Searching \ for 'Email charges by the USPS?' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=email+charges+usps
Search entire site for: 'Email charges by the USPS?'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'Email charges by the USPS?'
1999\09\23@152710 by William K. Borsum

flavicon
face
Hi All
Got an email today alleging that the US Government is working on
legislation to impose fees on all email to make up for lost postal
revenue--some $.05 per piece of mail. (Bill 602P)  Normal piclist traffic
would end up costing me $200 a month if this is true--and probably kill the
piclist and all others in the process.

"One congressman, Tony Schnell (r) has even suggested a "twenty to forty
dollar per month surcharge on all internet service" above and beyond the
government's proposed email charges."

Anyone know anything about this?

I recall seeing something like this every year or so--most are very large
storms in a very small teapot--but it would be nice to know if anyone has
any direct knowledge of truth of fiction on this subject.

Kelly
ps: if true <http://www.house.gov/writerep> will get a letter to all US
congress people--or so I am told.



William K. Borsum, P.E. -- OEM Dataloggers and Instrumentation Systems
<spam_OUTborsumTakeThisOuTspamdascor.com> & <http://www.dascor.com>San Diego, California, USA

1999\09\23@154215 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>Anyone know anything about this?
>

Yes, it's a known false-ness.

The gov't even uses this as an example of phony things - I believe it's on
the FCC website.  They must get bugged to death on these stupid things.

Andy

==================================================================
Eternity is only a heartbeat away - are you ready?  Ask me how!
------------------------------------------------------------------
.....andyKILLspamspam@spam@rc-hydros.com      http://www.rc-hydros.com     - Race Boats
andyspamKILLspammontanadesign.com  http://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics
==================================================================

1999\09\23@160706 by Les

flavicon
face
Not being a U.S. citizen, I may be wrong, but..

I've heard the same thing (aprox every couple years) in Canada..
Something like it started about 2 decades ago when the telco's were
"supposedly" considering charging BBS's an extra fee for using their line
for a BBS.  As always a thread of outrage started on every BBS.

These rumours range from taxing email, to taxing the time you use on the
internet..

I for one, think that taxing email would be logistically impossible.  Its
pretty simple for someone to just create an alternate protocol, path or
tunnel around the law.  The costs of implementing a structure to account for
specific types of data would most likely exceed any revenue gained for the
first decade, and put many ISP's out of business that didnt have the
technical expertise to institute the changes.

Im sure if there is any truth to it, it was most likely some computer newbie
congressman who just bought his plug-and-play desktop PC, installed generic
ISP software, or AOL and figured out that this email thing is "kinda cool"
and a 5cent tax would be a revenue waterfall, while placing his fresh cup of
coffee on the convenient built in coffee-cup holder.  (is that a run on
sentence?:)

A few years ago, we sent a techie from the ISP I worked with, to debate this
MLA (Member of Legislative Assembly) on the radio.  The MLA was suggesting
filtering all pornography on the internet.  Again, something that only
someone who knows nothing about the infrastructure and subsequent backlash
would think of.

Imagine eliminating porn on the internet?  There goes what is most likely
the bulk of ecommerce.

Long live Fido-Net. (is it still around?)

Leslie Bester
Chief Technical Officer
Gallmark Corporation
500-280 Smith St.
Winnipeg, MB.   R3C 1K2

Contact Specifications:
204-944-1119 (voice office)
204-949-0768 (fax office)
204-933-5164 (pager)
204-229-1082 (cellular)
.....lesKILLspamspam.....gallmark.mb.ca (email)
EraseMEpagerspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTgallmark.mb.ca (email pager)

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----  Version: 3.1
dpu(--) s: a- C+++(++++) UL++(++++) P++(+++>)
L+++(++++>) E- w++ O M- V PS+ PE Y-- PGP- t@ 5@
X+(++) R(-) tv- b+(++) DI+++ D+ G e h(*) r y+ z
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

{Original Message removed}

1999\09\23@161911 by Harrison Cooper

flavicon
face
Think about this for a minute......how many FREE email servers are there?
Why are they free? because of the ads on there.....revenue.  OK...so how
would they ever charge for each message and such?  By charging for per
login? nope....they would lose subscribers.  Charge for ISP access?
Nope....libraries have it as well.

So..plain and simple....even if they wanted to....it would never work.

1999\09\23@172206 by paulb

flavicon
face
William K. Borsum wrote:

> Anyone know anything about this?

 It's out by five months and twenty-three days.

 Not to say governments aren't scared of the Internet, because it
finally is something over which they have no control and no hope of
control.  Technology is in the hands of the common man, and they are
still mouthing legislation which fantasizes (hallucinates) control of
radio reception (of cellular phone bands for example).
--
 Cheers,
       Paul B.

