Elizabeth Warren: Allow Post Office to Offer Checking Accounts, Small Loans

[rickjump1 0]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/01/Elizabeth-Warren-Allow-Post-Office-to-Offer-Checking-Accounts-Small-Loans"In November, the U.S. Postal Service reported it had a $5 billion loss for Fiscal Year 2013, its seventh consecutive year with loss. At the time, Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe blamed Congress for the loss, citing an “inflexible business model.”

I guess this means he never got the $15 Forever Stamp to get them back in the black.

Banking? ....and the US Government can't collect owed student loans, and now there's talk of forgiving them. Will they forgive Post Office banking loans too?

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[davjohns 1]

Why would they care? It's someone else's money.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[quade 3]

The US Postal Service is one of those rare ducks in our government embedded right in the Constitution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Clause It's not like NASA or the DHS. It's right there in name and function and started on day one. It will probably take an Amendment to change it fundamentally. With the way Congress has been the last 4 years, good luck with that.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

quade

The US Postal Service is one of those rare ducks in our government embedded right in the Constitution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Clause It's not like NASA or the DHS. It's right there in name and function and started on day one. It will probably take an Amendment to change it fundamentally. With the way Congress Senate has been the last 4 years, good luck with that.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kallend 1,649]

turtlespeed

***The US Postal Service is one of those rare ducks in our government embedded right in the Constitution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Clause It's not like NASA or the DHS. It's right there in name and function and started on day one. It will probably take an Amendment to change it fundamentally. With the way Congress Senate has been the last 4 years, good luck with that.

Article. V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

That's a great idea. And, since everyone needs a checking account, maybe we can pass legislation to require everyone to have a post office checking account.

AND, If someone doesn't have money to open a checking account, the government can subsidize an account.

The website to apply will be open in 6 months. It should be flawless.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[futuredivot 0]

quade

It will probably take an Amendment to change it fundamentally.

Or a pen and a phone

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[weekender 0]

another thread on Walmart got me thinking. for years they have wanted to open banks in their stores. not branches but their own. people could cash checks and have checking accounts. it would be a bare bones account for low income people. would fill a need, since poor people get ripped off by check cashing places. not to mention the huge hassle of having to pay bills in person because they dont have checking accounts.

the gov't wont have it. they dont want Walmart in banking because it might help shareholders. of course it would help poor people too. people like Warren, a school teacher, seem to feel the post office would be better then a private entity. thats not true of course. i doubt she thinks they would be better, she is just against free markets and prefers a gov't run solution.

banks are against it too and they have alot of political power. so the poor lose out.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Andy9o8 0]

>>the gov't wont have it. they dont want Walmart in banking because it might help shareholders.

That is illogical. Walmart is a big corporation, and those in the elected side of the US govt (and their patronage appointees) - both Repubs and Dems - who generally are financially beholden to corporate money for their positions - are allied with big corporations' interests - in particular, corporations' efforts to squeeze out every penny of value they can for their shareholders. That said, though, I do agree with you that:
>>banks are against it too and they have alot of political power.

Put succinctly, Walmart (and it peer competitors) does have a lot of political clout, but by comparison the banking industry has MASSIVE political clout with the US govt, and that simply trumps Walmart's clout. So, Walmart has to suck it on that deal.

[weekender 0]

Andy9o8

>>the gov't wont have it. they dont want Walmart in banking because it might help shareholders.

That is illogical. Walmart is a big corporation, and those in the elected side of the US govt (and their patronage appointees) - both Repubs and Dems - who generally are financially beholden to corporate money for their positions - are allied with big corporations' interests - in particular, corporations' efforts to squeeze out every penny of value they can for their shareholders. That said, though, I do agree with you that:
>>banks are against it too and they have alot of political power.

Put succinctly, Walmart (and it peer competitors) does have a lot of political clout, but by comparison the banking industry has MASSIVE political clout with the US govt, and that simply trumps Walmart's clout. So, Walmart has to suck it on that deal.

the shareholder comment was a wise crack. i was simply stating that Democrats, no matter how much it helped the poor, would not want to see Walmart and the Waltons prosper.

my bank comment was simply that the big banks and check cashing firms aligned with the Republican party would be against it

so the poor lose either way but for different reasons, depending on your political beliefs.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Southern_Man 0]

quade

The US Postal Service is one of those rare ducks in our government embedded right in the Constitution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Clause It's not like NASA or the DHS. It's right there in name and function and started on day one. It will probably take an Amendment to change it fundamentally. With the way Congress has been the last 4 years, good luck with that.

I think the Postal Clause allows the postal service but I don't think it requires it.

Anyway, the fundamental problem is that Congress wants them to balance their books and pay for themselves but won't allow them to change service, close branches, etc. as they need to in order to achieve that end.

I lived in a small town (outpost?) with its own post office and church and no other businesses. Had a post office 4 miles in one direction and 6 in the other. The Postal service tried to close it and the people put up such a fuss that congress (or rather the congressman from that district) wouldnt' let them close it. Didn't run mail out of that office, just had a few P.O. Boxes and paid somebody 1/2 time to open the office. Huge waste of money. The people (all politically conservative) were proud that they had fought the closing and won.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[quade 3]

Southern_Man

I think the Postal Clause allows the postal service but I don't think it requires it.

