Post office closures target poor areas

Surprise, surprise!

The wave of post office closures lately is neither necessary nor evenly distributed. I just found an insightful article on Daily Kos laying forth how it really works:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/25/1010538/-Theft-in-Progress:-Your-Post-Office!?via=spotlight

This confirms what I've said all along: Post offices are closing not because of necessity but because of right-wing mismanagement. The Postal Service would be able to afford to provide the same level of service as 30 years ago if it didn't give a discount to junk mail. Furthermore, it also confirms my suspicion that post office closures were deliberately targeted at the poorest communities.

And what about the mysterious disappearance of public mailboxes? You know, the blue ones. Many Americans (including me) no longer have home pick-up of mail, so the public boxes are sorely needed. By eliminating boxes and home pick-up, the Postal Service is committing an open-and-shut violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Right now, I have to travel literally across town just to send a letter - now that the closest boxes have vanished.

The Daily Kos entry says it best: "The Postal Service needs to quit picking on powerless small towns and inner city neighborhoods while subsidizing mass mailers with overly discounted rates." I've said it for years.