PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
The wonderful capitalist corporations who bring us all the amazing products we consume are motivated by competition of the free market to produce disposable products.
"Planned obsolescence tends to work best when a producer has at least an oligopoly.[4] Before introducing a planned obsolescence, the producer has to know that the customer is at least somewhat likely to buy a replacement from them (see brand loyalty). In these cases of planned obsolescence, there is an information asymmetry between the producer, who knows how long the product was designed to last, and the customer, who does not. When a market becomes more competitive, product lifespans tend to increase.[5][6] For example, when Japanese vehicles with longer lifespans entered the American market in the 1960s and 1970s, American carmakers were forced to respond by building more durable products."
Wiki
Cars are just an example. And most of them are actually recycled.
What about all those products that end up in a landfill?
Just how long do we expect that we can do this?
We extract raw materials from the Earth. We turn them into products. We use them for a while (Sometimes a very short duration and most popular is single use.) Then we pay for garbage service to cart the stuff off to the landfill, and to bury it.
How many centuries is that supposed to be sustainable?
Are we being greedy by thinking we should have a right to do this even though we know that people a few hundred years from now cannot possibly continue as we have done?
Why don't we make higher quality products that last much longer?
We have durable goods. They are supposed to last a few years. That's pretty amazing in this world. Most of the products out there don't last very long at all. They are not supposed to. They are junk. Most of what we build and consume is junk. We only rent for a little while on it's way to it's eventual destination for all time, the land fill.
Obviously, capitalism doesn't care about this. Not in the least. It is of no concern at all. It doesn't cost manufacturers anything if they impact our world in this way by building and selling junk. Capitalism doesn't see this as a problem.
Society, on the other hand, DOES have very good reasons to see this as a problem. It's not sustainable, and we are using up raw resources with no idea of what we will do when things start running out.
We need to get more advanced in how we manage resources. But capitalism isn't pushing technology to do that. After all, capitalism has no reason to do that. Society has a reason. That's why society needs to do something. What can society do to manage the way capitalism works for it? Society can direct it's government to regulate capitalism to make capitalism do what society wants and needs.
If we had a tax on manufacturing that hit the producers of land-fill materials with the costs of disposing of what they produce, they would be coaxed to produce higher quality products which would last longer. The longer the life of the products, the lower the tax. Single-use manufacturers would pay the most. Ideally that tax would gradually progress higher and higher over time until it simply became unprofitable to produce single-use products. That would be the long-term goal. And all those people working in that segment would know it and have plenty of time to prepare and shift into more sustainable work.
We need a Waste Stream Tax on manufacturers.
Which, of course, they would respond to by, not only making longer lasting products, but charging more for them. We would have to pay higher prices for things. But that would still work for us, because we would not have to replace things so often. In the long run it would really save us all money and save the environment. We wouldn't have to use as much energy transporting things around, such as the delivery of the product to home or store, or the trip to the store to get it, or the hauling of the waste stream to the landfill, and the running of bulldozers at the landfill to bury it.
Product producers are sort of passing off their responsibility to the environment and the future, and we are paying for it by paying for waste disposal and more transportation than needed. We, the masses, are picking up the slack for they, the owners of great capital and big corporations. Electronic products are among some of the worst. It is absurd to get a new cell phone every year just to have the latest and the greatest. You can't have that. That's like trying to own a new car. You can buy a new car, but you can't own one. As soon as you drive it off the lot, it is a used car. And as soon as you get your new phone, it is an old phone. It is a fool's game chasing the marketer's lure. Nobody needs a new phone every year. Maybe there should be a tax on buying phones too often!
Sometimes it is refreshing to step back and take a look at the big picture.
We have to balance freedom with human sustainability. Neither is unlimited.
"Planned obsolescence tends to work best when a producer has at least an oligopoly.[4] Before introducing a planned obsolescence, the producer has to know that the customer is at least somewhat likely to buy a replacement from them (see brand loyalty). In these cases of planned obsolescence, there is an information asymmetry between the producer, who knows how long the product was designed to last, and the customer, who does not. When a market becomes more competitive, product lifespans tend to increase.[5][6] For example, when Japanese vehicles with longer lifespans entered the American market in the 1960s and 1970s, American carmakers were forced to respond by building more durable products."
Wiki
Cars are just an example. And most of them are actually recycled.
What about all those products that end up in a landfill?
Just how long do we expect that we can do this?
We extract raw materials from the Earth. We turn them into products. We use them for a while (Sometimes a very short duration and most popular is single use.) Then we pay for garbage service to cart the stuff off to the landfill, and to bury it.
How many centuries is that supposed to be sustainable?
Are we being greedy by thinking we should have a right to do this even though we know that people a few hundred years from now cannot possibly continue as we have done?
Why don't we make higher quality products that last much longer?
We have durable goods. They are supposed to last a few years. That's pretty amazing in this world. Most of the products out there don't last very long at all. They are not supposed to. They are junk. Most of what we build and consume is junk. We only rent for a little while on it's way to it's eventual destination for all time, the land fill.
Obviously, capitalism doesn't care about this. Not in the least. It is of no concern at all. It doesn't cost manufacturers anything if they impact our world in this way by building and selling junk. Capitalism doesn't see this as a problem.
Society, on the other hand, DOES have very good reasons to see this as a problem. It's not sustainable, and we are using up raw resources with no idea of what we will do when things start running out.
We need to get more advanced in how we manage resources. But capitalism isn't pushing technology to do that. After all, capitalism has no reason to do that. Society has a reason. That's why society needs to do something. What can society do to manage the way capitalism works for it? Society can direct it's government to regulate capitalism to make capitalism do what society wants and needs.
If we had a tax on manufacturing that hit the producers of land-fill materials with the costs of disposing of what they produce, they would be coaxed to produce higher quality products which would last longer. The longer the life of the products, the lower the tax. Single-use manufacturers would pay the most. Ideally that tax would gradually progress higher and higher over time until it simply became unprofitable to produce single-use products. That would be the long-term goal. And all those people working in that segment would know it and have plenty of time to prepare and shift into more sustainable work.
We need a Waste Stream Tax on manufacturers.
Which, of course, they would respond to by, not only making longer lasting products, but charging more for them. We would have to pay higher prices for things. But that would still work for us, because we would not have to replace things so often. In the long run it would really save us all money and save the environment. We wouldn't have to use as much energy transporting things around, such as the delivery of the product to home or store, or the trip to the store to get it, or the hauling of the waste stream to the landfill, and the running of bulldozers at the landfill to bury it.
Product producers are sort of passing off their responsibility to the environment and the future, and we are paying for it by paying for waste disposal and more transportation than needed. We, the masses, are picking up the slack for they, the owners of great capital and big corporations. Electronic products are among some of the worst. It is absurd to get a new cell phone every year just to have the latest and the greatest. You can't have that. That's like trying to own a new car. You can buy a new car, but you can't own one. As soon as you drive it off the lot, it is a used car. And as soon as you get your new phone, it is an old phone. It is a fool's game chasing the marketer's lure. Nobody needs a new phone every year. Maybe there should be a tax on buying phones too often!
Sometimes it is refreshing to step back and take a look at the big picture.
We have to balance freedom with human sustainability. Neither is unlimited.
