Comments for dysphemism

Comment on new wheels – update by Teague

Teague — Sat, 10 Jul 2010 18:57:02 +0000

Nice. Expensive, but quite satisfying. I accidentally demolished my front fender the other day...I've got my eye on these. Not a performance-oriented accessory, to be sure, but I think they would sure look classy on my Cross-Check.

Comment on new wheels – update by SS

SS — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:42:06 +0000

. . . and the rider. . . . .

Comment on ipad, first impressions by SS

SS — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:26:18 +0000

I just saw an Ipod touch yesterday, also extremely nice, with quite remarkable functions and visual clarity. Hard to type a paper on it, though.

Comment on USPS, take 2 by lj

lj — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:22:23 +0000

Yesterday I heard a story on the radio that mentioned the fact that "bulk mailers" make up 70% of US mail volume. I think that fits perfectly with my experience.

Comment on USPS, take 2 by Teague

Teague — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 06:54:34 +0000

Good points, though I think it’s important to consider how difficult it is to change a large institution like the Postal Service — e.g. to implement on-demand mail delivery, you have to change the job descriptions of most of its 600,000+ employees, lay off a substantial number of employees (once you figure out how many will be needed), revamp the sorting machines at every processing center, change how trucks carrying mail are scheduled and routed, etc., etc. You have to change almost every single aspect of how the organization functions, in an environment where each change requires the involvement of thousands of different people. This is a good reason to start thinking about and working on fundamental changes now, of course, but I guess I’m just saying that the fact that they haven’t made these sorts of moves yet is understandable, and it’s going to be really hard.

And since Congress has authority over any major policy decision (while the Postal Service is responsible for balancing its budget), it’s going to be even harder. I know I’ve seen a number of different statements from members of Congress taking credit for getting local post offices removed from the list of those to be closed. There are also union contracts constraining how quickly the Postal Service can change basic elements of how it operates…

Comment on USPS, take 2 by David Seelig

David Seelig — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:03:43 +0000

Agreed. Perhaps it was opt-in scanning and/or delivery? I’m surprised they didn’t mention anything about the breakdown of first class/bulk mail…

Comment on USPS, take 2 by lj

lj — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:57:21 +0000

The NYT is with you. A digital mail scanning service would raise some privacy concerns, in my opinion.

Comment on USPS, take 2 by el

el — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:18:44 +0000

Totally agreed that the USPS needs to be more imaginative with their future business models. Indeed, starting a scanning system like the one you mentioned in Switzerland would make consumers very happy and eliminate a lot of problems. (I know there are expats using a similar service while they’re abroad.) Agile routing and higher charges for people who realized they truly want to send hard copies seems like a vision. Really hope that pursue it. And I really hope they stop screwing up my mail forwarding – not very inspiring, USPS.

Comment on USPS by SS

SS — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:31:52 +0000

Unfortunately, really unfortunately, my impression is that junk mail is what is keeping the postal service afloat, so to speak. It costs the P.O. much less to deliver than real mail. I would love to ban it entirely, but then we’d probably have to pay a lot more for letters and packages. But wouldn’t it be great to get only mail from people or companies we really want or need to hear from!

Comment on USPS by Teague

Teague — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 04:50:24 +0000

That statistic about Americans receiving 55% of the world’s total mail volume is amazing.