U.S. Postal Service still essential



I feel the Oct. 7 column that Tim Hadachek wrote, which criticizes the U.S. Postal Service, is poorly formulated and stems largely from generational bias. I realize that today everyone under the age of 30 feels they are so important they must be in constant contact with others via Twitter.com, text messaging and mobile phones. However, many people over that age do not have the same obsession.

There was a time when almost everyone commuicated by “snail mail.”

Then, the USPS was the pride of this country. If we, as taxpayers, managed to get a like return on our investment that our tax dollars gave us for sponsoring the postal service on all of our tax dollars, we would still be the envy of the world.

Let me make it clear that I do not, nor ever have, worked for this organization; however, I have a broader frame of reference than Mr. Hadachek by merit of being older.

Once upon a time, being a “person of letters” implied that one had substantial communication skills. A person who utilizes the popular immediate media (and mediums) of today cannot make those claims. One can rarely find a blog or entry from some electronic source in which errors do not abound.

Quality of communique aside, the postal service was, by far, the cheapest and most expedient way for many rural inhabitants to reach others in the past. Based upon my experience today with the internet, e-mail, text messaging and the like, it has also been more reliable. I can honestly say that I do not think that I have ever lost anything I have posted in the U.S. mail. I cannot say the same about other information I have committed to electronic means.

The postal service has stood by the citizens of the United States in good stead and will continue to do so if properly aided.

Anyone wanting this organization altered obviously has little use for the wonderful services it provides and probably has ulterior motives. When something works as well as the U.S. Postal Service, you do not “fix it” if “it ain’t broken.”

Kindest Regards,

-–B. Akard