Smarter government (cheaper more covered part 2)

I've been to hell. I spell it, I spell it DMV

Anyone that's been there knows precisely what I mean

Stood there and I've waited and choked back the urge to scream

-Primus, DMV (Pork Soda)

 When I was living in the greater Chicago-land area I dreaded going to the Illinois DMV ( though it's actually called Secretary of State's Office Vehicle something or other). But as it happened it was rather pleasant. My Republican voting uncle asked me the next day at work "wasn't it wonderful?"

Of course it wasn't wonderful. But it was painless. I wasn't frustrated. That's the most you can expect out of such a scenario. Mediacom could learn a thing or two from the state of Illinois. The difference between smarter government and what we usually get is the difference between a forgetable experience and one so hellish it must be expressed in song.
Now again, let me set up the parameters. This is not a libertarian discussion if the government should do things even if they can do it right. This is a discussion about how the government can do things better. Let's look at recent news.

Solyndra
If you don't follow the news what happened is that Obama made a loan to a solar panel company that went out of business even with the extra half a billion dollars. Is the lesson that the government shouldn't give loans no bank would give? perhaps. But let's not let the conversation die there. Next time the government wants to meddle in the private sector, they should patron it not be it's patriarch.
The Obama administration  making the same mistake with green jobs as Republicans are making with the economy as a whole. They are assuming that the problem is a lack of liquidity when the real problem is a lack of demand.
If the Obama administration is really serious about helping these companies- buy their products. Order half a billion dollars worth of solar panels for government buildings. If the company still goes out of business after that at least you were able to cut down the overhead of running several government agencies.
The same could have been done on the auto bailout (though that ended up working out okay). We could have put in an order for X amount of electric cars or hybrid hummers for the military. 

Post Office
Bad mouthing the Post Office has been a pet peeve of mine since 2008 when it seemed trendy for Republican Presidential candidates. It seems to me that the Post Office is an example of the government working, not an example of the opposite. I don't remember ever getting a letter lost (though there might have been one in my midtwenties or I might have found it behind my dresser when I moved). It's the cheapest way to send a small amount of paper. It goes much above and beyond what it's privately owned competition would do.
What is really the icing on my hatred of Post Office bashing on the part of Republicans is that they are only in office because of the Post Office. The life blood of the Republican party has been to use mass mailings to get out the older vote. So even though they say in public they would choose UPS, they go with the government owned model.
This ruckus over the Post Office seems to be manufactured. From my understanding the cash flow problems are primarily caused by a requirement that the Post Office have it's pension paid up for 75 years. That seems excessive. The fear is that the government will have to bailout the USPS in 75 years. Really? We're in a recession now and the Republican plan is to put Postal workers out of work now so don't have to worry about their pensions in the future.
I guess that's encouraging that the Republicans are so sure that we'll still be a country in 75 years because they don't seem to think that way when talking about any other issue.