants charging higher prices because banks don’t charge a flat rate on debit purchases, but on a sliding scale.

It’s why some places won’t let you use the debit feature on your card; because they lose money when you make larger purchases. Everyplace else the cost of the fee is hidden in the price of things, and the shopkeeper has to guess what the margins are, so she can make a living.

The cost to the bank of each transaction is the same, but the charge isn’t.

That’s taking money for doing nothing.

Molly Ren
8 years ago

“The point being was that you don’t need to apply for a credit card, accumulate debt, then pay interest on it for the majority of things in life.”

Ah, there’s the point. Personally I have a credit and a debit card. I use the debit for the majority of my purchases, and the credit card for emergencies (which so far has been maybe once or twice a year, so I don’t have debt on it).

But still… no bank account? I know the banks apparently fucked up the economy, but I’m still not comfortable keeping my money in my mattress or buried in the back yard.

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

I’d like to note really quickly that none of this shit happens to me because I use a credit union. I highly recommend them for peons.

None of it forgives the banks or makes Brandon’s point tenable, but there are non-screwing options.

@Rutee: You made the claim that the USPS accepts all mail as if UPS and FedEx don’t. I have never been denied shipping something from any major mail carrier.

Are you blind or stupid? Cynickal already posted the blazonly advertised policy of using the USPS for expensive delivery.

ummm…I support highways. I have no problems with the government owning the roadways. I am also not opposed to privately managed roads. Both are fine.

You pretended that the government having a ‘monopoly’ on roads wasn’t a ‘fair comparison’, as if they don’t create important value. FYI, I’ve seen toll roads; I avoid them entirely. The ‘value’ is nil.

If the USPS broke even, I wouldn’t care if they exist. But in the grander scheme of things, the more important money issues regarding the government is making major programs solvent (Social security).

Eat the rich. They’re trying to do it to you. You’re stupid, aren’t you?

Pecunium
8 years ago

Rutee: Credit unions are a lot easier now, then they were. I’m suffering (a little) because I’ve moved, so I have only one place in a hundred miles I can make a deposit. Credit unions are also (so it seems) much less common around here (for branches/types) than I’ve seen them in the West. Tennessee is a vast wasteland (I had some checks, I had to sign them to my father and have him wire me the money, it was unbelievable).

But yes, credit unions are much better than banks, all around.

katz
8 years ago

1) There are Internet merchants that accept checks and money orders. Amazon also allows you to link checking accounts to your Amazon account. So you don’t need credit to buy things on their site. A bank account, yes. Credit, no.

2) Not really. Besides a few things that require a bank account/credit (e.g renting a car) or payment where physical cash is needed, you can live without a bank account.

Oh my fucking god. He can’t write two paragraphs without contradicting himself.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Molly: People that need cars aren’t dumb and I have lived in urban and rural areas so I know that having a car is more important in “random farm town” compared to NYC.

You can avoid paying for a car with credit by paying in cash. My first car was a $2000 clunker, so while you might not be able to save $50,000 to buy a BMW, you can easily buy a cheap used car.

If you want a bank account, then go for it. No one is saying that bank accounts aren’t useful. I am just making the point that one can live without credit or a bank account depending on the lifestyle they live.

@Rutee: Yes and the USPS hands off global mail to local mail carriers…what is your point? If the USPS isn’t charging UPS/FedEx for handling their mail, then the USPS is fucking stupid and it is their own fault.

Even most toll roads in the US are still managed by some federal/state transportation agency.

Comparing mail and roads is like comparing apples and oranges.

If you want to compare apples to apples, then you need to compare a government service to a private service that does roughly the same thing. USPS = UPS, public schools = charter schools = private schools, public roads = private/toll roads.

Saying that it isn’t a “fair comparison” doesn’t mean they don’t provide value. It just means they aren’t closely enough related to actually compare. It’s like saying apples and airplanes can be compared.

If you don’t like toll roads, then do what you are doing and don’t use them. Pretty simple.

Did you actually have a point to make about making government services like SSI solvent or do you think that hurling insults is a valid retort?

@Katz: We are really talking about two different things. The need for credit and the need for a bank account.

Credit needed: Bank loans, renting a car, mortgage.
Bank account needed: Not carrying all your money on you, making internet purchases easier.

So if you don’t plan on borrowing money, renting a car from Hertz or buying a house…you can live fine with just a debit card and a bank account.

If you don’t plan on doing the above as well as not having a problem with carrying/storing your money outside of a bank or buying products online….you can live without both credit and a bank account.

It really all depends on how one structures their lives and their goals. I have lived with both credit/debit cards and without them. I had a few minor inconveniences, but nothing major since I wasn’t buying a house or renting a car.

katz
8 years ago

We are really talking about two different things. The need for credit and the need for a bank account.

