Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. -- C. S. Lewis

A boon for online bill payment?: I'm not sure if I'm in favor of privatizing the postal service or not. Theoretically, it makes sense to me, but what would be the practical fallout? Would it cost $1.20 for a normal letter to be mailed? Would this decrease junk mail? Lots of potential ramifications, not all of which are bad. Even the former Postmaster General, William J. Henderson, favors privatization, as he wrote in this Washington Post editorial column in August, 2001:

"Not long ago, it would have been unimaginable. But [in 2001], under the terms of a $7.2 billion contract, FedEx began carrying and helping to sort some first-class, priority and express mail for the U.S. Postal Service. ... While having contracts with private companies is nothing new (airlines have tossed sacks of mail into their cargo holds for as long as they've been flying), the deal with FedEx, the Postal Service's traditional competitor, is a major step forward in the Postal Service's increasing collaboration with private business. ... As the postmaster general until I retired three months ago, I oversaw the negotiation of the FedEx deal. And I continue to see it as an innovative solution for a Postal Service struggling to remain competitive under market conditions that have changed strikingly over the past decade. But such alliances with private business don't go nearly far enough. What the Postal Service needs now is nothing short of privatization. And while I've said in the past that privatization is inevitable, I'm saying now that it's something that must be done."

Things I Miss About NYC: I used to love to read the New York Post, not for the quality of the journalism but for the unusual story selection and fabulous headline composition. Today's issue includes the following story: Killer Pit Bulls Rip Granny to Shreds. The New York Times headlined it Pet Pit Bulls Kill Woman, 80, in Her Home, while the Bergen Record went with the straightforward Pit bull kills 80-year-old woman. It is a horrific story in any context, but the sensationalizing of the Post headline is beyond journalistic, firmly in the lurid tradition of the National Enquirer. The National Enquirer is too much for me, but I have always enjoyed the 10 minutes it took to glance through the Post, sort of in the same way that I can watch the Jerry Springer Show for about 5 minutes before I just can't take it any longer. What is my fascination with this stuff, even for a few minutes?