Are Consumerism and planned Obsolescence Really Bad?

[Shakuhachi]

They keep the economy going. The more we buy, the more we need to produce, the more people we need to employ. The greater concern seems to be the waste and the damage to the environment.

 

[Glennon_P]

the waste and the damage to the environment.

That’s what drive me nuts about it.

I do agree with your first point about keeping people employed.

Years ago I was talking to an acquaintance of mine about a man we both knew who was building the first million-dollar house in our city. It was quite a sensation at the time. The person building the house was single and I commented about how wasteful it was for an 11,000-square-foot house to be built for one person.

My acquaintance, who ran an electrical contracting business, pointed out how many masons, electricians, carpenters, plumbers, landscape people, roofers, etc. had jobs that year because of that house being built.

Point well taken.

 

[AlbMagno]

The greater concern seems to be the waste and the damage to the environment.

That alone is enough to make it bad. The ends do not justify the means.

Also it’s dishonest in the case of a product’s part done intentionally worse to break sooner.

 

[Limoncello4021]

To me, “consumerism” is buying too much just to buy. That’s wrong: we should be careful with the money God gives us and use it wisely for our needs but not make spending and overindulging in goods a habit. Planned obsolescence is another thing entirely. It is very much a reality. We can fight it to the extent we are able by making necessary purchases wisely after sufficient research. I’m thinking big purchases like cars or kitchen appliances: it never pays in the long run to buy things that are cheaply made just because they are more inexpensive than other things. Buy quality and spend the money to get quality, but then plan to keep it for many years. In clothing, I focus on a simple wardrobe with classic well made clothes and quality fabrics with the intent on also keeping them for years. In short, try not to give in to a throw away culture.

 

[arvo]

I feel bad about that - why one should have big house and why others should be happy about the employment for such fake value creation. There are more meaningful ways to create value. E.g. we should create value for investing in science and development. The science requires investments for fighting cancer or (very hot theme) for fighting aging and achieving rejuvenation Turning back time with emerging rejuvenation strategies | Nature Cell Biology (regaining youth and avoiding death by aging), actually - many illnesses are due to aging and that is why they can be cured only with reversal of aging. I feel that creating technologies, materials for such investments in medical and supporting sciences is the real value creation.

Also - value creation for investments in robotics is very good - robotics can end exploitation and hard work. Robots help to survive in the times of pandemics - we see that governments can afford large stimulus without inflation - this can happen only due the installation of robot fleets. Such investments are good.

Also - value creation for supporting arts and literature and human development of all kinds - these are the things that I value and that is the right way to use wealth.

I guess that my line of thinking are closer to the Catholic spirit than the provided vignette.

And there are log of technologies for handling waste - e.g. Finland has waster sorting robots, there are ongoing research and development on full chemical recycling of plastics, about clean energy, etc. All this is about investing more in good causes and moving investments for just the sake of exhibiting pride.

 

[TK421]

They keep the economy going. The more we buy, the more we need to produce, the more people we need to employ. The greater concern seems to be the waste and the damage to the environment.

Employment in itself isn’t a good thing if it’s just having people produce things that don’t benefit the physical/mental/spiritual wellbeing of people, and a significant portion of the manufacturing and service industry is questionable in terms of what benefit it brings to people. People blow a lot of money for short-term rewards.

Being busy and being productive aren’t the same thing.

But, we live in a democracy (sort of). So yeah, any appeal to jobs is probably going to be popular regardless of the longer-term implications. There probably won’t be aggressive reform until people start dying by the millions and it becomes a popular thing to do.

People are already dying by the millions from air pollution but that doesn’t count because it’s too hidden. Mass floods and droughts and fires and such will do it.

 

[arvo]

Buy quality and spend the money to get quality, but then plan to keep it for many years. In clothing, I focus on a simple wardrobe with classic well made clothes and quality fabrics with the intent on also keeping them for years. In short, try not to give in to a throw away culture.

