The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Free Shipping
electricitylikesme
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So I had an idea today: the government should mandate a minimum level of internal goods shipping will be available free.
In the internet age, the single biggest impediment to commerce is the cost of shipping things around - and one of the biggest problems any country really has is infrastructure related to this. So I wonder, if the government simply subsidized the cost of a certain level of shipping service so that it was free to all citizens internally, how much benefit would you get from that?
My thinking goes that the follow on economic activity from something like this, would more then offset the cost of running it, and would incentivize the right kinds of efficiency improvements in infrastructure. It's also a natural complement to modern eCommerce.
I figure the structure would essentially replace the current expense of shipping things with a time-relation for distance and weight - so we'd draw a scale so for any location and weight of object (up to some limit), free shipping takes X amount of time - to help offset the costs and allow for amortization of the actual transit.
What does D&D think?
In the internet age, the single biggest impediment to commerce is the cost of shipping things around - and one of the biggest problems any country really has is infrastructure related to this. So I wonder, if the government simply subsidized the cost of a certain level of shipping service so that it was free to all citizens internally, how much benefit would you get from that?
My thinking goes that the follow on economic activity from something like this, would more then offset the cost of running it, and would incentivize the right kinds of efficiency improvements in infrastructure. It's also a natural complement to modern eCommerce.
I figure the structure would essentially replace the current expense of shipping things with a time-relation for distance and weight - so we'd draw a scale so for any location and weight of object (up to some limit), free shipping takes X amount of time - to help offset the costs and allow for amortization of the actual transit.
What does D&D think?
electricitylikesme on
0
Posts
I don't really think it is even that great of an ideal, I don't see how it will lead to bridges and roads getting repaired, and between ups, fedex and the usps it all actually work fairly well, and the government already helps to offset the cost of air shipping.
It would shift some of the burden from business to tax payers, and further flattening is going to help companies in States with the least regulation. Given the fairly regressive nature of or corporate take structure it would probably mean subsiding huge businesses like Amazon and Walmart at the cost of the middle class and small business, without really doing much to help them or encourage growth or entrepreneurship, because the competition between shipping companies has done a lot to prevent shipping from being a barrier to entry.
Because in the real world, the large corporations, with their armies of lawyers, lobbyists and accountant, their ability to relocate to more tax friendly areas, and the capital to play games with their organizational structure, are the huge companies, with lot of income.
Where is the real tax burden? Who does the heavy economic lifting? Who is really paying for services? It sure as fuck is not GE.
It's not a tax thread, I'd rather not derail it too much arguing about a small part of an argument I'm not terribly tied to. I know it is one where you have some knowledge, even in a tax thread I'd likely not be overly motivated to argue a point of rhetoric that's only kinda true if you squint a bit.
Do you think the increased burden to small businesses and the middle class would be outweighed by cheaper shipping costs? Do you feel this would not benefit large corporations more than small businesses and consumers?
Shipping seems like a pretty paltry cost, at least to the end consumer; even if it isn't "free" already, it's invariably a small sum compared to the cost of whatever item I ordered (some of the cost of shipping gets included in the price of the item, but still.)
If you're having a product shipped to you it seems like either 1) you can't get it locally or 2) it's already cheaper to have it shipped than to buy local. So why do we need added incentive to have things shipped to us?
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
I actually have paid more to ship things than they have cost. That has been the case with many of the used textbooks I have bought. Free shipping would encourage these types of markets a lot, craigslist would probably be revolutionized for instance. I'm not sure if that would contribute much to GDP but it would allow consumers to more efficiently spend their money and would increase the value of durable goods.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
How would that help? Larger sellers with more shipping volume already swing much better discounts on freight rates.
Now if you're trying to encourage purchasing at brick and mortar locations instead of online, okay -- but that's still going to drive up retail costs as the stock has to be shipped from somewhere.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
I think Amazon isn't "crushing the little guys" - it's enabling small booksellers and other retail businesses to turn a profit by leveraging Amazon's infrastructure and popularity. Amazon.com is the world's largest consignment shop!
In a country as geographically large as the US, shipping is always a very real cost. Trying to hand-wave this away probably wont work that well.
Now the big chains could obviously still run at a profit, they might change their price tiers for free shipping $5 here or there, and the little guys could take advantage of the government assistance, but what about the little, little guys? The Ebay/Craigslist crew. The only way they're going to get the free shipping perks would be through tax breaks right? Unless the post office started eating that cost on their end, which for private postage companies, I don't see happening.
Finally, you've got two other camps getting pissed, those blaming gas increases on government subsidized shipping and those pissed that the increase in shipping has caused more ecological impact.
In theory I think it's a good idea, I just don't see it working in a practical manner.
Admittedly it's annoying when you have to pay shipping on a small item, but I can usually either bundle that with something else or buy it somewhere local.
Also your economic efficiency argument is backwards.
Subsidizing small low value item shipping is going to cause a decrease in economic efficiency. Retail for all the news of it's impending death makes sense, because it's basically insane to ship a $2 item to someones door. Hiding the cost behind a government subsidy doesn't make it go away.
Most the cost of shipping is in the last mile delivery of it. Basically loading it on that last truck and driving it to your front door. If you really want to make shipping cheaper, you make an option to pick it up at the post-office. Which is basically what Wal-Mart/BestBuy do with the order it online, pick it up at the store option, and what all retail does with all the low-priced shit you use in your day to day.
But I ultimately agree with the point that this is somewhat a non-argument. Shipping is not expensive. However, I do agree with the idea that shipping tends to favor consolidation, as there is a benefit to shipping more parcels due to the cost savings, resulting in little or no shipping cost, and consumers are more likely to then buy from the larger companies. I am guilty of this myself, preferring to buy from Amazon.com any good that's also sold elsewhere but with a shipping charge. Granted, I pay for Amazon Prime, and other companies have experimented with all-you-can-eat shipping models, but again, this model succeeds with companies that are consolidated and sell a lot of shit.
It's more a question of how the little guys differentiate themselves, which is more difficult on the internet.
I don't even know why you would want to do this. It sounds like you're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist which is the cost of delivering a good to you is factored into the price you pay.
Honestly anything useful you could do here would end up just being a VERY complicated way of imposing a tariff on foreign luxury goods.
More trains.
You should have used media mail.
Also, the post office already heavily subsidizes shipping costs. It's just that rural areas are the ones who benefit rather than online retailers as such.
If I want to buy a toothbrush, it's probably not economically efficient for me to mail-order it from a specialist supplier in Brisbane. Logistics firms can, more cheaply, supply loads to a supermarket which I then visit to buy my toothbrush. I don't know why you think encouraging longer-distance purchasing is such a notable good that it's worth subsidising.
Also, and this again is an easy flaw to pick, why are taxpayers as a whole subsidising the costs of people who primarily like to consume things that need to be shipped around? That's probably regressive (although I suppose it needn't necessarily be so). Even if it's not though, you'd be subsidising a particular preference for long-distance consumption, for, really, I have no idea what reason.
http://newnations.bandcamp.com
Combined with the fact that the consumer can get free shipping quite often already. Let's leave that at the choice of the distributor, we don't need Uncle Sam stepping in, we need him making the roads and trains and planes work.
Also, I love that someone unironically said "what makes this tax regressive, it's more of a flat tax" But yeah, not a tax thread. Just wanted to throw that out there.
I just didn't want to derail the thread into a tax debate.
Really, all of Stockton should be bulldozed to create gigantic railhub.
It is a more efficient way of doing home delivery by having home delivery mean locker delivery. Hub and spoke is only more efficient that point to point when volumes are low. Every low cost airline uses this to their advantage.