And yet they used to turn a profit. Until Republicans passed a law requiring them to prefund retirements for 75 years out with the USPS Fairness Act.
Fairness Act, which imposes this burden on the USPS while no other federal agency (or private business) is required to prefund retirement benefits...quite fair.
"People" aren't. It's regressives that are trying to disenfranchise mail in voters. Then they put a regressive in charge of the USPS who is trying to run it into the ground so they can be like "oh gosh look how bad it is!"
Republicans want to privatize every public work. USPS isn't supposed to turn a profit. It's supposed to be a public good that is sold at cost so we all benefit. It used to be subsidized.
Republicans want to turn it into a new industry a la UPS, FedEx, etc, so it'd cost way more to send a letter. The love of money is the root of all evil. It's also the root of the Republican party.
This might seem like a minor quibble, but that money doesn't really come from taxpayers, and understanding what seems like a very technical financial thing is really important if you want to understand geopolitics in general. Here's an except from the beginning of David Graeber's Debt: the First 5,000 years, easily one of the single most interesting and enlightening books I've ever read:
Starting in the 1980s, the United States, which insisted on strict terms for the re-
payment of Third World debt, itself accrued debts that easily dwarfed
those of the entire Third World combined — mainly fueled by military
spending. The U.S. foreign debt, though, takes the form of treasury
bonds held by institutional investors in countries (Germany, Japan,
South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, the Gulf States) that are in most cases,
effectively, U.S. military protectorates, most covered in U.S. bases full
of arms and equipment paid for with that very deficit spending. This
has changed a little now that China has gotten in on the game (China
is a special case, for reasons that will be explained later), but not very
much — even China finds that the fact it holds so many U.S. treasury
bonds makes it to some degree beholden to U.S. interests, rather than
the other way around.
So what is the status of all this money continually being funneled
into the U.S. treasury? Are these loans? Or is it tribute? In the past,
military powers that maintained hundreds of military bases outside
their own home territory were ordinarily referred to as "empires," and
empires regularly demanded tribute from subject peoples. The U.S.
government, of course, insists that it is not an empire — but one could
easily make a case that the only reason it insists on treating these pay-
ments as "loans" and not as "tribute" is precisely to deny the reality
of what's going on.
So it's not coming from US tax payers, this is saying? It comes from Japanese taxpayers, German taxpayers, South Korean tax payers, etc. on top of US tax payers.
That really does not change the situation. It still is a massive amount of money out of US pockets, and the rest is out of US allies' citizen pockets. It also doesn't change the failing to pass audits. It also doesn't change their massive collection of known BS actions done in the past.
What it does change is that the availability of the money and the military machine are linked. It's not just that American taxpayers are footing the bill; it's that our military machine is funded by tribute, which we pretend is "debt" that we're totally going to pay back one day. It's one system.
To be clear, it's bad. I hate it. I just think it's important to understand how the thing we oppose works.
The fungibility isn't what's at issue. The link between the money stream and the military is a system that can't be understood separately. Thinking of it as taxpayer funded doesn't make sense.
arguably the entire worth of the dollar as a currency comes from it being what taxpayers pay in, so yeah it kind of does come from taxpayers
I encourage you to read the book. It really changed my perspective on what value even is and what it means. I don't think you'll think this after reading it.
It's the authorization a company has to have before their systems can access/store federal government data.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has the 800-53 which is a ~500 page document that's just a list of controls that must be followed, and companies have to get audited once a year to make sure they complied with the controls the previous year.
The fun part is that most of the controls are worded super vaguely, and you're at the mercy of the auditor's interpretation of them.
"Drop" is the wrong word. It's going to be more like "hoard for 50 years until they discover energy 3 and mega-warp, then sell the concept rights for energy 2 and warp to a corp"
Well, the military has a lot of projects and operations the public doesn't, and shouldn't, know about. If you see about a sting in Syria on CNN, so do the hostile insurgents, or whomever are the enemies du jour. But how can you expense the operation on a public budget sheet, if the operation can't, for security reasons, be public? The answer is simple: you spend $10,000 on $10 toilet seats, and the $9,990 now accounted for dollars are paying for equipment, ammunition, transportation, training, payroll, and benefits for something that officially never happened.
800 billion dollars divided by 165 million taxpayers is $4,848. That's if it were split evenly over all income brackets, which it is not, but unless your in the bottom tax bracket it's probably more than 6$
There isn't a US federal sales tax. Most states have a sales tax but that goes to the state government not the federal government. New Hampshire and Oregon have zero state sales tax too (with some exceptions like eating out).
Generally speaking in America the Feds regulate foreign affairs and interstate matters. Intrastate (within one state) things are left up to that particular state.