I've always thought the US Post Office model was one worth exploring for more industries (retail banking, stuff like epipens and insulin, etc).
If your lean and nimble business can outcompete the sclerotic and wasteful government, go ahead. No one will be happier than the public and the tax man. If not, then people will get their services from the public option.
In the USPS (also true of the US Post Office, but that hasn’t existed for quite some time) model, the government enterprise has an enforced legal monopoly, it is not in free and open competition wih private actors.
Im not american, so might be missing some context, but what is the monopoly?
You can use Fedex, UPS etc to ship anything from anywhere to anywhere. Nothing is stopping you from using fedex to ship your christmas cards as well. I assume people stick with USPS for simple letters because its cheaper and easier, not because of any enforced monopoly.
> You can use Fedex, UPS etc to ship anything from anywhere to anywhere.
You actually can’t, there are very specific rules for what you can use a non-postal carrier to send to which addresses and at which prices. Which is why you don’t see general, non-express, or cheap letter delivery from third-party services.
This is the sense that I meant it in, obviously they are peculiarities in the 18th century institution of the postal service that may or may not be worth copying over.
> obviously they are peculiarities in the 18th century institution of the postal service
The USPS was created in 1971, which is not the 18th Century.
(Heck, even the monopoly rules that originally applied to the Post Office that now apply to the Postal Service were first established in the 19th, not 18th, century.)
If your lean and nimble business can outcompete the sclerotic and wasteful government, go ahead. No one will be happier than the public and the tax man. If not, then people will get their services from the public option.