4 ms·
This isn't "the US" subsidizing rural communities, though. This is private enterprises effectively doing the same, for the sake of providing a flat rate shippin
by asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
This isn't "the US" subsidizing rural communities, though. This is private enterprises effectively doing the same, for the sake of providing a flat rate shipping service. Although I too think that rural living is bad for the environment, this is not a particular case of the government subsidizing it.
- leetcrew 6y agoif UPS/FedEx want to offer flat rate shipping to both densely and sparsely populated areas, it's on them to make it economic. if amazon wants to take advantage of their business model, I don't see anything unfair about it. USPS is a government agency though. if they ship stuff to rural areas below cost, that is the US government subsidizing rural communities. with mail still being the lowest-common-denominator means of communication, there is a public good argument for burning money to deliver mail/packages affordably to people in these areas. I do agree they should feel at least some of the cost though, and I also feel there is something distasteful about amazon exploiting this cost structure.
- formercoder 6y agoI wonder what the cost difference would be if we reduced mail to 1x per week and got everyone broadband.