4 ms·

> But we still want the convenience of walking down to their neighborhood store, so we've constructed an entire economic system built on shipping things in disp

by mlyle 4y ago

> But we still want the convenience of walking down to their neighborhood store, so we've constructed an entire economic system built on shipping things in disposable boxes around the globe and getting them to people's doorsteps within two business days. 1. Generally they don't come from across the globe to your doorstep after your order, but from a nearby fulfillment center. 2. Getting things quickly from online shopping is just as nice in cities (actually nicer, because you can get a broader variety of goods quickly) as in suburbs.

woodruffw 4y ago
Where, pray tell, does the fulfillment center receive them from? Shipping happens regardless (I know my local hardware store doesn't make vacuum cleaners), but the waste of individual boxes and delivery for every single item on demand is obscene. You're right that it's just as nice in cities, if not nicer. But that doesn't make it right, and it doesn't make it not a maladaptation within our economic system.
- mlyle 4y ago
  > Where, pray tell, does the fulfillment center receive them from? Shipping happens regardless (I know my local hardware store doesn't make vacuum cleaners), Yes, the steps before are very similar to fulfillment centers vs. to distribution centers servicing retail and to individual retail stores (not quite the same-- you need somewhat more fulfillment centers). It's just the last step from the fulfillment center to your house that are different.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    > It's just the last step from the fulfillment center to your house that are different. Right. It's that last step I'm criticizing. But even the former deserves some amount of attention, given the scale and proliferation of disposable consumption that Amazon has encouraged.
    - mlyle 4y ago
      > Right. It's that last step I'm criticizing. OK, then mentioning across the globe was not core to your argument (and thus I picked at it).
- mlyle 4y ago
  > You're right that it's just as nice in cities, if not nicer. But that doesn't make it right, and it doesn't make it not a maladaptation within our economic system. Also, please note... a frequent mistake in economics is to conflate positive statements ("Ordering online causes additional emissions and use of cardboard and packaging products") with normative statements ("it is wrong to waste cardboard and emit carbon for the convenience of online shopping"). Every agent in the economic system has their own normative beliefs and utility function. Hume showed us you can't get to the normative statement through positive observations.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    > Hume showed us you can't get to the normative statement through positive observations. Hume and I disagree :-) The original comment was a normative one: I think our current scheme is wrong, in a moral sense. I think it's also wrong in an economic sense, but that's just a cherry on top.
    - mlyle 4y ago
      > I think our current scheme is wrong, in a moral sense If we had, say, 1000x the resources that could be used without too adverse of consequences, would it still be wrong in your eyes? Or are you saying that you don't believe that the resource use is justified within our current constraints?
      - woodruffw 4y ago
        The latter. But that's one among many sufficient reasons: I also think it's indicative of an economic and social policy that encourages civic alienation and delocalization. The more snappy way of saying it: we're maximizing short term advantages (any plastic crap I want in 48 hours, shareholder value) at the cost of long term advantages (cities and towns worth living in, a sense of community rooted in part in supporting local businesses, not needing surveillance in every aspect of our lives because we've automated out the tacit security of being around other humans.)
- kelnos 4y ago
  > Where, pray tell, does the fulfillment center receive them from? Shipping happens regardless (I know my local hardware store doesn't make vacuum cleaners) Yes, exactly -- the shipping happens regardless. It's certainly more efficient to ship 20 of each widget to a store than it is to ship 20 widgets to 20 homes, though. But then people have to get to the store to buy those widgets, and often they will drive to get there (not everything is going to be available within walking distance). > but the waste of individual boxes [...] is obscene. Yes, this is bad. Personally I try to mitigate this by batching my purchases so more things arrive per box (admittedly, sometimes I don't do this), but some shippers will still break up a single order into multiple boxes spread over several days, which sucks. I do occasionally end up with an item that's shipped directly in its own packaging (that is, no extra box around the item, and it arrives in the same box that I would have picked up off a store shelf), but this is pretty rare, and of course there are many items where this wouldn't work (and would be more wasteful, not less). > But that doesn't make it right I'm curious as to how you're defining "right" and "wrong" here, and it does feel like some of your argument is based on "this feels icky and anti-social", and not entirely on objectively-bad externalities. I think the transportation aspect of these deliveries is a bit overblown, as transportation has to happen regardless, and people driving to a store to buy things is probably not much better (and is sometimes worse) than a box truck or van stopping door-to-door to drop things off (walking to a store would be the ideal, but I suspect this wouldn't replace as much driving or online ordering as we'd expect, even in places where it's possible). The packaging waste is definitely a consideration, but I've seen this getting better over time, with more reusable/recyclable paper products being used, and less plastic. We still have a ways to go here, though. To be clear: I do agree with you that much of this is objectively worse than visiting a store to make the same purchase, but I think calling it "obscene" is an overreaction.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    > but some shippers will still break up a single order into multiple boxes spread over several days, which sucks. I'd almost swear Amazon does this maliciously. One item per box. Unless you have a small delicate item and a large heavy item, in which case they put them in the same box with no void fill. Usually doesn't obviously damage the small delicate item, but I have to wonder if it's subtly damaged, etc, for the experience.

