Happy Atheist Forum

General => Philosophy => Topic started by: Dave on May 11, 2018, 12:51:31 PM

Title: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 11, 2018, 12:51:31 PM
Or the consumer attitude at least. I feel this is enough of a thinking, moral thing to find its place here.

Today's BBC "Four Thought" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04md5b0) was on our consumer culture. I think it generalised a bit and left out many facets of the problem because it is such a brief slot - but it invoked thought (as intended). Being a consumer myself (did I really need new photographic kit or was I allowing myself to be led by desire, envy and greed, do I really need three new shirts . . . .) but also the poessessor of a fine guilt complex I am a bit torn.

We are bombarded by adverts, some with audio, some flashing, almost everytime we go on line - thankfully HAF is a haven free from advertising madness. Though I do see the occasional Tappatalk banner do I not? Luckily I am mostly "advert blind", can ignore them. (Except for the occasional outburst of, "NO! I do not want to buy a frigging whatsit, I have just frigging-well bought one!" But even that is a silent outburst and occurs less often with time.)

I do not feel that I am a truly conspicuous consumer, well maybe except a bit for tech gadgets and bits, and will mostly tailor my spends as a compromise with my perceived needs.

What say you on this subject?
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Davin on May 11, 2018, 03:16:12 PM
I think we should kill the advertising. It's become way too aggressive with all the data farming and personal tracking that only works a bit of the time. At least tone it down a lot. I wouldn't mind watching a commercial if it was only 30 seconds long and the only one per commercial break (unless they make the commercial breaks more frequent).

I'm already tired of the "this new version of the thing, is the best version!" Like it's supposed to be? If it were equal or less, then they shouldn't sell it. "Most advanced..." come on, man, just tell me what it is. We know that new things are usually improvements on old things. The phones look almost the same, work about as well as each other, so stop pretending that your thing is much better than another company's thing.

I don't think that will happen, I'm sure that there is no one saying that being more honest and less aggressive will improve sales. I'm sure that everyone will tell them that it won't, but badgering and misleading consumers will.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 11, 2018, 04:19:47 PM
Not disagreeing at all there, Davin.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Tom62 on May 11, 2018, 06:16:33 PM
I fully agree with you, Davin. Sometimes the only product improvements are that they reduce the contents; increased the price;  replaced more expensive items or ingredients by cheaper substitutes; make it non-repairable and non-upgradeable; have only limited lifetime support or ensure that it cannot use the accessories of the previous version(s).   
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 11, 2018, 06:28:02 PM
Quote from: Tom62 on May 11, 2018, 06:16:33 PM
I fully agree with you, Davin. Sometimes the only product improvements are that they reduce the contents; increased the price;  replaced more expensive items or ingredients by cheaper substitutes; make it non-repairable and non-upgradeable; have only limited lifetime support or ensure that it cannot use the accessories of the previous version(s).

Yup, there were some good utilities in Windows that are now pay-for add-ons on 10 whilst Microshit fills your hard drive. The actual dimensions of the pack of a favourite cereal bar stayed the same size, as did the price, whilst the bars inside shrunk. I do without it now. My waistline appreciates it.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Bad Penny II on May 12, 2018, 03:39:30 PM
I'm a consumer and though I reserve the right I'm not quite ready.
I'm ripe for being roused for violence on the the marketers though.

Toblerone, the mountain shape choc.
They increased the size of the valleys.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 12, 2018, 04:23:36 PM
Re-listening to the prog I realised now why I capitalised, "The Consumer."  It is not the buying public that is the target but the concept as a marketting strategy.

We have to acquire and consume goods to live - whether that is at the "subsistence/barter" level or the mass (sometimes over) produced stuff of tge "civilsed and developed world."

Yes, much of it due to marketing strategy and hype, but that started probably a couple of hundred years ago when industrialisation got a real grip. Greed, on the part of both suppliercand consumer, was bound to escalate the situation, positive feed-back. I got hit buy the "buy more, save more" ploy in Tesco. I wanted a piece of lamb, really like leg steaks well grilled, with garlic and rosemary . . . Where was I, oh yes, choice of minimum three pack, with a "Use by" date (even if home frozen it says) that mean me having lamb three days running. Looked on the butcher's counter - no leg steaks but I could have a slice of rump. Just cost me twice as much/kilo than the packaged stuff.

The single consumer is not well catered for in terms of fresh food in supermarkets.

Anyway, that's for tomorrow, tonight it is take-away Thai red curry (chicken) and spiced rice.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Arturo on May 13, 2018, 02:01:46 AM
It's okay. In 10 years we will all be dead due to the current course of world politics and robots taking all the jobs while the rich people get fat(er).
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Icarus on May 13, 2018, 10:56:53 PM
Planned obsolescence is a reality.  Sure enough there are products that are more practical to replace than to repair.

At the risk of partially derailing this thread, I have a story for which I'd like your opinion. It is about customer abuse....or not.

