Posted 6/11/2019 07:18 (#7552857 - in reply to #7552481) Subject: RE: New one , anyone heard of this
It was much more important to have rural mail back before the existence of the Internet.
While I will agree here, it is still important. Not everything can be done digitally, especially in our age of security risks. Not to mention there are large swaths of this country where internet is not available; not even satellite.
Most things that are profitable are done by someone. The fact that corporations sometimes don’t want the hassle creates opportunities for individuals and/or small businesses.
That often does not happen. Rather than giving it up, a company will retain the rights and let it rot on the off chance something changes.
Perfect example is the railroad. Customers on a line will get a 30 day notice that the line is being railbanked. No more shipments, line isn’t profitable enough. Too bad if you already have deliveries contracted. This is business ending for companies that handle goods only shipped via rail.
And rather than selling the line to the competition, the railroad retains it in case a big customer were to want to build nearby and they are incentivized to reopen it. Leasing the line to little Class III (or a customer to do their own switching) often isn’t worth the liability. The line usually then erodes into the ground until it is abandoned and ripped up.
So the businesses on the line have to move or figure out how to transport in some other fashion.
If there’s so little activity in an area that it isn’t served by the electrical grid and/or the mail, then people that desire to live there need to weigh the negatives of limited services in to their location decision. Fortunately for them, again modern
technology has made “off the grid” living possible without sacrificing quality of life.
Multiple generations of people spent their entire lives working to gain Rural Free Delivery and rural electrification. I don’t understand why we should move backwards from our status today. Rural America already has access issues for services like healthcare or internet access.
I could support your ideas if there was also a clear requirement that, if a service like electricity was to be discontinued for an area, the infrastructure had be disperesed to a cooperative formed by the people who utilize it. The utility would also be required to continue interlinking the coop at a competitive rate. This would at least ensure access to the service while preventing a utility from sitting on it without use. It would also prevent that dreaded “subsidization” of higher cost areas by the more profitable regions.