I looked at the order, and no dissent or recusal is noted. Lack of any noted recusal means all nine justices participated, but lack of a noted dissent does not necessarily mean the decision to deny was unanimous.

But the court is in recess. I wonder if this was in fact a sole act on Scalias’s part. They have convoluted and arcane rules. I am not aware of any decisions other than this they make when not in session.

“Re Fedex, you can bet they were gouging the USPS with decade of overcharges if they’re so terrified of competing for and losing the contract now. Wonder how that contract got negotiated and overseen. Wouldn’t be any corporate lobbying in that award, now would there be? Probably USPS could just insource overnight at a way cheaper price, but then of course the “free marketeers” would be squealing about competition from the USPS.”

Uhhh, Fedex pays USPS to deliver their packages. Not the other way around. Without the USPS they would not be able to deliver to a great many places they do now.

probably confused matters by saying “a terrible service at a terrible

price” when I really meant “a terrible service or a terrible price.” (Terrible service for the USPS; terrible service and/or price for other state monopolies.) I don’t know what the market price would be for ordinary mail, because the monopoly prevents anyone else from trying. The prices for package and express delivery are reasonably comparable, but the USPS tends to be slower, has much worse service at the teller’s window, has way below-market tracking capability, and (unlike private carriers) refuses to deliver door to door. I don’t enjoy driving 10 miles to get my USPS packages when FedEx and UPS will bring them to my porch at little or no extra charge.

What? No door to door? Where do you live? Nome, Alaska? We know the USPS can deliver any letter anywhere for 45 cents because they break even at that price. That is one HUGE reason we enjoy such low prices – no profit motive. Without the USPS *you* are screwed just like the rest of us.

COngress has to approve of all rate increases.”

So what was stopping Congress when the Dems controlled it? Are both parties out to get the poor Post Office?

ENacting the prepay rule was a law – an act of Congress, rescinding it would also have to be a law. And we have seen 100% obstruction by COngress. No surprise there that nothing has gotten better.

ese arguments over a public service that provides terrible service at a horrible price (like the public schools) always degenerate at some point into the observation that, if nothing else, they’re providing well-paying jobs to deserving people, so lay off, mean conservatives! But I admit that it’s a new one on me to argue that the bad service is a good thing, because it unites citizens in the democratic activity of standing around in line.

You cannot be serious? Terrible service at a terrible price? USPS is far cheaper than UPS or FedEX and they deliver faster as well. Just compare UPS ground to USPS Priority mail. USPS wins hands down and USPS delivers on Saturdays for free. Plus you can mail a letter anywhere in the country for 45 cents. How much would FedEX chanreg for that? 5 bucks maybe? If you want a stark comparison look at International Priority Mail compared to FedEX of DHL. It is 1/3 the price. MILLIONS of small businesses depend on USPS for cost effective shipping. Without it they would go under. Think man, think.

“As for the FedEx habit of relying on the USPS, what’s to stop the Postal Service from raising the rates it charges FedEx until it’s solvent again? Or raising the price of stamps, for that matter. They’ve got a monopoly on ordinary mail, for Heaven’s sake, and they can’t set the price high enough to cover their expenses? This is not a compelling argument for the public-service model.”

What is stopping them is Congress. COngress has to approve of all rate increases. COngress pretty much has to approve of everything the Postmaster General proposes.

Ann Romney also deducts the costs of her horses as “equine therapy” for her MS. Try doing that with some experimental cancer treatments. And they get tax credits, not deductions. So the 77K comes right off their tax bill, not AGI. Most people do not know exactly how much of the tax code is a gift to the super rich. That is why Romney refuses to show his returns. He could never defend himself against the outrage when most of this country just lost 60% of their wealth.

The California high risk pool is called MRMIP. You have to wait at least six months, typically 18 as only so many slots open per year. So a person has to die to open a slot for somebody else. The cost is prohibitive at around 900-1500.00 per month and you can only be on it for 36 months. It doesn’t help a lot of people.

They voted him in. Wasn’t he a target also for recall but won?

Trust me on this, but my childhood would have been much less traumatic and I would have not been so abused and neglected had my father been taken away in hand cuffs and left my mother to raise us in his abscence. What’s Grothman going to do next – ban divorces? They’re going tyo need to hire half the state as social workers to keep an eye on the other half of the state.

She’s pretty – dumb, but pretty. She wouldn’t vote for an atheist because they see 95% of the world as crazy unlike themselves but she would consider voting for say Pat Robertson who sees 95% of the world as pure evil because they are not just like him? Whatever.

No. Union Station was built before Chinatown existed. It underwent several rennovations over the years. Chinatown is still were it’s always been, Spring Street. And the author is correct, you cannot beat the prices. I used to shop there and the prices were unreal. If you speak the language you can negotiate even better deals. I agree that WalMart will probably not be competitive.

Kennedy isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. We are stuck with Thomas and Scalia for 20 more years easily. And Alito and Roberts for 30.

So how is that different than society paying for your kid’s education because you can not afford the 12,000.00 each per year to send them to private schools? Did we give you permission to bear those children? No, you did it voluntarily fully expecting society to help pay for their upbringing. How moral is that using your definition of the word? DO we have the right to regulate how many kids you can have relative to your ability to feed, cloth and educate them out of moral duty to the rest of society?