There are people - financially constrained households - who just can not afford such investment-style approach. The can afford only the cheapest even if it not the wisest choice. The same goes with education - it is worth to pay for it, but there are lot of people who just can not make this choice - invest in education and skills. That is why some kind of redistribution is required, that is Catholic redistribution for the Common good.

 

[ralfyman]

They are some of the effects of free market capitalism, where businesses competing with each other have to produce and sell more, even if it means overproduction and overconsumption. Investments (including returns from them) are used for the same ends.

 

[Athanasiy]

The richer the society, the more satisfying life, the more wider the consumerism moods and the higher self respect.
For example, newly arrived emigrant to the West, who works double shift can buy even lord-pork and cheap but satisfying thrifty economic food but when the same person gets to his feet, he begins to respect himself.
Allows weekends, spends for pleasant recreation.
Buys fish and healthy, high-quality and not cheap products, because what in a third world countries people call luxuries, on the West its necessities.
It’s natural, accessible and normal.
It might be that people from a third world countries can rightly condemn a Western citizen, but at the same time, by the wheel of life in Western world consumerism often takes place as a vital necessity.

 

[otjm]

Also - value creation for investments in robotics is very good - robotics can end exploitation and hard work

Robotics used, for example, in the manufacture of automobiles has reduced a workforce of middle class wages jobs. Not sure where those displaced workers are going to go, or where someone with the mechanical skills but not yet employed (e.g. someone graudating froma trade school) is boing to be employed - meaning the cost of the training is wasted, and the liklihood is they are going to end up being employed at a lower and less skilled job.

Once upon a time fast food restaurants were the employment ground for high school students; those who worked hard and took as many hours as they could, often were able to pay for a first car, or pay part of their tuition after high school.

While there are still high school studnents employed in such jobs, they mnnow have to compete with adults who have low level skills, or have higher level skills but cannot find employment for those dkills, and at least here in Oregon one localk chin was the target of the ILWU, who finally got thier nose under the tent flap demanding higher than minimum wages; and to absolutely no one’s surprise except the “useful idiots” wroking int he stores voting for unionization, layoff’s started immdeiately, with robotics replacing some of the workers. “It’s not FAIR!” they screamed.

My answer on that one was “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it” and “Welcome to the world of unintended consequences”.

And one final comment: “hard work never hurt anybody”. Not everyone is capable of being a software engineer; some are ditch diggers or loggers or employed in other :hard work" jobs. And most of them made a living at it and raised a family with the wages earned.

 

[otjm]

People are already dying by the millions from air pollution but that doesn’t count because it’s too hidden.

Most who are dying from air pollution are in third world countries as the air in foirst world countries is far better. India and China are the worst polluters.

Mass floods and droughts and fires and such will do it.

Mass floods, particularly in the states in the south and south east, are due to massive building in areas that were “reclaimed”. When storms which in the past did little damage now do multi millions of damage with each storm are doing so because more and more people have flocked to those areas and built homes and businesses. Hurricanes have been hitting Florida since the time the mind of man remembereth not. And man not only remembereth not, but doesn’t learn. It is akin to building within the shake area of the San Andreas fault. There is an earthquake and your house is destroyed? Well, what did you expect?

In spite of the “gem” of a governor we have in Oregon, serious dry periods with a wind coming out of Canada at 40 to 60 mph is about a once in a century occurrence, and those who built towns, homes, businesses, etc. in heavily forested mountainous areas have lost their homes, etc. It is a tragedy, but it was a tragedy that anyone paying attention should have understood that the law of averages was eventually going to win.

And she knee jerks it “Climate Change!”

Climate, as one wag put it, has been changing since God was a little girl" (and with no disrespect to God intended - it was not intended when it was made) and will continue to change into the future, whether that is due to man-caused (name removed by moderator)ut or natural (e.g. eruptions) caused (name removed by moderator)ut.

well before she was born, the state lost some 3,400,000 acres of forests between about 1909 and 1959; actually more than that as I did not count the years in which we lost less than 100,000 acres. amazingly, it plummeted after about 1959 in large part due to better methods of putting out forest fires (planes and helicopters). But lack of thorough forest management led to the “perfect storm”.

