To the great big Post Office in the sky.
Cavey wrote:
Cras wrote:
Everyone understands finite resources, but some would suggest that, for example, Trident replacement funds or the redecorating of the home of the wealthiest household in the country would keep a lot of post offices open.
And I, of course, as a lifelong and oft stated republican and totally anti nuclear individual would wholeheartedly agree, as you fine well appreciate. See also bank subsidies....
Quite - So that's pretty much my point. There is money to spend on supporting the elderly and rural with access to services, but we just spend it on other things.
Well yeah, but I prefer to live within the real world, and actual deliverable politics - not cloud cuckoo la-la land. Much as I personally would love to see it, we ain't binning off Trident or the royals.
Incidentally, this is where people like Corbyn and his ilk go so badly wrong: they're swivel-eyed idealists and zoomers, basically, and the electorate know it.
Incidentally, this is where people like Corbyn and his ilk go so badly wrong: they're swivel-eyed idealists and zoomers, basically, and the electorate know it.
Why don't they have mobile post offices for rural areas like they have mobile libraries?
Oh, they'd probably get stolen.
Oh, they'd probably get stolen.
Cavey wrote:
To the great big Post Office in the sky.
Not really helpful. If you are saying close the post offices. Where do you think the services should go?
KovacsC wrote:
Cavey wrote:
To the great big Post Office in the sky.
Not really helpful. If you are saying close the post offices. Where do you think the services should go?
What services can you get from the Post Office that you can't get elsewhere?
Sorry Cras, but it looks like the Palace decorations aren't quite the costly drain that they might seem
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall ... 97815d500f
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall ... 97815d500f
I need a package sending special delivery which must arrive tomorrow and must be signed for. Where do I go if I can't go my local post office?
Satsuma wrote:
I need a package sending special delivery which must arrive tomorrow and must be signed for. Where do I go if I can't go my local post office?
Well, you can't do that at your local post office, it's too late.
However, there are a shed load of delivery companies that do next day signed-for deliveries and will collect from you if you want then to. But you surely knew that, so now I'm a bit confused.
Grim... wrote:
Satsuma wrote:
I need a package sending special delivery which must arrive tomorrow and must be signed for. Where do I go if I can't go my local post office?
Well, you can't do that at your local post office, it's too late.
However, there are a shed load of delivery companies that do next day signed-for deliveries and will collect from you if you want then to. But you surely knew that, so now I'm a bit confused.
What are you talking about? I have done that countless time at Post Offices. Has that changed recently?
DavPaz wrote:
Sorry Cras, but it looks like the Palace decorations aren't quite the costly drain that they might seem
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall ... 97815d500f
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall ... 97815d500f
It's still money that could have been spent elsewhere. The fact that it originates with the Crown Estate under an existing arrangement doesn't really change that.
It's like Rees-Mogg and his wife's house getting a shitload of cash, coincidentally as he was doing the people in charge a favour.
Curiosity wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Satsuma wrote:
I need a package sending special delivery which must arrive tomorrow and must be signed for. Where do I go if I can't go my local post office?
Well, you can't do that at your local post office, it's too late.
However, there are a shed load of delivery companies that do next day signed-for deliveries and will collect from you if you want then to. But you surely knew that, so now I'm a bit confused.
What are you talking about? I have done that countless time at Post Offices. Has that changed recently?
At 10:30pm?
Curiosity wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Satsuma wrote:
I need a package sending special delivery which must arrive tomorrow and must be signed for. Where do I go if I can't go my local post office?
Well, you can't do that at your local post office, it's too late.
However, there are a shed load of delivery companies that do next day signed-for deliveries and will collect from you if you want then to. But you surely knew that, so now I'm a bit confused.
What are you talking about? I have done that countless time at Post Offices. Has that changed recently?
I literally did that last week. Took parcel to the Post Office across the road from me on Wednesday morning, item arrived by RM Special Delivery next morning halfway across the U.K.
Out of all the services the post office provides you think sending parcels is the most irreplaceable?