by mlyle 4y ago

woodruffw 4y ago

Where, pray tell, does the fulfillment center receive them from? Shipping happens regardless (I know my local hardware store doesn't make vacuum cleaners), but the waste of individual boxes and delivery for every single item on demand is obscene. You're right that it's just as nice in cities, if not nicer. But that doesn't make it right, and it doesn't make it not a maladaptation within our economic system.

mlyle 4y ago
> Where, pray tell, does the fulfillment center receive them from? Shipping happens regardless (I know my local hardware store doesn't make vacuum cleaners), Yes, the steps before are very similar to fulfillment centers vs. to distribution centers servicing retail and to individual retail stores (not quite the same-- you need somewhat more fulfillment centers). It's just the last step from the fulfillment center to your house that are different.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  > It's just the last step from the fulfillment center to your house that are different. Right. It's that last step I'm criticizing. But even the former deserves some amount of attention, given the scale and proliferation of disposable consumption that Amazon has encouraged.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    > Right. It's that last step I'm criticizing. OK, then mentioning across the globe was not core to your argument (and thus I picked at it).
mlyle 4y ago
> You're right that it's just as nice in cities, if not nicer. But that doesn't make it right, and it doesn't make it not a maladaptation within our economic system. Also, please note... a frequent mistake in economics is to conflate positive statements ("Ordering online causes additional emissions and use of cardboard and packaging products") with normative statements ("it is wrong to waste cardboard and emit carbon for the convenience of online shopping"). Every agent in the economic system has their own normative beliefs and utility function. Hume showed us you can't get to the normative statement through positive observations.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  > Hume showed us you can't get to the normative statement through positive observations. Hume and I disagree :-) The original comment was a normative one: I think our current scheme is wrong, in a moral sense. I think it's also wrong in an economic sense, but that's just a cherry on top.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    > I think our current scheme is wrong, in a moral sense If we had, say, 1000x the resources that could be used without too adverse of consequences, would it still be wrong in your eyes? Or are you saying that you don't believe that the resource use is justified within our current constraints?
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      The latter. But that's one among many sufficient reasons: I also think it's indicative of an economic and social policy that encourages civic alienation and delocalization. The more snappy way of saying it: we're maximizing short term advantages (any plastic crap I want in 48 hours, shareholder value) at the cost of long term advantages (cities and towns worth living in, a sense of community rooted in part in supporting local businesses, not needing surveillance in every aspect of our lives because we've automated out the tacit security of being around other humans.)
kelnos 4y ago
> Where, pray tell, does the fulfillment center receive them from? Shipping happens regardless (I know my local hardware store doesn't make vacuum cleaners) Yes, exactly -- the shipping happens regardless. It's certainly more efficient to ship 20 of each widget to a store than it is to ship 20 widgets to 20 homes, though. But then people have to get to the store to buy those widgets, and often they will drive to get there (not everything is going to be available within walking distance). > but the waste of individual boxes [...] is obscene. Yes, this is bad. Personally I try to mitigate this by batching my purchases so more things arrive per box (admittedly, sometimes I don't do this), but some shippers will still break up a single order into multiple boxes spread over several days, which sucks. I do occasionally end up with an item that's shipped directly in its own packaging (that is, no extra box around the item, and it arrives in the same box that I would have picked up off a store shelf), but this is pretty rare, and of course there are many items where this wouldn't work (and would be more wasteful, not less). > But that doesn't make it right I'm curious as to how you're defining "right" and "wrong" here, and it does feel like some of your argument is based on "this feels icky and anti-social", and not entirely on objectively-bad externalities. I think the transportation aspect of these deliveries is a bit overblown, as transportation has to happen regardless, and people driving to a store to buy things is probably not much better (and is sometimes worse) than a box truck or van stopping door-to-door to drop things off (walking to a store would be the ideal, but I suspect this wouldn't replace as much driving or online ordering as we'd expect, even in places where it's possible). The packaging waste is definitely a consideration, but I've seen this getting better over time, with more reusable/recyclable paper products being used, and less plastic. We still have a ways to go here, though. To be clear: I do agree with you that much of this is objectively worse than visiting a store to make the same purchase, but I think calling it "obscene" is an overreaction.
- mlyle 4y ago
  > but some shippers will still break up a single order into multiple boxes spread over several days, which sucks. I'd almost swear Amazon does this maliciously. One item per box. Unless you have a small delicate item and a large heavy item, in which case they put them in the same box with no void fill. Usually doesn't obviously damage the small delicate item, but I have to wonder if it's subtly damaged, etc, for the experience.