I don't think competition is the answer here, I think it's more similar to the healthcare debate. Do you make people hard to deliver to have to pay more, or do

I don't think competition is the answer here, I think it's more similar to the healthcare debate. Do you make people hard to deliver to have to pay more, or do you "average" out the cost and make everyone pay roughly the same amount? With a combination of taxes, flat-rate fees, and delivery-distance based costs, I think it's more than possible to make a system where it's not "free" or extremely cheap to send somewhere hard-to-get, but it's also not prohibitively expensive. And IMO the postal service is riding that line in a way that i'm happy with. I appreciate that I can send a small box across the country for $5, and I can do that whether I live in NYC or in middle-of-nowhere pennsylvania. And I'm more than happy to pay a bit more in taxes to make up for the difference that the flat-rate doesn't cover if it means that lower-income individuals won't need to pay as much to send mail at all. I know that there are problems with not having competition, but I think mail delivery is along the same lines as other "naturally monopolistic" things like power, water, sewer, etc...