Grim... wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Satsuma wrote:
I need a package sending special delivery which must arrive tomorrow and must be signed for. Where do I go if I can't go my local post office?
Well, you can't do that at your local post office, it's too late.
However, there are a shed load of delivery companies that do next day signed-for deliveries and will collect from you if you want then to. But you surely knew that, so now I'm a bit confused.
What are you talking about? I have done that countless time at Post Offices. Has that changed recently?
At 10:30pm?
Do we have a rolling eyes Dimlie?
Curiosity wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Satsuma wrote:
I need a package sending special delivery which must arrive tomorrow and must be signed for. Where do I go if I can't go my local post office?
Well, you can't do that at your local post office, it's too late.
However, there are a shed load of delivery companies that do next day signed-for deliveries and will collect from you if you want then to. But you surely knew that, so now I'm a bit confused.
What are you talking about? I have done that countless time at Post Offices. Has that changed recently?
At 10:30pm?
Do we have a rolling eyes Dimlie?
He specifically said "tomorrow".
Anyway, like I said, out of everything the post office can do "sending parcels" is pretty much going to be the easiest one to replace. I don't really know why Sat mentioned it or why you all jumped on the bandwagon.
"Buying an annual fishing license" would have been a much better answer.
Oh, turns out you can do that online.
The one standout item probably is cashing in a paper pension book - but we must be down to a fast dwindling population of people that actually use those in preference to a bank account.
As cavey said all can be done online, granted.
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
There are a few collect+ and my hermies places. They don't offer the other services, and you can't just pop in with a parcel and money.
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
There are a few collect+ and my hermies places. They don't offer the other services, and you can't just pop in with a parcel and money.
KovacsC wrote:
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
In which case it is unlikely to be a crown post office but a sub post office, which aren't the subject of the strikes. There's something like 11,000 sub post offices and less than 500 crown.
Doesn't take away from the hypocracy of the statements that Doc posted however.
Grim... wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Satsuma wrote:
I need a package sending special delivery which must arrive tomorrow and must be signed for. Where do I go if I can't go my local post office?
Well, you can't do that at your local post office, it's too late.
However, there are a shed load of delivery companies that do next day signed-for deliveries and will collect from you if you want then to. But you surely knew that, so now I'm a bit confused.
What are you talking about? I have done that countless time at Post Offices. Has that changed recently?
At 10:30pm?
Do we have a rolling eyes Dimlie?
He specifically said "tomorrow".
Anyway, like I said, out of everything the post office can do "sending parcels" is pretty much going to be the easiest one to replace. I don't really know why Sat mentioned it or why you all jumped on the bandwagon.
"Buying an annual fishing license" would have been a much better answer.
It's obviously a generic 'tomorrow' statement rather than for one at a specific time stamp. I don't really know why you mentioned it and are trying to ride it stubbornly into the ground.
Generically posting things is still a decent use case for the Post Office, especially in rural areas, and replacing them all with Yodel or other companies is likely to make a significant cost increase. Trusting the concept of a free market to sort it out is obviously not particularly helpful. Many services are run not to be profitable but to provide help to people and a basic level of infrastructure; we could happily stop providing street lighting in certain areas, as it doesn't give you a great return on investment, but that's hardly the point.
Boiling everything down to "Does it make us money" is just a very odd (and extremely dangerous) way to run a country.
KovacsC wrote:
As cavey said all can be done online, granted.
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
There are a few collect+ and my hermies places. They don't offer the other services, and you can't just pop in with a parcel and money.
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
There are a few collect+ and my hermies places. They don't offer the other services, and you can't just pop in with a parcel and money.
You can't, indeed. But is there any reason why you couldn't?
Curiosity wrote:
Boiling everything down to "Does it make us money" is just a very odd (and extremely dangerous) way to run a country.
Pretty sure nobody's done that. Even Cavey, who's been most pro-closing, has said it'a been a case of prioritising expenditure, not looking for profit.
