1. | Jun 15, 2013

UVwihL dymrxwlfgscq

2. | Jun 15, 2013

TfCxR3 fegozyhggcqb

3. | Jun 15, 2013

Mp7sg6 njhyftsrvbya

4. | Jun 13, 2013

Dan,Thanks for your article. I read your posts falfhtuily and generally agree with your points. I agree with the general direction of this post, but want to provide some clarification on your portrayal of the US Postal Service (USPS).After a 19 year career with the USPS, and being married to a current USPS manager with 32 years of experience, I think I can shed a little light on the perception of little or no progress in 200 years.The USPS was restructured in 1971 to change from a federal department to a quasi-independent agency (Wikipedia). While this sounds like just a name change, it represented an amazing complication of a simple service by the federal bureaucracy.Congress mandated that the USPS was to break even or make a profit, though Congress had to approve all pricing and employment policies. Additionally, unionization was introduced, adding yet another impediment to some of the service enhancements you would expect.Again, this was a mandate from Congress, with a stifling result. Postal managers and leadership are primarily consumed with satisfying regulatory and organized labor requirements. While the pay and benefits are second to none, the work can be deeply unsatisfying.Believe me, there are many good people within the USPS that truly want to do much more than they're able, but are completely overwhelmed. Just imagine how the administration of government-run health care will turn out.