No we’re not. You’ve said that it’s possible to live without either, so we’re talking about both things. Saying “You don’t need a bank account for that, you can use a credit card” is disingenuous since you’re saying that you don’t need either one.

Bagelsan
Bagelsan
8 years ago

It really all depends on how one structures their lives and their goals. I have lived with both credit/debit cards and without them. I had a few minor inconveniences, but nothing major since I wasn’t buying a house or renting a car.

Aaaand now we’re back in “things that Brandon doesn’t want aren’t necessary for anyone” land. How nostalgic. :p

KathleenB
KathleenB
8 years ago

Brandon: The USPS is not taxpayer supported. That’s one of the biggest myths about the USPS, and the most annoying to employees, who get to hear entitled douchnozzles whinge about how ‘their’ money is being wasted. believe me, It gets really fucking aggravating, especially when such complaints are interspersed with threats to blow up post offices or hunt you down and rape you (yes, I got both when I did telephone CS for USPS).

Until adoption of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, the U.S. Postal Service functioned as a regular, tax-supported, agency of the federal government.

In 1982, U.S. postage stamps became “postal products,” rather than a form of taxation. Since then, The bulk of the cost of operating the postal system has been paid for by customers through the sale of “postal products” and services rather than taxes.

Source: http://bit.ly/nzMSyK

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Katz: And you can live without either. But it depends on how you live your life.

Also it is the other way around, it’s not: “You don’t need a bank account for that, you can use a credit card”

it’s: “You don’t need credit for that, you can use a debit card/bank account”

Both bank accounts and credit serves a purpose. However, if their purpose doesn’t mean much to you, then you can go without.

@Bagelsan: What is so hard to understand? People structure their lives in different ways. Some people can’t live without credit cards or a debit card while others move through life with neither. It all depends on what you want to do and what your priorities are. I am not the only one that has lived without either…many have and many do live without credit or debit by their own decisions.

If you work a simple paycheck to paycheck job and earning a weekly paycheck, you don’t really need either. However if you are in the real estate business, it seems highly unlikely you can do anything without credit (unless you have a serious bankroll).

So one can not make a blanket statement saying credit/bank accounts are useless. It really depends on your lifestyle and your life circumstances.

katz
8 years ago

Brandon: I know that saying what you mean doesn’t come naturally to you, but can you please just answer:

Do you or do you not think that people can reasonably live without both? That is, they have neither a credit card nor a bank account?

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@KathleenB: If you look at the USPS 2010 annual report, you will see under “this past year in review”. It has a line item that reads “capital contributions of US government”.

Now they may be using different definitions of “capital” and “contributions”. But I read that as “Money given to USPS by the US federal government”

It’s not like I got this data from some random blog…I got it from the USPS website:
http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-reports/fy2010.pdf

Also, the link that you provided also doesn’t prove your point since the first line on the second to last paragraph reads:

“The USPS does get some taxpayer support.”

KathleenB
KathleenB
8 years ago

Brandon: The impression that most have is that USPS is fully taxpayer-funded. That, in fact, was your implication above.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Katz: I think for certain people no. They need credit and a bank account. I found that I could reasonably live without either. A few of my friends don’t have either and they live just fine as well.

It isn’t until you need to do what I listed above does credit come into play. If anything bank accounts are a convenience (debit cards, online bill pay, etc…).

So if you work, don’t have a lot of bills and rent a small apartment, you can work, cash checks at places like Walmart, pay bills with money orders. And if your needs are pretty small, the fees to do all that can be less than the monthly fees banks charge. (since free checking is dying).

mythago
8 years ago

My first car was a $2000 clunker, so while you might not be able to save $50,000 to buy a BMW, you can easily buy a cheap used car.

There’s a reason they’re called “clunkers”, and it’s not because that’s a German word meaning “will cost you far less in maintenance than the car is worth”.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@KathleenB: No I didn’t. For one, the USPS charges money for their services. Hence they get most of their revenue from that. The amount of money the government contributes is pretty small.

The FY2010 lists revenue, expenses and contributions from the govt as (in millions):

$67,052, $75,426, $3,132

With an operating loss as (in millions):

$(8,374)

So the amount isn’t large, but making the claim that the USPS isn’t funded in anyway by the government is wrong.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

@ Rutee – When you say none of this shit happens to you with a credit union, what do you mean? I’m not thrilled with the way my bank keeps jacking up fees (and now I don’t even feel like I can say which bank that is, with our friend Hengist hanging around being all creepy). The major disadvantage of credit unions is how few locations there are, right? But you can use the ATMs of some of the major banks if you’re willing to pay a fee?

