Given that they mention "$16bn" repeatedly, it seems pretty clear to me that their comments are regarding marketing mail specifically, not the full set of services USPS provides.

I feel quite comfortable saying that there has been zero value to myself, or any other human, in delivering marketing mail to my home. I never look at it, I never read it, it just goes straight into my recycling as soon as I identify that a letter I've received is not from someone I have a legitimate personal or business relationship with. I have never made any purchase as a result of receiving an advertisement delivered to my home by USPS.

I think there's still a need for it, but it seems to me that if I got paper mail once a week that would be good enough (senders can still opt for "express" service for anything really time-sensitive). Most bills sent by mail have ~30 day payment due date, so getting them once a week would still be more than adequate. You could cut delivery staff and vehicle needs by close to 4/5 this way (keeping some capacity for the express letters).

The mail was delivered twice a day in most places until April 1950 when cuts made this impossible.

This is to say-- there have been changes made to the delivery frequency historically and there will be again most likely.

I like the USPS, but there is something odd about taking a piece of mail and dumping it directly into the shredder. You'd be surprised how many junk-mails contain a thick plastic card that can't be shredded-- I assume its to force you to open it.

It has gotten to the point with all of my communication technologies-- I dread phone calls, I dread text and instant messages. I dread mail of any type-- it's always bad news.

I believe that the focus/point made of a 'parent' was about bulk (spam) paper advertisements arriving at our homes, not ALL snail mail.

Perhaps I should have clearly stated it in my message.