 

[Xarto]

It’s a fine line, we are also creating huge amount of waste. I find that I’m only getting one, two years tops out of my washing machines and dryers no matter what brand I go with. They are also made to be disposable as it’s more expensive to repair them than buy new ones.

Also with electronics etc you probably aren’t employing local workers but foreign companies.

 

[Dan123]

Once upon a time fast food restaurants were the employment ground for high school students;

Did the fast food restaurants close during the day on school days?

 

[Gab123]

I think it’s also part of the culture of waste and consumerism.

 

[Gab123]

In the past a good pair of shoes¡¡ lasted a long time, and cobbles repaired soles on the same shoes to last many years.

 

[arvo]

And one final comment: “hard work never hurt anybody”. Not everyone is capable of being a software engineer; some are ditch diggers or loggers or employed in other :hard work" jobs. And most of them made a living at it and raised a family with the wages earned.

It is bad myth - everyone can be have good education and shine in more or less intellectual or artistic world - but lot of detailed education work and mentoring is required. That is why I prefer social-liberalism - it is for giving resources for everyone to develop his or her skills and capabilities. From my education I have learned a lot of tricks for myself that could help others, but I have lot of other stuff to do than share them. But there are lot of things in current education systems that prohibits the development of human beings. Obsession with geniuses is one of them. In reality - Einstein did not come in the desert, equations of his Special relativity were already known 30 years ago to Lorentz and dismissed by being funny. General relativity is just rewriting or already known math by that time. Obsession with the glory of the past is another obstacle to good education. There are so many challenges ripe for discovery today, much more than 100 years ago, and there are established methods how to do them.

And software engineering today is becoming blue collar job but machine learning and big data engineering is becoming automated and there are lot of ongoing work on the automated program synthesis. So - everyone should aspire for more, the world develops and that is good.

Let us wish and pray that more investment and money goes into fields that really created new things, new value, really helps all the people to live better lives and helps animals to experience less sufferings.

Politics can help here too.

 

[AlbMagno]

Climate, as one wag put it, has been changing since God was a little girl" (and with no disrespect to God intended - it was not intended when it was made) and will continue to change into the future, whether that is due to man-caused (name removed by moderator)ut or natural (e.g. eruptions) caused (name removed by moderator)ut.

But minimizing the man-made caused (name removed by moderator)ut can help, can’t it?

I think we will be hearing people use that argument that “Climate always changes” for milleniums, and every time we will have to repeat this same counter argument

 

[arvo]

I think we will be hearing people use that argument that “Climate always changes” for milleniums, and every time we will have to repeat this same counter argument

I wonder about this kind of thinking - searching what changes of the climate and that all human-made changes should be reversed. Instead - as a technoutopist - I am all for the climate engineering and it is irrelevant what caused the climate changes (it is relevant only for the determination of the mechanics of climate control). The question should be - what is the optimal climate for the people (and it involves all the game theory and economic theory for the fairness and justice and the Common good, of course) and then we just implement this optimal climate. There are emerging tools for the climate engineering/geoengineering. We should not stick with the climate that is naturally emerged during millions of years, we should get climate we need, that is the basics. There is no equation natural=optimal=good.

 

[blackforest]

The greater concern seems to be the waste and the damage to the environment.

In other words, yes, they can be bad.

There are sustainable ways to build the economy, e.g. more local, sustainable farms and employment in alternative energy programs.

Also, depending on how old you are, you may or may not remember Paul Tsongas. But while making his bid for presidency, he made the case that saving is just as important, (if not more so), as spending for the economy. People going into debt in order to “support the economy” is an unsustainable, short-term, and self-imploding “solution.”

 

[AlbMagno]

I study environmental engineering, so I know about that kind of technologies (which are experimental still). What I know is that climate engineering shouldn’t be used as an excuse to pollute more. It should go hand in hand with sustainable policies.

And I think the climate we had pre-industrial era is fine as an objective. We are talking at a ±30ºC range (the range of temperature at which a human could survive), so we don’t have many temperatures to choose…