New Mailing rates

This post has 16 Replies | 2 Followers
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 584
shanks wrote
on Jan 31, 2013 9:57 PM

     Wow, what a shock today when I mailed a 1.2OZ envelope to Canada. Old price was $3.00 and now $6.55.  It is going to be real rough selling to international customers.  I do lots of business all over the world for small packages under 3 oz. and the new postal rates will probably kill lots of business. Denmark went to $9.65 and each country will be different.  Any one that is mailing maybe good idea to look at your Web sites and make the necessary adjustments.

 

Shanks

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,863
Valbeads wrote
on Jan 31, 2013 11:43 PM

Shanks: were these rates through the USPS?  They just hiked the rent on my box again.  Know why?  Because the federal government is still under the delusion that the US Post Office still belongs to them.   The USPS hasn't been part of the federal goverment for nearly a century (I minored in history), but apparently, the Feds never got the memo, because they decided to use the Post Office like their own personal ATM.

All right, the grumpmeister is going to bed now.Sleep

Val

boutiquev.us

 

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,503
D.M.Z wrote
on Feb 1, 2013 1:24 AM

Well Val, if it makes you feel any better, think of it as USPS' comeuppance for subsidizing all the junk mail for how long?????????? eons? If you have to handle bags and bags of large envelopes and flyers and catalogs for almost no income it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it is a losing proposition. So your post box rates and our mailing rates are helping to put that trash into your mail box. I feel sorry for the employees who need to be cut, but it isn't going to stop bleeding red any time soon. Of course this is only my (not so) humble opinion, not to be confused with the reality as the USPS sees it. Donna

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 584
shanks wrote
on Feb 1, 2013 10:54 AM

Hi Val,

Yes, these rates are the new rates for USPS.  I sure hate to have to post $7.00 on my web page to send a small package to Canada.

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,863
Valbeads wrote
on Feb 1, 2013 1:07 PM

Ugh!  Disgusting!  Problem is, it's still the cheapest way to send packages.  I don't know how many countries UPS serves overseas, nor FedEx, and both of them are hideously expensive compared to the Post Office.  Sigh.......Confused

Donna:  I doubt they like handling the junk mail any better than we like receiving it.Confused  I'm very good friends with the postmistresses at my local post office, where I have my box, and they've said they hate to put it in people's mailboxes and don't get why businesses continue to do it when they annoy people online all the time.  One of them gave my mom and I a very creative solution to the constant credit card applications: save a few up and then mail them all back to the companies on their dime!  See how they like getting junk mail.Big Smile 

Sorry about my little rant last night.  I was in a lot of pain, my painkillers hadn't kicked in yet, and reading that was kinda the final straw.Embarrassed I've had it with every last one of our politicians; I don't care what side of tha aisle they're on.  I want to slap them all and treat them like the spoilt, bratty little children they are.  Ooops! I'm starting to feel like rant-girl again.  I think I'll go post another pretty piece of jewelry in the Showcase for you to enjoy!Smile

Val

boutiquev.us

 

Top 75 Contributor
Posts 515
tcwhit wrote
on Feb 1, 2013 6:41 PM

the usps has about 1/2 million current employees and almost as many retirees collecting pensions. they were forced to PRE pay all expense on all these people for the next 70 (I think that's right) years. in other words, paying for people that aren't even born yet. they've already also over paid (not their fault, but you-know-who's) a few BILLION dollars. the usps didn't cause these damages to itself, the governing powers did. the governing powers have the ability to prevent the collapse, but refuse to do so. Many major facilities have closed, over burdening the few left operating. If 100 people can only function at 100 percent already, how are those same 100 supposed to function for the other 200 that were let go??? obviously it can't be done. but like D says, the post office (like Soc Sec) became a private ATM. the $$ paid into SS was used to buy treasury bonds which are called in as needed. Guess where all that cash went....... Those bonds are soon to be not worth the paper they are written on.

 

Edit: Sorry, I tend to get ballistic in these areas. No more, I promise.

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,863
Valbeads wrote
on Feb 2, 2013 2:22 AM

TC: quick correction; I'm the one who said the USPS has become the gvt.'s own personal ATM.  And you're right, they've turned SS into a ponzi scheme that would make Bernie Madoff weep with envy.  I know how you feel; I turn into Rant-Girl about it, too, but I am trying to do something about it, difficult as it is in this Commie state I live in.  I think a lot of my outrage stems on behalf of a lot of the people on this forum who run small businesses and are just trying to take care of themselves and put a little extra money in the till, but then here comes the government! with their "you didn't build that!" mentality, "let's put as many small businesses out of business as we can!"  Small business is what made this country great, and I want every one of my beady colleagues to have a chance at success.  I think there's room for lots of us, because we all have different strengths, different styles.  You know, if we can get along pretty well here on this forum, these politicians could sure take a lesson from us!

Okay, I'll stop being Rant-Girl and shut up, now, I promise.

