It is more complicated than that. Current law states that all companies must pre fund their pension plans. Companies do not generally give health insurance benefits to retirees so it does not come up. For those companies that do it is not a requirement that they keep doing so, unlike a pension which can only be reduced in bankruptcy. The USPS has committed to funding retirees health insurance and can not legally reduce any benefits to its retirees or employees. Thus it makes sense to think of them more like a pension and to have it prefunded in a similar way.The issue with only having ten years to make up the shortage is academic since they have only contributed a couple of billion to that since the law passed and almost all of the money contributed to that is the 17 billion it had at the start from other sources.
That is the issue. Currently the USPS receives no taxpayer money and has unfunded liabilities in the tens of billions of dollars which is only projected to get worse. When those unfunded liabilities come due the taxpayers will be on the hook for them.
The question is not whether to screw someone over but who gets screwed over? Rural delivery has a cost, who should pay that cost the people who receive the benefit or strangers? It makes sense that whenever possible the people who receive the benefit should pay the cost.
If the hay humpers want timely mail, they should pay for it. My grandparents lived in a time when people got letters addressed to their small town’s general delivery and went to the post office to pick the mail up. Somehow they survived.
I wonder how common it is for rural areas to even have to-property mail delivery. I’ve lived on relatively sparsely-populated roads where we had it, as well as ones where we had to go to the post office.
Even some urban areas lack house-to-house mail delivery. Case in point: Bisbee Arizona, a century or so ago the largest city between New Orleans and San Francisco. When we moved into Old Bisbee we were given The Key To The City i.e. a free P.O. Box and key. City roads, mostly paved, are too narrow, twisted, and steep for easy access. 40% of addresses are on stairways, not roads. Young folk brag of having to climb 185 steps to get home. Older folk move to a flatter borough.
I’ve previously lived off rural roads with a mailbox at the end of a long dirt driveway. That beats driving twenty miles to a P.O. It’s a product of Rural Free Delivery:
Political football. Sound familiar?
Hmm this RFD certainly hasn’t found it’s way everywhere.
So, private companies aren’t allowed to deliver mail unless they really want to. That hardly sounds like a restriction, to me. I mean, anyone can slap an “urgent” label on anything. Most of the junk mail I get already says it’s “urgent”.
One of the jobs of our government is to set up infrastructure- roads, bridges, and yes, mail delivery routes. Without this infrastructure, our economy would collapse. Do you get mad every time you drive down a public road because you paid for all the other public roads you aren’t using as well?
You and I benefit from rural America having access to the test of the country, because it means that people living there can contribute to the economy. If we disconnect them, how are they supposed to produce anything of value? Rural states are already a net drain on our economy. You think kicking them while they’re down is going to somehow improve things for them?
Yes, that’s exactly how the law works.
Title 39 of the United States Code says exactly what you say here: private companies aren’t allowed to deliver mail, not even a little bit, “unless they really want to”. In section §310.3, “Exceptions” to the “Unlawful Carriage of Letters”, the code clearly says “if a private company slaps a big red URGENT label on every envelope they deliver, then that’s literally all they need. Everything is hunky-dory and A-OK, LOL”.
Everyone here should be thankful for the sophisticated insight into the federal code you have so graciously brought into this thread.
The rural state are not drains on the economy, they are what make the economy possible. Making them pay 75 cents for a stamp instead of 55 cents is not going to shut them down, for most people adjusting will be super easy, barely an inconvenience.
Public roads are a different debate. There are doubts whether and how a privatized road system would work. We know how a privatized Postal Service would work, just like the current one except it would have competitors and have cut its budget to match its revenue.
Blue (mostly urban) states federally subsidize Red (mostly rural) states. Much ranching out West here depends on subsidized access to federal land. And how much agribiz money remains in the states where it’s generated?
I expect you’ll find many rural residents who strongly disagree. You want to discriminate against country folk? Good luck with that.
Charging one buck per passenger mile will surely cut road congestion. 
Tell Congress to un-cut the USPS throat by removing the toxic pension requirement. (USPS is second-largest employer in the US.) Then convince private carriers to compete with USPS outside the most densely populated areas.
The government may subsidize rural states but that does not mean those states are drain on the national economy, that is not how economies work.