No speculation involved, its simple math. Subtract out a pro-rated portion of the annual charge you mentioned (which might not even be appropriate since the charge might not be included in those loss figures, since it takes place in Q3, and the figures are for Q4), and the Post Office is still losing money hand over fist.
As for "preserving the commons", the post office isn't commons, I can't walk in to it and start using its facilities. Its a quasi-government business, not commons.
As for other more expensive areas of government spending, that doesn't provide any justification, the more we spend elsewhere, the less we can afford to waste on subsidizing the post office.
As for universal service, government sponsorship is not a requirement in order to get universal service. Fed-Ex, UPS, DHL etc. serve addresses all over the country for the businesses they are allowed to perform. |