As to Brandon’s point, I don’t expect the USPS to make a profit any more than I expect the Royal Mail to make a profit. Their responsibility is to make sure that citizens get their mail in a timely manner, not to make money for shareholders. I can understand why a libertarian doesn’t like the idea of public services that aren’t designed to be profit-making entities, but it’s a bit silly to act as if the fact that they don’t make a profit is a sign that they’re failing at their mission, because that’s not actually their mission at all.

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

Brandon you’re still fucking stupider than pudding,

Section 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings;–And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

The US Postal Service is constitutionally MANDATED.
What does the USPS handing mail to lawfully established mail carriers of other countries have fuck all to do with anything?

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@mythago: My first car worked pretty well…by clunker I meant it was cosmetically unappealing. It was an old car but I bought it with proof that it just went through a tune up. It got shitty gas mileage, but gas was $1.50 a gallon at the time so it didn’t really break the bank.

It ran well and had a lot of miles, but it looked like crap and would not have impressed anyone.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

Also, on the idea that people don’t need credit cards or even bank accounts – sometimes I have to travel for work. In order to get good rates on flights, hotels, etc, I need to book well in advance, take advantage of special offers, etc. Have you ever tried to use Expedia or book a hotel room without a credit card? I guess in theory the no credit card or bank account thing is possible, but only if you’re willing to limit your life in a lot of ways that are very inconvenient.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Cynickal: Again, not saying the USPS should be abolished, I just want them to not be a bigger tax drain than necessary.

Someone made the comment about UPS/FedEx handing mail to the USPS. The USPS does exactly the same thing with other mail carriers (Royal Mail, Japan Post, etc…)

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

Also you’re still a complete dipshit who doesn’t bother to read the articles you quote.

control, could reduce our projected gap by $123 billion. By
themselves, these changes are not enough. The remaining $115
billion gap can be closed only through legislative, regulatory, and
labor changes that would afford the Postal Service suffi cient
fl exibility to continue to fulfi ll its mission to the American people
without additional cost to taxpayers.
This second critically important category of changes includes:
(1) Restructuring the Postal Service’s unique obligation to
prefund retiree health, particularly given overfunding of CSRS
and FERS pensions;

*THIS* is where the fundamental profit loss is. Regardless of the fact the the USPS is a NON-PROFIT entity!

So to review for people who read for comprehension;
1) the post office is constitutionally mandated to deliver all letters, flyers, packages and post cards to all residence in the US or US held territories.
2) Commercial carriers push the most expensive aspect of their business (i.e. the delivery part) on to the USPS
3) The USPS is Congressionally Mandated to pay a full 75 years worth of pension and benefits in just ten years.

katz
8 years ago

Mass unemployment and poverty is a very strange definition of “solved.”

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Katz: No. The USPS isn’t getting the same amount of business as it formerly did. With the creation of things like IM services, social networks, email and practically every other form of communication, the USPS is getting less mail. The majority of the mail getting delivered is physical products bought online.

So with a drop in mail being delivered, why should we continue to keep people on when their is less work to do. Should we just start paying people to do nothing?

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

@ Rutee – When you say none of this shit happens to you with a credit union, what do you mean? I’m not thrilled with the way my bank keeps jacking up fees (and now I don’t even feel like I can say which bank that is, with our friend Hengist hanging around being all creepy). The major disadvantage of credit unions is how few locations there are, right? But you can use the ATMs of some of the major banks if you’re willing to pay a fee?

I can’t speak to overdraft fees, but I don’t pay a red cent to use my money in general. My bank isn’t actually in my state anymore, and although that has caused a couple problems, it’s generally worked out fine between direct deposit and the like. I don’t handle cash, and use debit or credit for everything, and they gave me a card that functions as both. If you need a lot of cash, this is probably not an ideal solution. There are other disadvantages as well; the amount earned in savings is smaller, because credit unions predominantly deal with low risk and low return income. There are some services that they simply do not offer, such as international wire transfers (I don’t think that’s a problem for most people). I’m sure there are others, but they haven’t come up for me.

Note that having a debit card (Which I am, again, not charged a single red cent to use) does allow some handling of cash without an ATM, from cashback. I suspect that some of this is just mine, but I really am treated much better at my credit union than I ever was at a bank. It’s really nice to not pay money to use money. (I was charged for checks. Like, the printing of the checkbook, not the usage of the checks inside. That’s about it).

amandajane5
8 years ago

Agreed about credit unions. I dropped the BofA when I was offered an in to my local credit union (a downside, there are many you can’t get into if you don’t work someplace associated with them) and it took me very little time and effort to get stuff out of BofA and over to them, and the fee payments dropped dramatically. I do have a $5/mo charge for online billpay, but that’s it. And I could not pay that and just write paper checks instead. Many credit unions also refund you the money you’re charged for out-of-network ATMs, so the cost to you ends up being nothing. The customer service was an enormous step up also, for me. I can’t speak for all credit unions, but I’d recommend mine to anyone.

