[Guvante]

Universal service obligations have been some of the least effective tools used...

After all what constitutes not servicing?

How would a state run service be better?

[eru]

> How would a state run service be better?

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity

[Guvante]

Each post office has individual leadership which serves the purpose of that principle.

[eru]

That workaround justifies nearly anything.

[Guvante]

Unless you have an elected position or the position needs to be filled ignoring the wishes of the local group that would select a replacement that is kind of true.

Local elections have real value.

But splintering a government entity just because you can isn't automatically better.

For instance who pays for the last mile? Who pays for the first mile? With a federal program it doesn't matter the answer is the same. With a state program sending mail to a low density state could impact the pricing structure of a high density state.

You could end up with fragmentation where cross state is more expensive or worse these friction points are enough where the monopoly breaks down because a few states don't need a monopoly and just let local businesses compete.

[eru]

> With a state program sending mail to a low density state could impact the pricing structure of a high density state.

Yep, aligns incentives nicely!

> You could end up with fragmentation where cross state is more expensive or worse these friction points are enough where the monopoly breaks down because a few states don't need a monopoly and just let local businesses compete.

Sounds like a good outcome, no? Yes, down with monopolies, especially government enforced ones.

[Guvante]

You presume that saving money on stamps (which are less than $1 and locked to inflation) is more important than universal service.

Why?