With the postal service out on strike - would the world end if "standard" residential post was once or twice a week, with anything faster being special delivery?
This is one of the curious aspects of British politics over the past 25 years. Govt's delighting when nationalised industries become smaller more efficient businesses yet wondering what they are going to do with all these new unemployed people. Payments to nationalised industries down, disability benefit payments up as huge swathes of the country became jobless areas.
One hand is supposed to help the other, not hit it with a hammer. While I'm sure some people have benefited by having a new start away from their previous job how well has it done in the long run? I think it is fair that results have been mixed. When Labour votes are tumbling and fringe parties win then it is because people want to protest.
I wonder how well the German and New Zealand models work? While Deutsche post claim improved efficiencies did the Govt benefit from removing the postal monopoly or did it just shift the costs elsewhere?
My point is not that it has been privatised efficiently and thus needs fewer people, but that the still-state-owned GPO is being broken by a badly designed market.
I'd actually welcome a more efficient/smaller GPO (feel free to replace that with almost any massive govt owned body). It may well mean more people unemployed, if briefly, but I honestly believe that within a few years at most you'd have everyone back at work and the gain in efficiency would be worth the few years of increased social security costs.
At the moment admittedly this at the level of a belief, since I don't have any numbers to hand, but I'm in the libertarian/minarchist/right area of the political landscape, so not entirely surprising.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 12:45 am (UTC)One hand is supposed to help the other, not hit it with a hammer. While I'm sure some people have benefited by having a new start away from their previous job how well has it done in the long run? I think it is fair that results have been mixed. When Labour votes are tumbling and fringe parties win then it is because people want to protest.
I wonder how well the German and New Zealand models work? While Deutsche post claim improved efficiencies did the Govt benefit from removing the postal monopoly or did it just shift the costs elsewhere?
no subject
Date: 2009-10-23 07:28 am (UTC)I'd actually welcome a more efficient/smaller GPO (feel free to replace that with almost any massive govt owned body). It may well mean more people unemployed, if briefly, but I honestly believe that within a few years at most you'd have everyone back at work and the gain in efficiency would be worth the few years of increased social security costs.
At the moment admittedly this at the level of a belief, since I don't have any numbers to hand, but I'm in the libertarian/minarchist/right area of the political landscape, so not entirely surprising.