Cras wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Boiling everything down to "Does it make us money" is just a very odd (and extremely dangerous) way to run a country.
Pretty sure nobody's done that. Even Cavey, who's been most pro-closing, has said it'a been a case of prioritising expenditure, not looking for profit.
Doesn't make any difference to old "obviously" over there.
Cras wrote:
KovacsC wrote:
As cavey said all can be done online, granted.
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
There are a few collect+ and my hermies places. They don't offer the other services, and you can't just pop in with a parcel and money.
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
There are a few collect+ and my hermies places. They don't offer the other services, and you can't just pop in with a parcel and money.
You can't, indeed. But is there any reason why you couldn't?
Not for me, I have a car and I am mobile.
In small towns and villages, where buses are infrequent (as they are not profit making so services have been reduced) it can be difficult to get to another town etc.
Cras wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Boiling everything down to "Does it make us money" is just a very odd (and extremely dangerous) way to run a country.
Pretty sure nobody's done that. Even Cavey, who's been most pro-closing, has said it'a been a case of prioritising expenditure, not looking for profit.
Well, he said they should be shut down because they lose money. When the response to inefficiency and loss-making is to remove a service and the hope that the private sector will step in, it doesn't really make a difference to the end user whether you torched it on ideological grounds or not.
Grim... wrote:
Cras wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Boiling everything down to "Does it make us money" is just a very odd (and extremely dangerous) way to run a country.
Pretty sure nobody's done that. Even Cavey, who's been most pro-closing, has said it'a been a case of prioritising expenditure, not looking for profit.
Doesn't make any difference to old "obviously" over there.
Sadly, indeed not, no. Axes to grind etc.
It's interesting to note, is it not, the knee-jerk reaction of some in terms of the 'we must save our Post Offices' but when actually asked what specific services they're referring to, they can't really answer, just some stuff about sending parcels at 10:30pm, which isn't even accurate AFAIK (notwithstanding why this should even be so invaluable and worth saving over, say, building 50-odd new schools every couple of years or so). Clearly, it's pseudo-politics-by-meme.
But really, that's the problem here isn't it, in a nutshell.
ApplePieOfDestiny wrote:
Doesn't take away from the hypocracy of the statements that Doc posted however.
Sorry, what statements? Who is being a hypocrite?
KovacsC wrote:
Cras wrote:
KovacsC wrote:
As cavey said all can be done online, granted.
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
There are a few collect+ and my hermies places. They don't offer the other services, and you can't just pop in with a parcel and money.
The PO in a small town are kinda essential. My town is rural, the PO is in the Spar, rather than a dedicated building.
There are a few collect+ and my hermies places. They don't offer the other services, and you can't just pop in with a parcel and money.
You can't, indeed. But is there any reason why you couldn't?
Not for me, I have a car and I am mobile.
In small towns and villages, where buses are infrequent (as they are not profit making so services have been reduced) it can be difficult to get to another town etc.
That's not what I meant - I meant is there any reason why you couldn't pop into a collect+ place with a parcel and money and have them take it for you? The Post Office save the cost of maintaining staff and a location in rural locations, and they're just left with the cost of running a van once a day to go collect things. They'd have to provide some sort of incentive to get the collect+ shops to provide that service, so call it a 5% kickback on postage costs. I can only think that would save you a fair bit over maintaining thousands of dedicated post office facilities.
Cavey wrote:
ApplePieOfDestiny wrote:
Doesn't take away from the hypocracy of the statements that Doc posted however.
Sorry, what statements? Who is being a hypocrite?
The Guvmint. Striking employees are depriving people access to Crown post offices when we're closing a lot of them anyway which is why they're striking.
Separately I note (from - like - facts and shit) that the number of post offices has stayed approximately constant since 2008.
Cavey wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Cras wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Boiling everything down to "Does it make us money" is just a very odd (and extremely dangerous) way to run a country.
Pretty sure nobody's done that. Even Cavey, who's been most pro-closing, has said it'a been a case of prioritising expenditure, not looking for profit.
