United Kingdom V: Son of a beach

[Asura]

I'd simplify it further.

If the argument was "masks can make the problem better" vs "masks can make the problem worse" it'd be a very different discussion.

But it isn't that. It's "masks can make the problem better" vs. "masks maybe don't help all that much". I'd rather force the country to wear masks temporarily, given that debate, while we do some research and if it's proven they have very little efficacy beyond doubt in this specific case, I'd roll back on that law, and sleep soundly for the rest of my life that I backed the right horse.

If you want to debate masks are bad because they make people take risks (like the whole "people shouldn't own breathalysers as it encourages drink-driving" type of argument) then maybe that'd be something, but I haven't seen any evidence of that.

[fallenangle]

I have at the supermarket I use and, as I have been self-isolating, the only shop I've been into for about 3 months.

Three weeks ago there was a woman wearing a mask who was coughing and sneezing, not badly but enough to be noticeable in the queue going in and whilst queuing to get out. It might just have been hay fever or a cold who knows? Whatever the case she should not have been out shopping but wearing the mask had undoubtedly given her permission.

It does seem it makes some people take more risks and put others at risk, at least in my observations, mentioned in earlier posts. When you add that to those whose mask wearing and practices break all the hygene rules too these are some of the things that have made me so cynical about such matters.

[Team Andromeda]

Royal Mail used to provide next day delivery. It was called first class post. Until it was meddled with under the ideological con trick of ‘competition’.
.

I've had many issues with Royal Mail long before the part sell-off, numerous times games being over a day late from when they were posted out, even if sent out 1st class. Which used to wind me up in the 90's when so looking forward to the latest game and it was like the end of the world, if a game was more than a date late. I've been using the same Valley's line track, to go to Cardiff and cheer on the team. every other Saturday since 1984 and even in the 80's we used to call British Rail, 'British delay'. I have issues with both the Public and Private Sector levels of service and don't think one is 100% always better to run a service better than the other





But I like you and respect you too much to get into an ideological debate or take issue with what is to someone, a passionate and heartfelt belief; it's like having a debate with her over Animals in the food chain. Not matter what one says, she's always be opposed to it.

[prinnysquad]

I've had many issues with Royal Mail long before the part sell-off, numerous times games being over a day late from when they were posted out, even if sent out 1st class. Which used to wind me up in the 90's when so looking forward to the latest game and it was like the end of the world, if a game was more than a date late. I've been using the same Valley's line track, to go to Cardiff and cheer on the team. every other Saturday since 1984 and even in the 80's we used to call British Rail, 'British delay'. I have issues with both the Public and Private Sector levels of service and don't think one is 100% always better to run a service better than the other





But I like you and respect you too much to get into an ideological debate or take issue with what is to someone, a passionate and heartfelt belief; it's like having a debate with her over Animals in the food chain. Not matter what one says, she's always be opposed to it.

First class wasn’t next day guaranteed, but was so good, it was often treated as such. It was simply a better service back then. Cheaper and more efficient. Competition has made everything poorer, and people accept that because competition is better, what they have now is better, when it clearly isn’t by any measurement.

As a service, the cost inefficient areas were subsidised by the cost efficient profitable areas. That’s how a service should work. That’s why competition in bus services and train services is a disaster. The non-profitable routes just get cut, rather than maintained via a reallocation of funds.

British Rail struggled with old stock and too much union friction. Nationalised railways nowadays are different. They work fantastically well in other countries. Over here, the East Coast mainline was screwed up by private companies. Once taken into public hands, it became more efficient and made money. It’s a no brainier. Furthermore, compare the safety records of Railtrack and Network Rail. We should have a fully integrated transport system of trains and buses, which focuses on the service aspect, with standardised prices and balanced timetables.

Privatisation of services and infrastructure is an ideological experiment that’s largely failed. By definition, running a service HAS to provide a service. Making a profit has to be a secondary concern. Privatisation has it the other way around. For me it’s not particularly about ideology. It’s about what works well. Common sense dictates that when profit is the primary concern, a service suffers. And most of them have.

No worries, though. Just different views, innit. Happy to talk about them one day over 54 pints lol.

[Team Andromeda]

I don't care enough on either side to get stuck in to a full on debate. I don't hold a passionate belief in either sector enough.I've had issues with both the Public and Private sector

I highly doubt you'll ever change your mind over it; like her with use of Animals in the Food chain or for me with Jackie Chan being so much better than Bruce Lee (And we all know it's true ) If that's what you believe and shout for , why should you change or stop fighting for your corner.

So I just repect your views and beliefs and thinks it's fair enough

[prinnysquad]

Dunno like mate. I‘ve changed my mind on plenty of things over the years. Some on this here forum. If the private sector proved itself in some area of national infrastructure and service provision, I’d happily concede that I was wrong.