I have a close friend who lives in Kaunas Lithuania. He is not a conspiracy theorist but he is swearing to me that all automobiles sold in Lithuania are "seconds". That is the autos that are sent there to be sold are rejects or are inferior examples of the manufacturers standard product.  These autos are to be unloaded on the unwary or the helpless.

My friend gives me countless verifiable examples of that practice in his country.  I call bullshit on this notion but he is very convincing.  It is inconceivable to me that Toyota, Mazda, Ford or any other manufacturer would deliberately foist off an inferior vehicle on a consumer.   For example, no new auto can have a warranty that lasts past two years. Here in the US we have ordinary warranties on power trains for a hundred thousand miles or five years whichever is first.  I have 2004 Honda Element that has given me no expensive trouble since new. In Lithuania that car would have been consigned to the junk yard long ago. because it was a cull for sale only in Lithuania.

How come there are so many old but still functional Toyota pickup trucks in god forsaken places like Afghanistan, Sudan, and other poor countries?  Could or would papa Toyotasan  send their rejects to such places?  So alright,  the climate in Lithuania is not kind to machinery. Does that matter enough to make a big difference in manufacturer warranties?


Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: jumbojak on May 14, 2018, 01:30:48 AM
I imagine the climate does. Frame rot from salt has killed most of the older Toyota pickups. They used to be a dime a dozen but now a four wheel drive Toyota pickup from the early 90s is a highly valued truck, if it's safe to drive.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Arturo on May 14, 2018, 01:54:32 AM
Quote from: Icarus on May 13, 2018, 10:56:53 PM
It is inconceivable to me that Toyota, Mazda, Ford or any other manufacturer would deliberately foist off an inferior vehicle on a consumer.

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Davin on May 14, 2018, 02:53:32 PM
Quote from: Icarus on May 13, 2018, 10:56:53 PM
Planned obsolescence is a reality.  Sure enough there are products that are more practical to replace than to repair.
That is a big issue, also the right to repair is also an issue. Apple in a big way is trying to prevent people from repairing their phones at third party repair shops. Shops that will repair phones longer than Apple will.

This is a long video from this guy Louis Rossman who runs his own repair shop and runs live streams showing him repair various devices. I'm sorry, he tends to ramble a little and the video is long, but I think he makes his point better than most.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 14, 2018, 04:09:30 PM
Quote from: Davin on May 14, 2018, 02:53:32 PM
Quote from: Icarus on May 13, 2018, 10:56:53 PM
Planned obsolescence is a reality.  Sure enough there are products that are more practical to replace than to repair.
That is a big issue, also the right to repair is also an issue. Apple in a big way is trying to prevent people from repairing their phones at third party repair shops. Shops that will repair phones longer than Apple will.

This is a long video from this guy Louis Rossman who runs his own repair shop and runs live streams showing him repair various devices. I'm sorry, he tends to ramble a little and the video is long, but I think he makes his point better than most.


I know that their build quality is usually excellent but I would not buy an Apple product if they halved their prices but maintained the same attitude towards their customers. I accept non-authorised 3rd party repairs voiding warrantees all manufacturers have that attitude. But their recent battery con trick was enough to put me off the brand. Then I am not a pro user, just this guy with a phone, not bothered which brand so long as it does what I want for a few years. Current Samsung four years old and still serving me well.

I have changed batteries and/or USB jacks in five older tablets, for other people, so far. But not all newer tablets offer spares. So I have a battery and jack already on hand for this, my main use one, another of 2014 vintage.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Davin on May 14, 2018, 04:34:19 PM
Quote from: Dave on May 14, 2018, 04:09:30 PM
Quote from: Davin on May 14, 2018, 02:53:32 PM
Quote from: Icarus on May 13, 2018, 10:56:53 PM
Planned obsolescence is a reality.  Sure enough there are products that are more practical to replace than to repair.
That is a big issue, also the right to repair is also an issue. Apple in a big way is trying to prevent people from repairing their phones at third party repair shops. Shops that will repair phones longer than Apple will.

This is a long video from this guy Louis Rossman who runs his own repair shop and runs live streams showing him repair various devices. I'm sorry, he tends to ramble a little and the video is long, but I think he makes his point better than most.


I know that their build quality is usually excellent but I would not buy an Apple product if they halved their prices but maintained the same attitude towards their customers. I accept non-authorised 3rd party repairs voiding warrantees all manufacturers have that attitude. But their recent battery con trick was enough to put me off the brand. Then I am not a pro user, just this guy with a phone, not bothered which brand so long as it does what I want for a few years. Current Samsung four years old and still serving me well.

I have changed batteries and/or USB jacks in five older tablets, for other people, so far. But not all newer tablets offer spares. So I have a battery and jack already on hand for this, my main use one, another of 2014 vintage.
My GF had an iPhone, it was a few years old because she doesn't really see a need to upgrade her phone when hers still works fine, then the battery ruptured and she had to replace it, but they don't replace the battery, and since it was a few months past their support time they could only offer up a replacement with a fee. They're not bad phones in general, but I don't think any phone is tested for lasting longer than a few years.