Doesn't make any difference to old "obviously" over there.
Sadly, indeed not, no. Axes to grind etc.
It's interesting to note, is it not, the knee-jerk reaction of some in terms of the 'we must save our Post Offices' but when actually asked what specific services they're referring to, they can't really answer, just some stuff about sending parcels at 10:30pm, which isn't even accurate AFAIK (notwithstanding why this should even be so invaluable and worth saving over, say, building 50-odd new schools every couple of years or so). Clearly, it's pseudo-politics-by-meme.
But really, that's the problem here isn't it, in a nutshell.
I think probably that some resistance to the idea comes from the fact a lot of people don't believe that they will start building new schools on the back of this, or reinvest the money anywhere. They just see that there will be one less service. No idea how they could have arrived at this crazy kind of a notion, though.
Cavey wrote:
Grim... wrote:
Cras wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Boiling everything down to "Does it make us money" is just a very odd (and extremely dangerous) way to run a country.
Pretty sure nobody's done that. Even Cavey, who's been most pro-closing, has said it'a been a case of prioritising expenditure, not looking for profit.
Doesn't make any difference to old "obviously" over there.
Sadly, indeed not, no. Axes to grind etc.
It's interesting to note, is it not, the knee-jerk reaction of some in terms of the 'we must save our Post Offices' but when actually asked what specific services they're referring to, they can't really answer, just some stuff about sending parcels at 10:30pm, which isn't even accurate AFAIK (notwithstanding why this should even be so invaluable and worth saving over, say, building 50-odd new schools every couple of years or so). Clearly, it's pseudo-politics-by-meme.
But really, that's the problem here isn't it, in a nutshell.
We have answered what the post offices do, I have asked you what services you think can be done else where. You gave a flippant answer of the post office in the sky.
At that point, was it worth carrying on?
I use my postoffice, for travel money, buying stamps and sending and receiving parcels.. For pure convenience.
KovacsC wrote:
For pure convenience.
So paying for a post office for you is clearly totally unnecessary then.
So we're back to what essential services a post office provides that can't be effectively provided elsewhere.
Cras wrote:
That's not what I meant - I meant is there any reason why you couldn't pop into a collect+ place with a parcel and money and have them take it for you? The Post Office save the cost of maintaining staff and a location in rural locations, and they're just left with the cost of running a van once a day to go collect things. They'd have to provide some sort of incentive to get the collect+ shops to provide that service, so call it a 5% kickback on postage costs. I can only think that would save you a fair bit over maintaining thousands of dedicated post office facilities.
Royal Mail lets you print postage, so technically all they need to do is rent some space from these shops so a van can go and pick up your stuff (if it won't fit in a post box).
Not sure how you'd deal with special delivery stuff, though - that'd rely on a member of the shop staff.
@ Mark Well, yes, but that's an entirely different problem obv.
KovacsC wrote:
We have answered what the post offices do
"Send parcels" doesn't really make them essential.
KovacsC wrote:
I have asked you what services you think can be done else where.
Nearly all of them right now, every single one with a little planning.
ApplePieOfDestiny wrote:
Separately I note (from - like - facts and shit) that the number of post offices has stayed approximately constant since 2008.
Does that figure include Post Office Locals?
These are stripped down versions of main branch post offices that sit in local shops and the like and offer a much reduced service.
Cras wrote:
KovacsC wrote:
For pure convenience.
So paying for a post office for you is clearly totally unnecessary then.
So we're back to what essential services a post office provides that can't be effectively provided elsewhere.
I suppose, all the services can be broken up and done else where, at a cost.
The post offices are already there. The sub post offices are rarely just a post office, most are shops too
Grim... wrote:
KovacsC wrote:
We have answered what the post offices do
"Send parcels" doesn't really make them essential.
KovacsC wrote:
I have asked you what services you think can be done else where.
Nearly all of them right now, every single one with a little planning.
Passport check and send? That would require training as well as planning.
Grim... wrote:
KovacsC wrote:
We have answered what the post offices do
"Send parcels" doesn't really make them essential.
