The Post Office didn’t used to be one of these Fannie/Freddie like pseudo-non-governmental “corporations” that were going to demonstrate the virtues of privatization. It used to just be part of the government.
Anyway, “privatizing” is just conservative code for “killing” because they know most essential government services are not viable in the market because they are part of a commons. (This even puts aside the question of whether it’s right or not.) See, if these “businesses” were profitable, then the government could just use the surplus without taxing. But not everything is profitable. They know it, so they spin it off to kill it. Think school vouchers.
Some things are about creating channels for the market to function, like roads, highways…and the post office.
The reverse of this is nationalizing generally profitable businesses when they fail or cause systemic failure. Interesting isn’t it? There again commerce’s general function would be improved first by nationalization then privatization but they’re against it because… gravy train over.
I’m starting to see myself as someone who is pro-business but anti “free” market. To some this sounds ridiculous, but honestly, I think laissez-faire is bad for business.