1999\09\23@184322 by hgraf

picon face
Urban legend, I believe you can find this one at http://www.urbanlegends.com. TTYL

{Quote hidden}

1999\09\23@194113 by Harold M Hallikainen

picon face
On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 12:23:23 -0700 "William K. Borsum"
<RemoveMEborsumTakeThisOuTspamDASCOR.COM> writes:
>Hi All
>Got an email today alleging that the US Government is working on
>legislation to impose fees on all email to make up for lost postal
>revenue--some $.05 per piece of mail. (Bill 602P)  Normal piclist
>traffic
>would end up costing me $200 a month if this is true--and probably
>kill the
>piclist and all others in the process.
>
>"One congressman, Tony Schnell (r) has even suggested a "twenty to
>forty
>dollar per month surcharge on all internet service" above and beyond
>the
>government's proposed email charges."
>
>Anyone know anything about this?
>

       Here's what I wrote about the subject back in June...

Harold


Harold Hallikainen
spamBeGoneharoldspamBeGonespamhallikainen.com
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.
See the FCC Rules at http://hallikainen.com/FccRules and comments filed
in LPFM proceeding at http://hallikainen.com/lpfm


No truth to the info.  A good clue is the "bill number."  That is not
how bills are numbered in the house or the senate (they are H.R. 9999 or
S. 9999).  There is no member of Congress named Schnell (see
http://clerkweb.house.gov/106/mbrcmtee/members/mbrsalph/oalmfram.htm).
       The Washingtonian (quoted in the email) states the following on
their web site (at http://www.washingtonian.com/about/emailhoax.html )

The message that is apparently out over the Internet
           about an "editorial" by The Washingtonian
           supporting an e-mail tax is a hoax.

           We never wrote such an article or editorial. We do
           not have a "March 6" issue. The congressman
           quoted does not exist; the bill number does not
           exist; the law firm which supposedly wrote this
           e-mail does not exist; the address given for the law
           firm does not exist; and an almost identical e-mail
           was started a month beforehand claiming that the
           Canadian government was going to impose an e-mail
           tax.

           We at The Washingtonian do not know who put
           this hoax out, but it is not true.

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: dl.http://www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

1999\09\24@081157 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
The US postal service has not lost any revenue from the common usage of
email.  In fact, they have seen increased usage of the postal service.

If people stop using the USPS, you'll see that as a raise in the cost of
sending a letter, which will in turn force more people to the internet,
which will raise the cost of the letter, etc.

However, the internet is still considered by many to be an unreliable
method of sending mail.  You will not see many legal documents sent via
email for awhile (excepting those for ecommerce), many people still
don't have internet access - and simply don't want it, etc, etc.

-Adam

"William K. Borsum" wrote:
{Quote hidden}

1999\09\24@101132 by Matt Bonner

flavicon
face
"William K. Borsum" wrote:
>
> Got an email today alleging that the US Government is working on
> legislation to impose fees on all email to make up for lost postal
> revenue--some $.05 per piece of mail. (Bill 602P)  Normal piclist traffic
> would end up costing me $200 a month if this is true--and probably kill the
> piclist and all others in the process.

Internet Hoaxes:
 http://ciac.llnl.gov/ciac/CIACHoaxes.html

Bill 602P is the last one in the list.

--Matt

1999\09\24@102417 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>The US postal service has not lost any revenue from the common usage of
>email.  In fact, they have seen increased usage of the postal service.

Due to e-bay, most likely.  Every time I ship a box (and these boat boxes
are huge - today's measured the Priority Mail limit), if I get a new window
guy he always comments "E-bay, huh?" to which I reply, "No, this is a
regular business and I've opted to do most of my product delivery by USPS
for its convenience [I drive by 3 PO's on the way to work each day] and
reliability and low price.  You also accept larger boxes than UPS, have
lower COD rates, and Customs is not a problem like it is the UPS [less
intervention and handling]."  Of course, he's shocked and says something
stupid like "where's my sign" (Can anybody tell me which comedian came up
with that line?)

>However, the internet is still considered by many to be an unreliable
>method of sending mail.  You will not see many legal documents sent via
>email for awhile (excepting those for ecommerce), many people still
>don't have internet access - and simply don't want it, etc, etc.

Congress recently e-mailed a bill to Billary for signature.

Andy

==================================================================
Eternity is only a heartbeat away - are you ready?  Ask me how!
------------------------------------------------------------------
RemoveMEandyspamTakeThisOuTrc-hydros.com      http://www.rc-hydros.com     - Race Boats
andyEraseMEspam.....montanadesign.com  http://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics
==================================================================

1999\09\24@152756 by Anne Ogborn

flavicon
face
hoax

been around a while


'Email charges by the USPS?'
1999\10\10@193234 by Andrew Russell Morris
flavicon
face
This is nonsense. The Postal Service has posted a letter on their website
to that effect. I've read it.

Andy Morris



{Quote hidden}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1999 , 2000 only
- Today
- New search...