▲ 128 ▼ Denmark becomes first country in world to end letter delivery (www.abc.net.au) submitted 10 months ago by Deceptichum to c/world 58 comments fedilink hide all child comments After 401 years, the Danish postal service has ended letter deliveries as the country fully embraces the digital age.
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 10 months ago (5 children) They sure weren't permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 9 points 10 months ago (4 children) Reading the article they went from 1.5b in 2000 to 110m last year. That doesn't sound like an insignificant amount after all. This sounds like a bad move. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) While it sounds like a lot in a raw number,that's not much for a population of 5.5million people for an entire year. Besides, most of that was bills and correspondence from the government, things that have no reason for still being snail mail. This sounds like a bad move. Based on incomplete and misinterpreted data, sure. Based on the realities here in Denmark? Not really. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago (2 children) FYI, this is very similar to what is going on in Canada right now: the post is a crown corporation, meaning it's a federal entity funded by the public through taxes and the carrier fees. Package delivery is their highest volume, but they have an exclusive right to letter mail. The government was debating axing the service, but the postal union pushed back hard with month long strikes. The argument for axing the service has two flaws: corporations will fill in the gap: they will not. They will take over the service and monopolize it (or collude). And when it's a necessity that people have to rely on, they will jack up prices and ask for government subsidy to keep it going. Basically all that was created was a middleman taking their cut... the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable. Sure, it's nice when they are, but that's not the point of a service and the government can balance budget elsewhere, like selling energy for example. It's infrastructure, not a business venture. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (1 child) when it's a necessity that people have to rely on Which snail mail letters haven't been for decades, making your objections hypothetical at best. Everything that a snail mail letter can do, there's a better and easier alternative. It's the horse and buggy of correspondence. the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable THAT you're right about, at least. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. And the reactions of those of us not stuck in the distant past range from celebration that this antediluvian system is finally considered obsolete to a complete lack of interest in whether or not something utterly superfluous that nobody has needed for decades will continue to be done. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 1 point 10 months ago If they added a clause somewhere that they could spin the service up again when deemed necessary, that'd be fine. How will people receive their government IDs now? Or credit cards? Or postcards? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 9 points 10 months ago (4 children) Reading the article they went from 1.5b in 2000 to 110m last year. That doesn't sound like an insignificant amount after all. This sounds like a bad move. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) While it sounds like a lot in a raw number,that's not much for a population of 5.5million people for an entire year. Besides, most of that was bills and correspondence from the government, things that have no reason for still being snail mail. This sounds like a bad move. Based on incomplete and misinterpreted data, sure. Based on the realities here in Denmark? Not really. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago (2 children) FYI, this is very similar to what is going on in Canada right now: the post is a crown corporation, meaning it's a federal entity funded by the public through taxes and the carrier fees. Package delivery is their highest volume, but they have an exclusive right to letter mail. The government was debating axing the service, but the postal union pushed back hard with month long strikes. The argument for axing the service has two flaws: corporations will fill in the gap: they will not. They will take over the service and monopolize it (or collude). And when it's a necessity that people have to rely on, they will jack up prices and ask for government subsidy to keep it going. Basically all that was created was a middleman taking their cut... the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable. Sure, it's nice when they are, but that's not the point of a service and the government can balance budget elsewhere, like selling energy for example. It's infrastructure, not a business venture. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (1 child) when it's a necessity that people have to rely on Which snail mail letters haven't been for decades, making your objections hypothetical at best. Everything that a snail mail letter can do, there's a better and easier alternative. It's the horse and buggy of correspondence. the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable THAT you're right about, at least. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. And the reactions of those of us not stuck in the distant past range from celebration that this antediluvian system is finally considered obsolete to a complete lack of interest in whether or not something utterly superfluous that nobody has needed for decades will continue to be done. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 1 point 10 months ago If they added a clause somewhere that they could spin the service up again when deemed necessary, that'd be fine. How will people receive their government IDs now? Or credit cards? Or postcards? