HP3000-L Archives

April 1999, Week 3

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Art Bahrs <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Art Bahrs <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 20 Apr 1999 12:50:18 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (75 lines)
Hi Roy and Others :)
    um... it hasn't eluded them.. The US Postal Service has considered setting
up email where the user pays a "Stamp Fee" to send email.... didn't fly or
work...

   The USPS would love to get the money  for all our email... but the system
currently won't let them.... tho... I bet Clinton would love to charge a nickel
for every email!

   Hey... it would probably pay for "his" little war in Kosovo.... hmmm... but
that is another tirade hehehe

Art "Debugging :) with a little help from my friends :) " Bahrs

----------
>From: Roy Buzdor <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Goverment to tax e-mail ??
>Date: Tue, 20 Apr, 1999, 14:09
>

> Eric Bender wrote:
>>
>> At 12:58 PM 4/20/1999 -0300, Gary Nolan wrote:
>> >I do no how true this is but this is what i
>> > received today. (message below)
>>
>> In a front page story, the Montreal Gazette reports this
>> morning that this email tax - which falls within the
>> realm of the believable for anyone familiar with the
>> restrictive practices of Canada Post - is in fact an
>> almost-instant urban legend.
>>
>> There is no Bill 602P under consideration by Parliament.
>> There is no backbencher named Tony Schnell.
>> There is no lawyer named Richard Stepp.
>>
>> What makes this a certain fabrication is that no lawyer
>> would ever work without pay.
>
> 8<snip>8
>
> However, what would make it believable (in the US) is
> that the US Postal Service HAS gone after alternate
> carriers.  6-8 years ago, the Post Office decided that
> they were losing too much business to Fedex (iirc), and
> that people were sending things overnight which did not
> really need to go over night, and that people were
> spending $8 - $10 with Fedex instead of $0.28 - $2.50
> with the Post Office just because they wanted their
> letters to actually be delivered, not because they had
> to be there the next day.  As silly as it sounds,
> the Post Office not only filed the charges, but
> actually won (out of court, iirc) something on the
> order of $500,000 from 3 large businesses, and put a
> small dent in Fedex's business.
>
> So, would the US post go after ISPs you bet your
> sweet bippy.  I just hope that the idea eludes them
> for a while yet.
>
> --
>
> Buz          (8
>
> +--------------------------------------------------------------+
> |  Knowledge is proud that it has learn'd so much;             |
> |  Wisdom is humble that it knows no more.                     |
> |    -- William Cooper: _The Task VI_                          |
> +---------------------------------------+----------------------+
> | This is official written notice:      | My real address is:  |
> |   Please remove me from your mailing  |   lnuslad dot dzvg41 |
> |   list.                               |    at eds dot com    |
> +---------------------------------------+----------------------+

ATOM RSS1 RSS2