General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDo you think the increased ordering stuff online has...
.... increased or decreased traffic? The way I see it, most of the things delivered by an Amazon truck or UPS would have required an individual to get themselves to a store. A bunch would use public transport, but wouldn't most drive their cars? A trip for each couple of things??
Where am I thinking wrong here?
tia
las
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,570 posts)When ordering online they usually don't. If I want to get something through Amazon I might order only that item or maybe only a few items, but when I'm out shopping I'll try to be efficient and get all the things I need in one trip even if I have to visit more than one store. So my use of my car to shop is usually more efficient than my use of Amazon or other online sellers.
procon
(15,805 posts)Sometimes I order individual items when I need it fast. But usually I spend several days browsing through Amazon in my PJs from the comfort of my recliner, adding items to my order as I think about what I need for the next couple of months. I try to plan ahead and keep well stocked with supplies.
If I had to shop in town I'd have to drive to several different stores to get everything on my list and that's a huge waste of my time, effort and gas. To be honest, I really dislike shopping because of the traffic, inconvenience of parking, rude people and poor customer service, and I hate it when I find out a particular item I need is out of stock. A shopping trip consumes the better part of a day, leaves me so exhausted I cant do anything the rest of the day.
I think online shopping is more efficient in terms of time and conservation. Instead of many people driving their own cars and shopping independently, companies like Amazon use mass transit to ship multiple orders at the same time. When UPS or the USPS delivers my order, they are also delivering to dozens of other people in my area at the same time.
C_U_L8R
(44,982 posts)Streets are clogged with Ubers circling our blocks, stopping randomly, annoying everyone.
And even store aisles are jammed up with professional shoppers filling carts for instant delivery.
I think we are in an awkward in-between time right now - but hopefully heading towards more shared and public transportation services. And less about individual car ownership and use.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Myself, when we do errands we consolidate them, one trip in our ancient, fuel efficient, low emission Prius to stop at a few places all at once and get everything we need for the week or even month.
We recently took a road trip to visit an elderly parent, and I couldnt believe the number of giant Amazon trucks glutting the road. Those semis have to transfer packages to other trucks for delivery: a single box of dishcloths, or a bottle of moisturizer in each one, each and every day. I do not see that as a savings at all in terms of the environment or, perhaps, traffic.
But the real traffic problem, if you live in an urban area are all the Ubers and Lyfts roaming around. It has to be controlled.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"Where am I thinking wrong here?"
Lack of data to analyse (e.g., number crunching) from which to project a result. Without data, any result we imagine would be little more than a guess.
LAS14
(13,767 posts)Backseat Driver
(4,377 posts)that precludes both running around for the shopping experience or supporting home deliveries. After what happened in our family, I'm just plain fed up with the rich employers getting richer through "our" efforts for little more than minimum wage that will only raise our tax bracket. I feel no particular need - oh, there are wants, but a crappy job just won't ever make my dreams possible now -- the peace of mind of having what's necessary for what ails me (better healthcare above Medicare--dental, vision, hearing and that 20% that goes uncovered), to enjoy our own home with a yard/pets/garden and be confident that replacing things like major appliances/maintenance chores was also doable; to attend local events that require a ticket or an extra tank of gas to even get there in a reliable, well-maintained vehicle--(finally running well after nearly a year of small spaced repairs, and I've got a list of small local farm stores I'd like to visit and support with a purchase--some of which require a day-trip); heck, a nice gift or flowers for a sick friend isn't even possible.
We've got what we need and can't be frivolous with the dreams - so why leave home where "expensive bad things" could cut into rent, utilities, and groceries -- besides, I've got the memories, right? It's not "living," anymore, just surviving, but I'm content to do what I want when I want at home on no particular schedule or by anybody else's rules or regulations, being grateful that it could be a whole hell-of-a-lot worse (of which I am reminded by what's in the news daily). I've held a theory that's been around just too long; that you can have the funds or have the time, but never-to-rarely both at the same time, which is why those times are so special, and for which you pay with the bad stuff soon following that special outing.
Your son may call it "agoraphobia," but believe me, I'd "go out" much more if there was the confidence that the family and/or myself would have the funds the two of us could meet to resolve the possible problems found "out there."
abqtommy
(14,118 posts)some people and bad for others. My preference is for minimizing my online shopping since I like to be around people and get out of the house but, as always, I do what works best for me. You get to decide the same.