[Anpanman]

First class wasn’t next day guaranteed, but was so good, it was often treated as such. It was simply a better service back then. Cheaper and more efficient. Competition has made everything poorer, and people accept that because competition is better, what they have now is better, when it clearly isn’t by any measurement.

It would have been cheaper just as a pint of beer when I was eighteen was about 40p, it was also probably cheaper adjusting for inflation but I'd really like to see your evidence for it being more efficient just to satisfy my curiosity, I would probably err the other way but would like to know for sure.

Thanks.

[prinnysquad]

Efficient by time, not necessarily by cost.

[dvdx2]

Thank your lucky stars you get your mail delivered regularly and in most cases on time. Royal Mail is like a diamond grade service compared to some countries. Ever tried getting something delivered quickly in South America? I know people in Chile and Argentina who have to wait once a week , in some cases once a fortnight to get local mail delivered (and that’s before the pandemic). What about other countries like Italy, where people won’t even send items to, for fear of them regularly vanishing. I could count the number of issues i’ve had with Royal Mail on one hand and I have been posting mail for the last 35 years.

[Team Andromeda]

Dunno like mate. I‘ve changed my mind on plenty of things over the years. Some on this here forum. If the private sector proved itself in some area of national infrastructure and service provision, I’d happily concede that I was wrong.

You could make a case for either Public or Private depending on your view IMO. Good and Bad in both sectors .

But I don't care enough to argue the toss, over them or think it's worth upsetting mates . It just makes no sense to me to look have the Private sector run the Water utilities or the Railways, when there is no choice and effectively no competition.

[Anpanman]

Efficient by time, not necessarily by cost.

Ah, you didn't make that bit clear.

Anyway evidence please, as I said I'm pretty sure their quality of service results is consistent at 90% ish, you've obviously got the hard data, just asking to see it that's all.

Thank your lucky stars you get your mail delivered regularly and in most cases on time. Royal Mail is like a diamond grade service compared to some countries. Ever tried getting something delivered quickly in South America? I know people in Chile and Argentina who have to wait once a week , in some cases once a fortnight to get local mail delivered (and that’s before the pandemic). What about other countries like Italy, where people won’t even send items to, for fear of them regularly vanishing. I could count the number of issues i’ve had with Royal Mail on one hand and I have been posting mail for the last 35 years.

Think that's what a lot of people fail to remember, overall we get a great service for what we pay.
I seem to remember the last time we had a bad winter and the other carriers couldn't get deliveries into far flung parts of the UK and RM stepped in to do it for them.

[prinnysquad]

Hard data about what?

Delivery times are slower and less frequent. Anyone in the country can confirm that.

[Anpanman]

Hard data about quality of service results - published and on the record please.

Delivery frequencies are less because;
a: second delivery was taken out
b: letter volumes have dropped, parcel increasing over recent years
Both of which you can find by asking Mr Google

Not interested in anecdotal rubbish - about 'when I were a lad it was much better', I'd say my service is just as good if not better, same for my family so that's at least not quite everyone.
Remember since privatisation (like or loathe it) RM has invested money into sortation tech so that would suggest efficiency has increased since they have to deliver more items then in say the 70's or 80's as the population and business mail has increased - though overall volumes look to have dropped over the last few years.

Again stuff you can find on Google, but I can't seem to find anything on quality of service results going back 10, 20, 30, 40 years.

So, if your service has dropped then unlucky but what I'm saying is there doesn't seem to be a discernible drop in their overall metric, if you have anything concrete then let's see it.

[prinnysquad]

I think you’ve misunderstood my point. Or maybe I haven’t made it clear enough.

My contention is that, since the ‘liberalisation’ of the market, the service has suffered. You said this yourself? I’m not sure why you’ve gone full-on offensive since you started from an point of agreement. As you said, RM had legal obligations to focus on the service aspect, while private companies could cherry pick the best deals. To fund shortfalls, the cost of stamps increased by 37-50% in a handful of years, for example.

My further contention is that the privatisation of RM has resulted in a poorer service. This isn’t about some kind of Hovis-advert anecdotal whimsies. It’s based on the experience that deliveries are slower. Collections are certainly less frequent. But until someone produces some studies on delivery times, then the evidence of customer experience is all you’ve got to rely on I’m afraid. My claims are equally as valid as others, until then. Mine are based on first class post being slower than it was just a few years ago.

Re, improvements. I readily agree that the private sector can teach the public sector things about efficiency and productivity in some areas. As long as service isn’t compromised, it’s a good thing.

[Brad]

For all the services we rely on we should just look back to a time where it was at its best and just go and do that again. Like trains are, objectively, absolutely ****ed compared to when I was a teenager. So, no new grand plan needed, just go back to how we did it then.

I am not prepared to discuss this lol!