Andrewf20 wrote: » My mums garden strimmer was acting up before (intermittently cutting out). She brought it to a garden shop who recommended just binning it and buy a new one, maybe the motor was broken. I took a look and found that the live wire was cut through the insulation. A 15 minute repair job had it sorted and it's still working to this day.
mariaalice wrote: » We all can't continue to consume in the same way as we have in a planet with finite resources. So how would our new life look, a life where we consume less ( consume less of what? ) do art ( even for those who do not have the talent or interest in art ) promote communities ( how exactly? and what does that mean? )
Bob Harris wrote: » Inspiring! Reducing consumption dramatically would be a catastrophe for capitalism and in turn cause huge disruption worldwide. Huge unemployment and social unrest, a collapse in the social welfare system, the banking system. The list goes on.
ToddyDoody wrote: » Because he wanted to fix a strimmer? Capitalism works for me. I dont work for capitalism.
completedit wrote: » It’s too hard to change, our society is geared to make people think that success is equaled to having stuff. Having stuff gives people a tangible goal that provides meaning. If we didn’t have the allure of stuff and with relgion’s waning importance, what is left to strive for?
Purgative wrote: » I'd agree with AnfrewF. I bought some veg thing the other day in Lidl - it was grown in Vietnam, processed in south Africa and the flown to me all for 79c. Madness. When we first moved back here we decided to grow potatoes. Digging them is back breaking. It took me an hour to fill a big bag. Lovely spuds but ....
Irish Guitarist wrote: » With all the things being taxed and banned it baffles me that you can still buy cheap AA and AAA single use batteries. You could buy a packet of 16 batteries or something for a couple of euro but they last no length. They're some of the most wasteful products around. You don't see the government doing ad campaigns encouraging people to buy a battery charger and some rechargeable batteries though. Another thing that pisses me off is all the different type of lithium-ion phone and camera batteries. I've bought loads of digital cameras over the years and every one requires buying a new type of battery. Many of them use the same voltage batteries and I'm sure if they were standardised and made the same shape they'd work in different camera. It isn't enough to buy a new camera from Sony though, they want another €40 or €50 for a battery too and they don't want you using it in a Canon or Nikon, nor do Canon or Nikon want you using their batteries in a Sony camera.
Purgative wrote: » When we first moved back here we decided to grow potatoes. Digging them is back breaking. It took me an hour to fill a big bag. Lovely spuds but ....
Wibbs wrote: » ...Cars are a good example of this. They are purposely designed to run well for a period of time, backed up by dealer only warranties for when they don't and then to be uneconomical to repair. This is madness, especially when we have had the tech since at least the 90's to make cars that could last far far longer and be easier to repair. Sticking batteries or fuel cells into them will do nothing for this wasteful product cycle. It may even make things worse as marketing will convince people they need the latest Car 2.1 and they could become more like IT devices to be replaced entirely every few years.
Mr. Incognito wrote: » It works in practice because the small percentage of the worlds's wealthy are serviced by the vast majority of low wage workers who create all these products at basically slave labour. Its unsustainable. Any time there is vast inequality there is war. It's inevitable. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Badly Drunk Boy wrote: » The problem is that everything is made to fail after a certain (short) amount of time, and when the obsolescence is in-built, people accept that and scramble to get the next upgrade, whether it's a phone or a telly or whatever.
Wibbs wrote: » ...Now I can somewhat understand IT stuff like phones, computers and even tellies as they've evolved going obsolete, but keeping food cool and washing and drying clothes? Utter bollocks.
jimgoose wrote: » Ever wonder why big trucks run for millions of miles with very little trouble, and those huge Caterpillar machines typically serve for decades, with Cat supporting a "rip out/repair/refurbish" service? It's because commercial operators don't put up with the sort of bollocks outlined in your rather decent post.
Wibbs wrote: » ...as far as carbon footprints go I'm way ahead of some knit your own muesli vegan sandal wearer who has bought a new Prius every few years and is now in a second gen Nissan Leaf thinking he's saving the penguins.
Bob Harris wrote: » I've read a few times that if all of the world's wealth was equally distributed it would take only a couple of generations to find it's way back into the hands it was taken from.
jimgoose wrote: » I had to scrap my 20-year-old Jaaaaag at the start of this year, and now I drive a 2011 Focus turbodiesel that does 60mpg and requires no solid jade nor Unobtanium neither!
Wibbs wrote: » And it's a stupid theory as it is completely unprovable. Generally only believed by the daft like libertarians or the naive, or dumb.
Wibbs wrote: » aye J, but it's only 8 years old, when and if it gets to 20, watch how hard parts will be to source then. That said the motoring landscape will have changed a lot in the next couple of decades.
biko wrote: » We need to stop the emerging middle classes in India, China and Africa. It's not sustainable for them to consume in that way.