By no means was I implying that the ability to profit means they did profit. Im just stating what the law was.
The vast majority of first-class and bulk-rate mail is not anything can't wait a few days. For truly urgent deliveries, use a courier service or pay a higher postage that covers the expenses of that.
And that's why it (unfortunately) won't happen lol the USPS is as much of a jobs program as it is an actual mail delivery service.
As the guy above you pointed out, the postal workers union exists, and would fight this tooth and nail. Additionally, without legislation forcing it, management at USPS doesn't really have any incentive or ability to fire 1/2 to 4/5ths of their workers, those saved tax dollars don't really matter to them.
As much as I agree it could be made much more efficient, doing so would probably be very unpopular politically. For as often as people have negative experiences with the USPS, no one wants to see their friendly neighborhood post carrier (who walks around in a fun outfit dropping off letters and packages to them) get canned.
I was confused by this until I realized you are missing some logical steps in your (accurate) argument.
The 2006 law took away the safety net (ie the ability to charge whatever is needed to break even).
The “you can now make a profit” rule actually made it HARDER since it came with a price cap.
It told the USPS: You can keep any profits you make, but you cannot raise prices above the rate of inflation to get them.
This forced the USPS to absorb rising costs through internal efficiency rather than passing the bill to mailers