>>In the private sector, when facing a loss you must cut expenses and work to increase revenues immediately or face, bankruptcy, sale or liquidation. UPS is still profitable. Fed Ex is struggling. DHL is gone.
>>
>>In the public sector, when facing a catastrophic loss you must "face the prospect", "consider" and "mull" cost savings before submitting your suggestions to the Postal Regulatory Commission for review and report to Congress, who will then "face the prospect", "consider" and "mull" the suggestions.
>>
>>Congress is considering a bill to change the way the post office funds its retiree health benefits over the next two years that could save it $2 billion annually."
>>
>>This is the same Congress which 3 years prior mandated pre-payment of future retiree health benefits which now accounts for the massive loss.
>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32273314/ns/business-us_business/
>>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2009/08/24_billion_quarterly_loss_for.html?hpid=news-col-blog
>>
>>In the private sector those in charge during such catastrophic losses would be fired. In the public sector they're rewarded with power over auto, finance, energy and possibly health care.
>
>In the private sector they *SHOULD* be fired.
>
>Don't tell that to investment and banking firms.

I'd agree if they'd gone down like Lehman. However, most of the big names' management had previously invested(contributed) money to ensure that they'd be bailed out. When it hit the fan, the politicians (ie investments), acted just like they were paid(bribed) to do and bailed them out. The business' did not fail and in fact are now turning "profit". Hence, those in charge should not be fired, but should receive bonuses for successfully navigating the crisis. ;)