KovacsC wrote:
I have asked you what services you think can be done else where.
Nearly all of them right now, every single one with a little planning.
I see what you are saying. Parcels can be sent via other means.
But that is a big part of a post office.
But yes of course most stuff COULD be done elsewhere. In the same way, you COULD go and get all your groceries from several different shops rather than one super market.
Mr Russell wrote:
Grim... wrote:
KovacsC wrote:
We have answered what the post offices do
"Send parcels" doesn't really make them essential.
KovacsC wrote:
I have asked you what services you think can be done else where.
Nearly all of them right now, every single one with a little planning.
Passport check and send? That would require training as well as planning.
Is that really worth spending hundreds of millions of pounds every couple of years or so though?
Don't forget, no-one has said or claimed that post offices don't offer some or any benefits - in fact I've said the exact opposite.
Mr Russell wrote:
But yes of course most stuff COULD be done elsewhere. In the same way, you COULD go and get all your groceries from several different shops rather than one super market.
And if it can be done without notable cost or loss of convenience to the customer, then surely that's reasonable, rather than spending lots of public money keeping them open?
Mr Russell wrote:
But yes of course most stuff COULD be done elsewhere. In the same way, you COULD go and get all your groceries from several different shops rather than one super market.
My nearest Post Office is in a supermarket.
Cras wrote:
Mr Russell wrote:
But yes of course most stuff COULD be done elsewhere. In the same way, you COULD go and get all your groceries from several different shops rather than one super market.
And if it can be done without notable cost or loss of convenience to the customer, then surely that's reasonable, rather than spending lots of public money keeping them open?
Precisely.
My new year's resolution is to stop visiting this thread I think.
Cras wrote:
So we're back to what essential services a post office provides that can't be effectively provided elsewhere.
Mostly financial services (banking/benefits/pensions/etc) for older customers in rural areas, I'd argue. There was a big to-do a few years back about how people could use the Post Office as a bank if all their local branches closed; now that's going away. I am not convinced by Cavey's "they can use the internet" for older customers, which smacks of "let them eat cake" condescension to me. Two thirds of our population owns a smartphone. That's an awful lot of people who don't.
There's a nice Commons briefing paper here: http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... N00385.pdf. Notable that the banks are not closing branches because they aren't used, they're closing branches that are being used because they aren't profitable. So there is demand.
Cavey wrote:
It's interesting to note, is it not, the knee-jerk reaction of some in terms of the 'we must save our Post Offices' but when actually asked what specific services they're referring to, they can't really answer, just some stuff about sending parcels at 10:30pm, which isn't even accurate AFAIK (notwithstanding why this should even be so invaluable and worth saving over, say, building 50-odd new schools every couple of years or so). Clearly, it's pseudo-politics-by-meme.
I cannot imagine why, after 261 pages in this thread of you not listening to anything except your own pre-existing political ideology, that people might have lost interest in engaging with your arguments. Quite astonishing.
Turns out you've not done so well at that.
[edit] @ Myp
[edit] @ Myp
Mr Russell wrote:
ApplePieOfDestiny wrote:
Separately I note (from - like - facts and shit) that the number of post offices has stayed approximately constant since 2008.
Does that figure include Post Office Locals?
These are stripped down versions of main branch post offices that sit in local shops and the like and offer a much reduced service.
All post offices. "Crown" post offices went from 403 to 315 between 2008 and 2016. Kovacs can buy a stamp in any of them though.
Cras wrote:
Mr Russell wrote:
But yes of course most stuff COULD be done elsewhere. In the same way, you COULD go and get all your groceries from several different shops rather than one super market.
And if it can be done without notable cost or loss of convenience to the customer, then surely that's reasonable, rather than spending lots of public money keeping them open?
The very fact that we're spending pages talking about the spending of public money on post offices instead of say, the Queen's house, or on any one of the thousands of dodgy government contracts shows how controlled we all are by the media.
Page 157 of 289 [ 14415 posts ]