It was, in fact, a requirement of a free society at the time the document was written. Its main business at the time wasn't junk mail, but to facilitate interstate commerce; not just with basic communication, but also roads on which it would travel. It also was pretty much a requirement in order to have an informed electorate.

Much like a number of things written at the time, it may have outlived its original intent and usefulness, but good luck Amending it out of the Constitution.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[weekender 0]

i would like to expand my original response.

i loathe Sen Warren. She has little understanding of the banking industry but a tremendous amount of hate and jealousy of it. common among teachers. with that said, i think her idea has merit and should be explored. the USPS office might be an excellent place for what she is discussing. I would, however, like to see Walmart and others be able to compete. that competition would truly help the poor.

it wont happen. people like Sen Warren would rather see the poor suffer if it meant the Waltons do not get any wealthier.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[rickjump1 0]

weekender

i would like to expand my original response.

i loathe Sen Warren. She has little understanding of the banking industry but a tremendous amount of hate and jealousy of it. common among teachers. with that said, i think her idea has merit and should be explored. the USPS office might be an excellent place for what she is discussing. I would, however, like to see Walmart and others be able to compete. that competition would truly help the poor.

it wont happen. people like Sen Warren would rather see the poor suffer if it meant the Waltons do not get any wealthier.

I agree, "her idea has merit and should be explored", but only with play money.
Warren isn't naïve. She's smart enough to go into those poor neighborhoods and give more false hope on something she cannot deliver. I wonder if it even occurs to her that there are people who want to wean themselves away welfare. Being a teacher, she should be figuring out how to get school vouchers to the kids who really want to excel. If she's not already done that, she's a phony.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[funjumper101 15]

weekender

i would like to expand my original response.

i loathe Sen Warren. She has little understanding of the banking industry but a tremendous amount of hate and jealousy of it. common among teachers. with that said, i think her idea has merit and should be explored. the USPS office might be an excellent place for what she is discussing. I would, however, like to see Walmart and others be able to compete. that competition would truly help the poor.

it wont happen. people like Sen Warren would rather see the poor suffer if it meant the Waltons do not get any wealthier.

Obedient Conservatards repeat the party line about a highly qualified individual.

The same Conserrvatards profess to have the utmost respect for those who have served in the Military. Those that have been awarded the Purple Heart, are absolutely not worthy of respect, if they happen to be a Democrat running for POTUS. Then the Consevatards produce band aids in the shape of the Purple Heart, as shameful as that is, and use them to disparage a man who had served honorably, while the opposing candidate had not. 100% hypocrisy, and the 'tards are too clueless to see it.

You may not like Ms. Warren. Lack of qualifications is not a valid reason. I am sure that Faux Spews, Rimjob, etc, all repeat the mantra about "lack of qualifications" when the facts show otherwise. Conservatards have no regards for facts. They just repeat what their leaders tell them, even when it is patently ridiculous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren

[weekender 0]

very mature response. im sure Sen Warren is proud to have you defend her.

She taught law. She has no financial industry experience. she is very critical of an industry she has no actual experience in. nor does she have much academic experience in. she has done some work and teaching on bankruptcy but not much on banking. that is why i commented the way i did.

Who do you suppose my leaders are? Fox and Rush, hah. I voted for a women who is hated by them. Hillary Clinton is a Democrat who supports free markets and a strong financial industry.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Andy9o8 0]

Your cavalier summary dismissals and minimizing of her credentials throughout this thread are silly.
It's not worth the energy to type the longer version of that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_warren

[weekender 0]

Andy9o8

Your cavalier summary dismissals and minimizing of her credentials throughout this thread are silly.
It's not worth the energy to type the longer version of that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_warren

she does not have private industry experience, not even academic experience teaching banking. insult me all you want it does not change her life.

for impressive people in politics, with real world experience, check out Larry Summers, Robert Rubin, Rahm Emmanuel, Henry Paulson and Neel Kashkari. to name a few. i have not always agreed with them but respect their experience. so at least you know where im coming from. or dont and just insult me.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

...insult me...

I didn't, unless you choose to take it that way. I realize you stand by your posts, but I stand by mine. Sorry to have been abrupt, but I just didn't feel like taking the time to squabble about it.

[weekender 0]

Andy9o8

Quote

...insult me...

I didn't, unless you choose to take it that way. I realize you stand by your posts, but I stand by mine. Sorry to have been abrupt, but I just didn't feel like taking the time to squabble about it.

no biggie, just assumed you were picking on me. hah.


feel like you missed the point though. its a no brainier i would dislike Sen Warren. i assumed everyone would ignore that. my point was that in spite of my loathing of her, i liked her idea. i think it has merit and should not be dismissed. i only mentioned the negative to strengthen my positive comment.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

i only mentioned the negative to strengthen my positive comment.

I take it you've been married.

[weekender 0]

Andy9o8

Quote

i only mentioned the negative to strengthen my positive comment.

I take it you've been married.

duh to Elizabeth Warren. didnt you read your own link.

kidding

back on topic. there really is a need for the working poor to have access to basic banking services. if the gov't wont allow Walmart to do it, which i think is crap. then maybe the post office can. id prefer to see them both do it but have to agree with Sen Warren. it seems like a great fit for the USPS. they already have all these offices in poor towns. have the communities trust and i assume the personnel capable. really should be explored. people need these services to have any quality of life. i feel most Americans dismiss the burden of not having them.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante