The counter-argument to your second point is that no matter when you do this, it will be painful, so you might as well rip the bandage off as quickly as possible. You may find it unconvincing, but there it is.
>"I've got a pen and I've got a phone - and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward."
I am staunchly opposed to the continuous growth of these powers, but each party seems to support them when their guy is president, and Congress seems unwilling to take action.
I guess I keep getting hit by the "why now" part: is it worth privatizing the USPS now, which seems to save < $10B per year, to jeopardize the legitimacy of the election in a time of such deep uncertainty?
In some ways, this is comparable to the situation with DACA, in that it was important to the party in control of the executive branch, they didn't have the ability to pass legislation, and they thought it had to get done urgently.[1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_Action_for_Childhood_...
Maybe this is so hard for me to see because I have very very fond memories of the post office. I had the same mail carrier deliver mail for almost all of my childhood. He became a pseudo-uncle to me. He was always there.
And it's hard for me to imagine that people have anything but love and tenderness for the USPS.
I have had mixed experiences with many different carriers, and have no particular fondness for any of the organizations, though some of the people (at each) have been very good, kind, and helpful.
I don't know why this was a priority for people in the current administration, though I view privatization of the USPS as a generally laudable goal.
After all these comments, I'm probably still leaning towards wanting it to stay public, but more open to privatization, and still quite vehemently unconvinced that now is the time to make that change. Again, thank you for all the conversation.