<p>
</p>
<p>I love the to actually “feel” a letter and to know the person took time to actually “write” something to me. I love buying CD’s and getting the liner notes. I am not a fan of digitized stuff.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I can say it makes no sense why people want to see the media in an e-mail or a fax as opposed to other ways.</p>
<p>
Do you mean you have no landline phone service or cell phone service? You can receive email with either of these. There are people who still use a regular analog dialup modem on their landline to receive emails. It works okay for emails. You don’t ‘need’ broadband for it.</p>
<p>
Not at my house - it goes straight to the recycle bin. I never open the big pile of advertising papers - I just immediately get rid of it. I suspect I’m not alone. </p>
<p>If I want a coupon for something I just go to the company’s website and print it. (I know - I’m adding to your frustration with me, but in a friendly way) ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Care to play the 12 and 26 lbs package between two cities in the US? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, USPS could be profitable, if they were allowed to close locations that serve little to no piurposes, if they would be allowed to reduce their workforce, if they could get past the muscle of the couple of well-funded unions, if they could reduce the biggest sources of losses, and … the list goes on. </p>
<p>But does this not go to the heart of the problem, and to the heart of most problems of agencies/corporations that are under the protective umbrella of our government? Do we really believe that the US would be better off without a postal service? Of course not, but we would be MUCH better off with a company that can balance its books. </p>
<p>Despite the overly simplistic (mis)representation of the success of privatizing the postal service in Germany (which started WELL BEFORE this century) the transformation is possible. Do we really think that unions and the preservation of labor are less important in Germany than in the US? Do we really believe that the US trails Germany in the digital age … progress?</p>
<p>
You can do this without the USPS - the person can ‘write’ the letter by hand, scan it, send it as an email attachment, then you can receive it, print it out, and then read it. If you really wanted the full experience you could fold it and stuff it into an envelope and seal it first before opening and reading it. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Those figures stated were incorrect. I don’t know anybody that mail a box that is 2 feet long, tall, and wide.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nice try, but that would be a copy of the letter. I like the real thing. Sounds like a lot of work for 45 cents.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t have e-mail on my cell phone. Heck, I don’t even have texting and deleted that feature. lol</p>
<p>
Printing it on frilly stationery, adding sealing wax and dousing it with perfume would be a nice touch :)</p>
<p>
Could it be that Gladgraddad was speaking to another poster and/or about the “average” person?
Oh, never mind.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not recommended…especially with thank you letters to older relatives…even if they are ok with it if other older relations hear of it and hold to older notions of etiquette on such matters. </p>
<p>I received an extremely heated lecture about how my inclination to type* my mailed thank you letter rather than handwrite it illustrated how little gratitude I showed an older relative for a gift precisely because I didn’t take the time and effort needed to do the latter. </p>
<p>I can just imagine how emailing the thank you would make the sender an even greater “ingrate” in their eyes. </p>
<ul>
<li>This was well before email and the internet were commonplace with the mainstream public.</li>
</ul>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry, I’m not like the “average” person. I don’t need to spend $100 on a cell phone.</p>
<p><strong><em>whooosh</em></strong>** the sound of the subtle message flying right over your head.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wouldn’t recommend it in any situation. Typed thank you letters are so tacky and not personal.</p>
<p>
So really you’re just ‘choosing’ to not have an electronic means of receiving the conveyance. I understand preference (and additional cost) but you were implying that it was impossible to receive electronic conveyances in these areas and for probably over 99% of where people live in this country, including your area since you have a cell phone, it’s certainly possible to be ‘connected’ enough to receive it electronically and it’ll be a heck of a lot faster than the USPS, UPS, FedEx, and the like.</p>
<p>
Haha - that part’s hard to do in a scan/send/print.</p>
<p>You know - no matter what’s done in the way of forward progress and the fact that the vast majority of people have moved to it and like it better due to its efficiency in speed and lower cost, there will always be some still pining for the older methods, to hear the clip-clop of the Pony Express rider coming their way, or the whistle of the train announcing yet another delivery of mailbags to town, but eventually things need to change and the vast majority not penalized to subsidize those who refuse to change simply because they ‘don’t like it’.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are mixing me up with another poster. I never said those things.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why do things need to change? Not all change is good.</p>
<p>You’re not being penalized. So what’s your problem?</p>
<p>Gladgraddad, I obviously have email (though not on my phone) but where I grew up and in lots of flyover country we just don’t have cheap access to technology that many of us take for granted. I remember trying to explain to friends from New York on California how the rest of us lived. :)</p>
<p>From having a relative that spent 37 years in the postal service (though now retired), I think many people have no real clue how much the average worker gets frustrated with the way the company is run. What makes it worse is this quasi-government fiasco. It has all the government bureaucracy weighing it down coupled with the expectations of a private company. Unlike a private company the USPS answers to the whims of Congress. Those all powerful unions are on board with sweeping changes, so no real reason to vilify them needlessly. What they are objecting to are sweeping personnel cuts without the freedom to make changes to service. Working more with less people is not the solution, but working smarter is. </p>
<p>And Xiggi, I do think Germany is ahead of the US in this digital age because the proof is in the digital mail, the mobile telephone service that costs so much less than ours, the faster broadband access.</p>
<p>
I probably did mix it up.</p>
<p>
Not all change is good but lots of change is, including keeping up with technology and societal changes. I don’t think it’s true that I’m not being penalized because in the end the taxpayers will need to bail out the USPS due to their inability to change but even without that many of us are being ‘penalized’ in the subsidized postage some of us pay - re my example that it costs the same to send a letter to your next door neighbor as sending it across the country to some rural location.</p>
<p>And all the blame can’t be heaped on the USPS - even when they try to enact changes there are some congress people who’ll nix any change they have in mind and they need congressional approval for many of the changes. It always comes down to NIMBY as usual.</p>
<p>
I lived in Kansas for a while - does that count?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But having too much technology can be bad. Sending a thank you letter or a graduation invitation through an e-mail or fax is far less personal. It’s nice to sometimes send a letter “the old fashioned way”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If that time comes, then you can complain.</p>
<p>Well this thread sure has morphed. </p>
<p>I still am a fan of the fixed rate priority mailing boxes from the postal service.</p>
<p>
That’s for sure. We use the flat rate boxes as well - never had a problem.</p>