Another judge rules against Trump

[Ohiogal]

The U.S. Postal Service’s method to set prices for competitive services was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on May 22.

The ruling comes in the wake of President Donald Trump’s assertion that USPS doesn’t charge Amazon.com enough to deliver its packages.

http://www.ttnews.com/articles/postal-services-pricing-methodology-upheld-appeals-court

[hlthe2b]

1. Trump makes us all embrace "foes" as "friends" on various issues...

On this, I'm not only firmly in support of USPS, but Amazon as well, despite their predatory practices and poor worker support in many areas...

Likewise, though I would normally be strictly opposed to AT&T-CNN/Time Warner merging, I'm having trouble rooting against it, given Trump's interference.

Uggh. He's making hypocrites of us all.

[marybourg]

2. It comes "in the wake of". But nowhere does

the article say the ruling came in a case actually involving tRump and his bluster.

[spanone]

3. what a piece of shit 'president'. trying to HURT a private business for personal reasons.

fuck you don

[malaise]

5. And

then some - he is a vile cretin.

[spanone]

6. i wake up in the morning wanting to punch the fucker every day!

[MyOwnPeace]

8. I do not..........

want to physically harm him.

I just want him taken away to a prison, placed in prison garb, and living the rest of his life locked up and away from his "friends and family" (oh, and this is what his "friends and family" look like: $$$$$$$$$$$$$).

[catbyte]

13. No kidding.

[IMG][/IMG]

[malaise]

10. Seriously

He is a detestable creep

[Cha]

4. Fuck Dictator Wannabe

[Uncle Joe]

7. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread Ohiogal

[RKP5637]

9. Trump, is such a disgusting POS. n/t

[Princess Turandot]

11. This case began in 2015, with the United Parcel Service challenging how the US Postal Service...

sets prices for its 'competitive products' i.e. stuff other than stamps. This was done before the Postal Regulatory Commission; it resulted in a minor change to the calculation that did not satisfy UPS. They continued their legal action, which the Court of Appeals has now rejected.

The beginning and end of the opinion:

TATEL,Circuit Judge: The U.S. Postal Service holds congressionally authorized monopoly power over the market for some of its products, like first-class mail delivery, but for other products, like parcel post, it competes with private companies. To promote fair competition, Congress tasked the Postal Regulatory Commission with ensuring that the Postal Service sets competitive products’ prices high enough to coverall “costs attributable to [those] product[s] through reliably identified causal relationships.” 39 U.S.C. § 3631(b); see also id.§ 3633(a)(2).

In two 2016 orders, the Commission directed the Postal Service to include among the “costs attributable” to competitive products those costs that would disappear were the Postal Service to stop offering those products for sale. United Parcel Service, Inc., which competes with the Postal Service, petitions for review of both orders, arguing that the cost attribution methodology the Commission embraced is both inconsistent with the statute that gives the Commission its regulatory authority and arbitrary and capricious. For the reasons that follow, we deny the petitions.

and:

The Accountability Act requires a competitive product to cover only those costs that can be attributed to the product “through reliably identified causal relationships.” 39 U.S.C. § 3631(b). In establishing this causal requirement, Congress expected that “the expert ratesetting agency, exercising its reasonable judgment” would “decide which methods sufficiently identify the requisite causal connection between particular services and particular costs.” NAGCP, 462 U.S. at 827. Here, the Commission did exactly that, settling on a cost-attribution methodology that implements its statutory mandate and falls well within the scope of its considerable discretion. Because “the Commission’s exercise of its authority [was] ‘reasonable and reasonably explained,’” U.S. Postal Service, 785 F.3d at 750 (quoting Manufacturers Railway Co., 676 F.3d at 1096), we deny UPS’s petitions for review.

[scarytomcat]

12. Trump is too late

Amazon is now delivering its own packages
but it may be time to end the tax break Amazon is getting
they should pay taxes

[Duppers]

14. TRUMP GAVE AMAZON A HUGE TAX BREAK,

(Now) WANTS THE COMPANY TAXED ..Newsweek, 3/29/18

President Donald Trump lashed out at online retail giant Amazon via Twitter on Thursday, saying it doesn’t pay its fair share of state and local taxes.

But what Trump didn’t mention is that the company paid zero federal income tax last year, and may even see a large federal tax refund in coming years thanks to the tax overhaul the president signed into law in December.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-who-just-gave-amazon-huge-tax-break-wants-company-taxed-866229