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) While it sounds like a lot in a raw number,that's not much for a population of 5.5million people for an entire year. Besides, most of that was bills and correspondence from the government, things that have no reason for still being snail mail. This sounds like a bad move. Based on incomplete and misinterpreted data, sure. Based on the realities here in Denmark? Not really. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago (2 children) FYI, this is very similar to what is going on in Canada right now: the post is a crown corporation, meaning it's a federal entity funded by the public through taxes and the carrier fees. Package delivery is their highest volume, but they have an exclusive right to letter mail. The government was debating axing the service, but the postal union pushed back hard with month long strikes. The argument for axing the service has two flaws: corporations will fill in the gap: they will not. They will take over the service and monopolize it (or collude). And when it's a necessity that people have to rely on, they will jack up prices and ask for government subsidy to keep it going. Basically all that was created was a middleman taking their cut... the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable. Sure, it's nice when they are, but that's not the point of a service and the government can balance budget elsewhere, like selling energy for example. It's infrastructure, not a business venture. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (1 child) when it's a necessity that people have to rely on Which snail mail letters haven't been for decades, making your objections hypothetical at best. Everything that a snail mail letter can do, there's a better and easier alternative. It's the horse and buggy of correspondence. the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable THAT you're right about, at least. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. And the reactions of those of us not stuck in the distant past range from celebration that this antediluvian system is finally considered obsolete to a complete lack of interest in whether or not something utterly superfluous that nobody has needed for decades will continue to be done. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 1 point 10 months ago If they added a clause somewhere that they could spin the service up again when deemed necessary, that'd be fine. How will people receive their government IDs now? Or credit cards? Or postcards? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago (2 children) FYI, this is very similar to what is going on in Canada right now: the post is a crown corporation, meaning it's a federal entity funded by the public through taxes and the carrier fees. Package delivery is their highest volume, but they have an exclusive right to letter mail. The government was debating axing the service, but the postal union pushed back hard with month long strikes. The argument for axing the service has two flaws: corporations will fill in the gap: they will not. They will take over the service and monopolize it (or collude). And when it's a necessity that people have to rely on, they will jack up prices and ask for government subsidy to keep it going. Basically all that was created was a middleman taking their cut... the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable. Sure, it's nice when they are, but that's not the point of a service and the government can balance budget elsewhere, like selling energy for example. It's infrastructure, not a business venture. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (1 child) when it's a necessity that people have to rely on Which snail mail letters haven't been for decades, making your objections hypothetical at best. Everything that a snail mail letter can do, there's a better and easier alternative. It's the horse and buggy of correspondence. the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable THAT you're right about, at least. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. And the reactions of those of us not stuck in the distant past range from celebration that this antediluvian system is finally considered obsolete to a complete lack of interest in whether or not something utterly superfluous that nobody has needed for decades will continue to be done. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 1 point 10 months ago If they added a clause somewhere that they could spin the service up again when deemed necessary, that'd be fine. How will people receive their government IDs now? Or credit cards? Or postcards? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (1 child) when it's a necessity that people have to rely on Which snail mail letters haven't been for decades, making your objections hypothetical at best. Everything that a snail mail letter can do, there's a better and easier alternative. It's the horse and buggy of correspondence. the service has to be profitable: it doesn't. Government services don't have to be profitable THAT you're right about, at least. So yes, as the lady said, the world is watching for sure. And the reactions of those of us not stuck in the distant past range from celebration that this antediluvian system is finally considered obsolete to a complete lack of interest in whether or not something utterly superfluous that nobody has needed for decades will continue to be done. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 1 point 10 months ago If they added a clause somewhere that they could spin the service up again when deemed necessary, that'd be fine. How will people receive their government IDs now? Or credit cards? Or postcards? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 1 point 10 months ago If they added a clause somewhere that they could spin the service up again when deemed necessary, that'd be fine. How will people receive their government IDs now? Or credit cards? Or postcards? permalink fedilink source parent