WouldBe
Dislicksick
Also the problem that there doesn't seem to be a standardisation of sizes across brands. So you order something you think will fit and it doesn't.
DfT may introduce compulsory delivery charge for online shopping -
- Thread starter Marty1
- Start date
Buddy Bradley
Pantheistic solipsist
My wife is constantly returning clothes (not Amazon per se, but other retailers). Mainly because women's clothing manufacturers all have completely different ideas about what numeric sizes mean, so ordering without trying on is a crapshoot.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
Do you find that not true for men too? I find some manufacturers always cut small, some big etc. I have stuff of S, M and L all of which fit me.
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
Isnt this just another attempt to save the high streets and get shoppers paying tax and businesses paying rates again?
Yes. An obvious problem when clothes are sized S, M, L ... etc, rather than in inches or centimeters. I can be anything from large to 2XL depending on the manufacturer.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Yeah. Who needs tax revenue anyway.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
This tax isn't just being applied against dodgers like Amazon. It's all deliveries. So it's the customers and other businesses who would effectively be made to subsidise the cheats.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
A DSqauared shirt arrived for for me last week, XXL. I can’t get it over my shoulders it is so small!
cupid_stunt
Chief seagull hater & farmerbarleymow's nemesis.
Have you put on weight since lockdown?
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Not really, and my the distance between my shoulders stay the same even if I had done.
A lot of this stuff is manufactured in the Far East and sized-up accordingly. Consequently you often find stuff on eBay etc., size XXXXL which corresponds to a UK Large!
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Shoppers pay tax, regardless of where they buy their goods. If the government don't want to collect that tax from Bezos, why should the customer be punished?
Online shopping is where we're at, and it won't be changing any time soon. This tax will only serve to hurt the poorest and anyone involved in the Amazon supply chain.
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
I know that, you know that, but the high street is some sacred totem that must be preserved for some.
Presumably it also engages more workers than depot and deliveries so is good for the economy or gdp or whatever these people are obsessed with.
Hmmm
- I hadn’t thought of that.This claim that this proposal is in part to curb frivolous spending is probably a load of shit too.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Really, you think so?
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Bezos has just bought Zoox, the self-driving car/taxi company. I wonder if he has plans to do away with the need for delivery drivers.
friendofdorothy
Solidarity against neoliberalism!
Yes.
Here's a radical idea- why not have fewer vans deliver to a few places, lets call them 'shops' and have several them all together, lets call that 'a local high street'. Then people can go there on foot or on buses, they can actually see and what they are buying and try things on if needed, then only buy the things they actually need.
At the moment small traders pay disproportionate taxes and business rates.
Big traders pay less per sq ft for enormous out of town superstores that are harder to reach by public transport.
The mega global corps pay very little tax indeed. They take trade from the smaller traders while clogging up /polluting our streets with a million fucking deliveries.
I can't beleive the vast amount of crap people buy and return - the waste is obscene and unsustainable. Its neoliberal madness wrapped up as convenience and choice. If you are concerned about the environment and don't want your local community obliterated by a few unaccountable global giants - just stop it, don't buy into it. Buy less and buy local.
And if you need something delivered - expect to pay for that service.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
What about the people who can't afford high street prices, do they not matter?
Why should those who can't afford to or don't want to pay high street prices subsidise those who can/do?
I also fail to see how a van with 300 packages onboard could possibly be worse for the environment than the recipients of those packages all travelling into town for them. Ordering online and having it delivered makes much more sense environmentally, although I'd certainly agree with a levy on returned clothing, as that Amazon wardrobe thing sounds like a ridiculous idea.
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
Really didn't think you'd be one arguing that disabled people should pay more for their shopping.
BristolEcho
Well-Known Member
All well and good. Except the highstreets actually sell very little of what you need locally. If you don't drive it's almost impossible to get anything bulky. I love my local highstreet and use it all the time for what I can, but anything else I don't really go into town for as it is horrendous.
On the final point about paying if you expect the service to pay for it. Most people do pay delivery fees why should they pay more on top? I would definitely want to see exemptions for people on PIP too.....
Not aimed at you but the idealised image of town centres is long detached from reality. Most of it is owned by one guy now.* As for local highstreets we need to find ways to keep them relevent by adapting them to local needs.
*Exaggeration but Ashley owns a chunk of them and I'm not sure the CEOs of these companies are worth anymore to me than an online company.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Even the so called 'free' deliveries aren't free, the delivery cost is incorporated into the price.
If we're going to add a delivery tax to purchases made online, should we not also add a collection tax, payable at the exit of every shop (unless you can prove you walked or cycled to the shop)? What's the difference? I'm not suggesting such a ridiculous idea but it's no less ridiculous than suggesting a delivery tax.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Hmmm
This claim that this proposal is in part to curb frivolous spending is probably a load of shit too.
It sounds like the kind of bullshit you'd get in China. "Don't spend too much money on having knick-knacks delivered to your home, or your social credit rating will suffer".
Fuck that bullshit. I just know that there are utter wastes of skin in UK high society who would love to be able to enforce such discipline on the feckless plebs. Except they're neoliberals over here, so they'd make you pay more money instead. Cunts.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
I'm sure he'd love too but a robot van that brings it to your door will still need someone to get it out of the van, carry it up your drive, knock on the door, irritate your neighbours by asking if it can be left wth them and stick a card through your door saying "Sorry We Missed You" Robots are going to have to progress a lot further than self-driving vans before they can get rid of the delivery person even if they don't drive the van.
I think they’ve seen how much Bezos and other online big boys have absolutely cashed in by the billions due to Covid and thought - how can we get a piece of that.
Saying that - reading some of the comments on here gives perhaps an indication of any hearing into exploitation of delivery drivers would go - I’m sure Amazon would use the - it’s better for the environment to have vans full of parcels than individual cars’ clause, then assure ministers that they would look to ramp things up to 500 parcels per van
Absolute bedlam today at the Amazon depot - massive routes - I’ve gone out with 175 stops/242 parcels - doing my bit for the environment tho
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Saying that - reading some of the comments on here gives perhaps an indication of any hearing into exploitation of delivery drivers would go - I’m sure Amazon would use the - it’s better for the environment to have vans full of parcels than individual cars’ clause, then assure ministers that they would look to ramp things up to 500 parcels per van
It would be patently stupid and utterly transparent for Amazon to attempt to use environmental justifications for their exploitative labour practices. It wouldn't matter if every Amazon delivery was completely pollution free, if their business model was otherwise unchanged.
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
Saying that - reading some of the comments on here gives perhaps an indication of any hearing into exploitation of delivery drivers would go - I’m sure Amazon would use the - it’s better for the environment to have vans full of parcels than individual cars’ clause, then assure ministers that they would look to ramp things up to 500 parcels per van
Not impossible. A lot of parcels per van makes sense but drivers can't just chuck out a parcel every five seconds. TBH I think most actual customers would understand that there are physical limits to what drivers can accomplish, despite the occasional mouthy customer you probably meet now and then, but ministers would have no clue at all.
That doesn't mean that the environmental arguments are invalid, though.
Similar threads
