2 ms·
His argument is that we shouldn't feel obliged to deliver mail to residences so far out of the way that said delivery is cost prohibitive, not that "no governme
by cookiecaper 14y ago
His argument is that we shouldn't feel obliged to deliver mail to residences so far out of the way that said delivery is cost prohibitive, not that "no government services should be provided to anyone not in Washington DC". Sounds reasonable to me. The specifics of "cost prohibitive" and "out of the way" can be refined to prevent ideologically-charged, unrealistic reductions like yours.
- Turing_Machine 14y ago"His argument is that we shouldn't feel obliged to deliver mail to residences so far out of the way that said delivery is cost prohibitive" Define "cost prohibitive". Costs exceed revenue for that particular piece? If so, I can guarantee you that the delivery radius is a lot smaller than you (and he) appear to think that it is. There's a reason why essentially every country adopted a flat-rate fee for regular mail way back in the 19th century.