>Yes, currently the service is expected to fund itself. This is short sighted I could not disagree more. While I agree they don't "need" to be profitable and

>Yes, currently the service is expected to fund itself. This is short sighted I could not disagree more. While I agree they don't "need" to be profitable and we "could" just give them tax money the fact that they try to be in the face of competition and come pretty close to doing so despite some dumb requirements really results in an incentive structure that puts them head and shoulders above pretty much any other subsection of government one interacts with. So perhaps let's not remove the incentive for profitability. Edit: And before anyone tries to construe this as me advocating for privatization or anything else like that, I'm saying they're fine the way they are (on a macro level, I'm sure there's tons of individual items that could use refinement, like any organization) and ought to be a model for other government functions. >and has progressively made one of the greatest public services worse. What? Are you joking? Have you ever tried to do anything other than a bog standard transaction at the DMV or get anything beyond typical "homeowner pays professional to do typical thing" type work permitted? The USPS is one of the most user friendly services in existence even once you get off the beaten path of sending standardized envelopes and parcels. If you restrict the comparison to just federal services it's not even close except perhaps some very specific common workflows but even then when it goes off the rails it goes off the rails way harder and is way more painful to resolve. Ask anyone of social security age if you don't believe me.