Val

boutiquev.us

 

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 353
ottercat wrote
on Feb 3, 2013 7:00 AM

Ladies, it's well that you bring these things up.  Try this one on for size:  military service members pay into Social Security, but when a service member 'retires' with a retainer (retirement pay, which they earn), he/she loses that amount when drawing Social Security (if SS is greater than RP (Retired Pay), then SS + 0 RP; in other words, lose the retired pay; should be SS + RP = combined amounts).  At least, the higher % disabled vets keep both, but that's a fairly new development.  I got to work for the distribution center in our area as a casual (Christmas) and loved it.  Almost got on as a casual later, but there was a freeze on hires.  Since that time, I've seen the workforce numbers drop (temps in our area, gone) and our regular carrier is more harried than ever (has to do her route as fast as possible).  Our post office used to be open 6 days a week; now closed on Saturdays.  I'd rather they went to 5 days a week delivery (which Congress won't allow), just to spare the carriers, mail handlers, and clerks who have the burden of trying to do more with less.  Thank Congress for telling the U.S.P.S. what to do/not do and then not fund them.  No wonder the mailing rates are so high.  I haven't sent anything to family for ages; may try the single rate boxes (fill to bursting and under 70 pounds).  My husband found a way to reduce the junk mail, but we still get some of it; I'll ask him how and relay if anyone is interested.  I was in the Armed Forces for 12+ years and am considered retired without retainer (no retired pay).  I wouldn't trade those years for anything.  I agree with Val, the politicians could learn a thing or two from all of us here.

Well, thanks for listening.  I'll just jump down from the Soapbox here, and get on with beading.  And if I offended anyone, my apologizes.

Ottercat Coffee

02-03-13 (0458 PST)

Be yourself.  Everyone else is already taken.  ~ Oscar Wilde

Top 75 Contributor
Posts 515
tcwhit wrote
on Feb 3, 2013 9:37 AM

Ottercat - no apology is necessary. Only a fool is offended by truth.

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 3,290
ForumModerator
SCB1 wrote
on Feb 3, 2013 9:57 AM

Ottercat,

Sorry, but I have to challenge your statement pertaining to retired military. My husband spent 23 years active duty and retired in 1985 with a retirement pay. He now also collects SS in full along with his full military retirement and he has "0" disability. 

What I believe you are confused with, is that if you have a retirement from the military and a second retirement from another government job, such as a Civil Service job you are only allowed to take the higher of the two retirements. In the old days prior 1970's you could collect both (double dipping), but it was changed sometime in the late 60's or seventies. But they never disallowed anyone to collect one government retirement plus their full Social Security. 

The only people ( that I am aware of)  that can not collect both their full retirement and SS is the auto industry, You can retire from the auto industry after 30 year, and collect your full retirement from them, however when they collect SS they give up that amount of their auto retirement. So much for their union agreeing to this concession.

Happy Beading!!

Sue,

Small-town USA. 

Michigan.

 

 

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 584
shanks wrote
on Feb 3, 2013 10:39 AM

Hi Ottercat,

I am retired military with full retirement pay and do collect SS as well. I have been retired Air Force since 1973 and started collecting SS in 1994. Never had a reduction in either pay.

Shanks

 

 

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 353
ottercat wrote
on Feb 3, 2013 8:37 PM

That's odd -- maybe I misunderstood.  My husband retired in 1994 (20 years); receiving disability pay (VA).  His retirement pay was reduced (off-set) by the amount received from the VA (I've seen his yearly statement).  He was informed that his retirement pay & disability would be off-set (reduced) by the Social Security amount he would receive when eligible (age); will not be allowed to draw both.  However, in 1998, a postal worker (retired from the military with 30 years) retired from the Post Office and it was stated that he would be one of the last to draw both military retirement pay and a Federal pension; also known as 'double dipping'; that includes SS.  For those retired with disabilities, the law was changed to allow 100% disabled veterans to draw both their retirement pay AND their disability without an off-set; the percentages have been lowered to include others.  Obviously, the rules have changed.  If you check the retirement rules for current service members, they will receive less for retirement then those who retired with my husband (50% of his military pay).  Timing is everything.  Thanks for pointing that out.

Ottercat Coffee

02-03-13 (1835 PST)

Be yourself.  Everyone else is already taken.  ~ Oscar Wilde

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 584
shanks wrote
on Feb 3, 2013 10:10 PM

I did some checking and found there are some restrictions but here is what it says

Military Service And Social Security

"You can get both Social Security benefits and military retirement. Generally, there is no reduction of Social Security benefits
because of your military retirement benefits. You’ll get your full Social Security benefit based on your earnings."

http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10017.pdf  

This will give you some solid information.

 

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 353
ottercat wrote
on Feb 3, 2013 10:46 PM

Thanks, Shanks.  Every bit helps.

Ottercat Coffee

02-03-13 (2044 PST)

 

Checked out the information -- will pass it on to my husband.  He probably knows, but can't hurt to make sure.  Thanks, again.

Ottercat Coffee

02-03-13 (2056 PST)

Be yourself.  Everyone else is already taken.  ~ Oscar Wilde

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,863
Valbeads wrote
on Feb 4, 2013 12:03 AM

Well, be aware that That Man has plans to not only hack into military bennies, but mut military pensions, as well.  Whadda guy.  BTW, they are closing the central posrt off ice in Binghamton( why? because the gvt. continues to treat the p.o. as their own personal ATM machine).  Wait, what am I saying?  The government treats the American taxpayers like its own personal ATM machine, but they don't have to pay any transaction fees, or "foreign" ATM penalties!  What's wrong with this picture?!

I have an idea- toss these idiot politicions out of office, every last one of them.  We beaders will go in and run things ourselves.  We'll certainly do much better that these creeps.  We have business experience, we know how to get good deals, and we're smart enough to budget properly, which is more than I can say for the 535 boobs in Congress and the biggest boob of them all, that sits in the oval office!  Beaders for Congress!  (ooop! Sorry- I'm at it again, aren't I?  Mea culpa.Embarrassed)

Val

boutiquev.us

 

Page 1 of 2 (17 items) 1 2  Next > | RSS