>Because, in theory, you care that they can vote and mail in their taxes at a reasonable price, even from places that are economically unfeasible to have a mail delivery system.

"A reasonable price"? A reasonable price, in the long run, is what the service costs. And there aren't any areas that are economically unfeasible to deliver mail - just not for less than a dollar. I'm okay with people out in the sticks paying, say, $2.50 to send a letter. Are you trying to tell me there are people who can't afford, say, five bucks a year to send two letters (even assuming they do vote by mail)? If money's that tight in rural Nowheresville they can move to the city and get a desk job like everyone else.

>Whether you actually care is up to you, but the US government has decided US citizens care.

Sure, because rural voters have proportionally more voting power. There's no secret why the system is the way it is.

>It's similar to the gov't money that was paid to run telephone lines to rural areas (ref: freeconference.com article from the other day).

Yes, the telephones, the roads, airports, mail... still don't see why people can't pay their own way. Look, there are things I pay more for where I live. Housing, for instance. Why aren't they paying part of my rent?

In the ideal libertarian world, there is a free movement of peoples. People are free to move from one location to another in order to best optimize the system. This is great in theory but breaks down in practice. There are physical, bureaucratic and psychological barriers that keep people in one place. For instance, my father's family is largely from rural Indiana. We have had a family farm for several generations. In fact, my family has a road named after it (Hammer Road) because it was mostly occupied by members of my family that had lived there for so long. There are members of my family that will inherit that land and for several reasons will continue to farm that land for generations to come.

My family has every right to vote and do so proudly. A callous wave of the hand and saying "they should pay their own way" in order to be an equal citizen in this country is .. well, elitist, immoral and just plain wrong.

P.S. If you want to give everyone free internet or free phones (with the appropriate legislation to make contracts entered over said mediums binding, of course) then do away with the USPS. Until then you're going to have to pay for everyone's right to be a full citizen of this country by subsidizing the postal service.

>A callous wave of the hand and saying "they should pay their own way" in order to be an equal citizen in this country is .. well, elitist, immoral and just plain wrong.

There sure doesn't seem to be any shortage of people with their hands in my pocket who get indignant when I point it out. There's nothing elitist, immoral, or wrong in saying people should pay their own way. People of sound mind and body shouldn't be freeloading off their fellow citizens. I realize there's a certain lifestyle people enjoy when it comes to rural living. That's tough.

Before automation something like 95% of the population was involved in agriculture. My family was all farmers, if you go back far enough. And yet they all ended up moving where there was work when farming wasn't working out. What makes your family so special that you think I ought to be paying to maintain their chosen lifestyle?

There is a very reasonable solution to this. Offer special rates for civics activities like voting and taxes. AFAIK, a special rate with return receipts already exists for filing taxes.