Dracula
Dracula
8 years ago

Hmm. I didn’t know that much about credit unions. Now I’m intrigued. May have to look into it.

katz
8 years ago

I too heart my credit union! No monthly minimum balance, no debit card fees, etc etc. The trick is to get cash back at the grocery store instead of going to an ATM.

Pecunium
8 years ago

re credit unions: Many belong to a Co-op, and co-op ATMS are free. Some belong in such a way that co-op member branches can be used as if they were a branch of your CU for everyday banking.

Pecunium
8 years ago

Brandon: So the amount isn’t large, but making the claim that the USPS isn’t funded in anyway by the government is wrong.

Compared to: If you want to compare apples to apples, then you need to compare a government service to a private service that does roughly the same thing. USPS = UPS,

So, which is is, a government service, as you had been stating in your previous condemnations, or something for which there is a contribution, the amount of which isn’t large.

If the latter, why hold it up as a poster child of gov’t inefficiency?

Because it’s a convenient whipping boy. Never mind that it’s not been the thing people accuse it of being sice 1982… 30 years.

And, as Rutee says, it’s not supposed to run at a profit. As cynickal points out, if it ran at a straight loss (like the Army) it would 1: be mandated, and 2: worth every cent.

Did you actually have a point to make about making government services like SSI solvent or do you think that hurling insults is a valid retort?

Do have any actual figures, or is is it going to be more of the same, “It’s going broke”, without any actual explanation/demonstration of real understanding of the solvency of the SSA.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Pecunium: Your comparison is comparing two different things: a companies service record and it’s finances. Again, apples and oranges. Which is also two different arguments.

Again, the USPS and the ARMY are two different things which serve two completely different functions. It’s like comparing UPS to Blackwater…it makes no sense.

1) The Army doesn’t provide any chargeable services. They are completely supported by tax dollars.

2) The USPS makes most of it’s money via paid postage and other fees charged per person. It only takes a miniscule amount of tax dollars.

As I have stated above, I am fine with government services that charge for their services to not make a profit. But they should at least break even for multiple reasons:

1) They can budget their money efficiently and appropriately
2) They don’t have to keep going to congress to get more tax dollars
3) They don’t take tax dollars that can be used elsewhere.

The better government services manage money, the more services we can have without raising taxes.

Bagelsan
Bagelsan
8 years ago

Again, the USPS and the ARMY are two different things which serve two completely different functions. It’s like comparing UPS to Blackwater…it makes no sense.

Uh, as far as I can tell their basic functions are “serving the interests of the American people (by mailing stuff),” “serving the interests of the American people (by shooting people),” “making money (by mailing stuff),” and “making money (by shooting people)” respectively.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Bagelsan: Ya, if you want to make a sweeping broad generalization. What next? Are you going to say apples and oranges are the same thing…fruit.

From that standpoint, all we can do is talk about govt services in the abstract because one could argue every single government services “serves the interests of the American people (by doing X)”

So do you actually have something specific or do you just want to argue in the abstract?

Bagelsan
Bagelsan
8 years ago

I’m saying that the purpose of the USPS is not to make money; comparing it to things that are primarily intended to make money is silly.

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

@Cynickal: Problem solved:

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-08-11/politics/30042108_1_federal-worker-union-contracts-pension-plan

Unconstitutional.

Actual solution: http://baucus.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=702
*Which addresses the actual problems within the Postal Service, not some shitty anarchist idea of closing down government so they can pretend to be Mel Gibson In Beyond Thunderdome*

Unimaginative
Unimaginative
8 years ago

Holy crap, you even have to pay service charges at credit unions? People complain that there’s too much government in Canada, but jeez. I use a for-profit bank, and I pay NO FEES at all, unless I go into overdraft. They make their money by using my money. I get free cheques, no limit on transactions, no charge for transactions. They pay me pretty good interest on my savings. I was looking into using a credit union, but they charge fees and have transaction limits. How do United Statesers do anything anymore? It’s like you’re being bled to death by a kijillion blood-sucking insects.

I’d really like to see these “regulation of industry is ruining the economy” people trot out some citations, because the opposite is true. Actually, I’d like to see them locked into padded rooms or put into retirement colonies without access to the media, so that they could inflict less damage on the US (and thus the global) economy.

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

Libertarian fuckwads keep complaining that only Galtian Captains of industry can successfully run anything and that government agencies that produce more services for fewer dollars are more inefficient than corporate, for-profit organizations.

Of course these are the same fuckwits that thing unemployment is at 9.3% because unemployed people are lazy and living large on their government cheese.