3 ms·

Yeah I don't get it. They're complaining about a 2.2bn dollar loss this year, when last year the loss was even greater - and that's with the apparently reductio

Yeah I don't get it. They're complaining about a 2.2bn dollar loss this year, when last year the loss was even greater - and that's with the apparently reduction in mailings this quarter. At the same time the Gov will spend billions on a fighter jet that will likely never see combat, billions on other countless military waste, who knows how much in carting the president around to golf... I don't think this is entirely about election fraud, it just happens to be an easy target for the people that have already been trying to gut the USPS. I see it in the same vein as them trying to gut NASA. They both have such small budgets in the grand scheme that it just makes absolutely no sense.

manquer 6y ago
It is never about the actual money spent . It is about how much visibility that spend is having in the public/political mind space . This is why doesn’t make sense to compare nasa and military budgets . Decision makers do not see all money as equal. Even if there was no hidden agenda,cutting some spends are far easier than others even if it made logical sense , the lobbying power of the military budgets has is lot more than that of say NASA or USPS. It is not just government it is true for corporates and non profits as well , Mozilla cuts servo over say pocket for similar reasons ,
- emodendroket 6y ago
  "Easier" in what sense though, it's not as though the post office is unpopular (arguably a goal of these changes is to change that to build support for privatization but anyways)