Apple also has been caught a few times intentionally slowing down older phones in the software. Not that the old phones couldn't handle the newer software, they intentionally made them run slower.

I agree with third party repairs voiding the warranty too. that's fine. What I'm against though is Apple suing third party repair shops for selling counterfeit iPhones simply for repairing them.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 14, 2018, 04:55:29 PM
Yes, it was the "slow down" matter that wiped out all respect I had for Apple as a company. If they are, dort if, claiming that non-Apple repaired iPhones are, somehow,  now counterfeit iPhones . . . Just hope car manufacturers do not adopt this attitude and sue every non-approved repairer.

I understand that the "everlasting lightbulb" scenario is almost a death sentence for lightbulb manufacturers but this sort of thing is death to the planet taken to its limit.

I took delight spending about an hour repairing a throw away car component. Mainly involved a small drill, a 3mm brass screw+nut and a bit of soldering. Swapping the unit would have taken 15 minutes. Lasted another five years until the rear springs went and the car was scrapped.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Davin on May 14, 2018, 05:14:40 PM
Quote from: Dave on May 14, 2018, 04:55:29 PM
Yes, it was the "slow down" matter that wiped out all respect I had for Apple as a company. If they are, dort if, claiming that non-Apple repaired iPhones are, somehow,  now counterfeit iPhones . . . Just hope car manufacturers do not adopt this attitude and sue every non-approved repairer.

I understand that the "everlasting lightbulb" scenario is almost a death sentence for lightbulb manufacturers but this sort of thing is death to the planet taken to its limit.

I took delight spending about an hour repairing a throw away car component. Mainly involved a small drill, a 3mm brass screw+nut and a bit of soldering. Swapping the unit would have taken 15 minutes. Lasted another five years until the rear springs went and the car was scrapped.
I agree with that. But I don't think the everlasting light bulb will not kill the industry, just pull it back down. I don't think that phones lasting longer on average will destroy the phone industry, just knock profits down a bit. A longer phone life cycle, of 4-6 years instead of 1-2 years, would also allow for more quality assurance testing. Would be better on waste too.

I have no solution though but allowing repairs, consumers refraining from getting the next slightly better version, and manufacturers supporting devices for longer. would make a huge difference.

Cars are another pretty big waste thing. In the US especially. I think we have a pretty high car to person ratio and cars are traded in for newer version pretty often. My car is over ten years old and I'm now planning on getting a new one. I wish I could go on with it, it's mostly been a good car, and I'm not really missing any of the fancy new tech on cars now.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Tom62 on May 14, 2018, 05:16:02 PM
Customer "support" gone bad...
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 14, 2018, 05:41:24 PM
Quote from: Davin on May 14, 2018, 05:14:40 PM
Quote from: Dave on May 14, 2018, 04:55:29 PM
Yes, it was the "slow down" matter that wiped out all respect I had for Apple as a company. If they are, dort if, claiming that non-Apple repaired iPhones are, somehow,  now counterfeit iPhones . . . Just hope car manufacturers do not adopt this attitude and sue every non-approved repairer.

I understand that the "everlasting lightbulb" scenario is almost a death sentence for lightbulb manufacturers but this sort of thing is death to the planet taken to its limit.

I took delight spending about an hour repairing a throw away car component. Mainly involved a small drill, a 3mm brass screw+nut and a bit of soldering. Swapping the unit would have taken 15 minutes. Lasted another five years until the rear springs went and the car was scrapped.
I agree with that. But I don't think the everlasting light bulb will not kill the industry, just pull it back down. I don't think that phones lasting longer on average will destroy the phone industry, just knock profits down a bit. A longer phone life cycle, of 4-6 years instead of 1-2 years, would also allow for more quality assurance testing. Would be better on waste too.

I have no solution though but allowing repairs, consumers refraining from getting the next slightly better version, and manufacturers supporting devices for longer. would make a huge difference.

Cars are another pretty big waste thing. In the US especially. I think we have a pretty high car to person ratio and cars are traded in for newer version pretty often. My car is over ten years old and I'm now planning on getting a new one. I wish I could go on with it, it's mostly been a good car, and I'm not really missing any of the fancy new tech on cars now.

I did include "almost" in my comment about the future of the lightbulb industry - they would have the "new build" and "first time buyer" market to keep the demand trickling over! I can imagine everlasting light bupbs being on some wedding gift lists, they ain't going to be sold for a few pennies.

4-5 years life for phones sounds OK to me. There are excellent re-use and recycling facilitues over here, all my old spectacles end up in the eye charity bin for re-use in 3rd world countries. Not sure if it still is elsewhere but, when we had a prison here, the inmates earned a bit grading, cleaning and packaging these glasses.

My laptops seem to have a 5 year life before something mechanical gives up. Last one was the screen lead connection deep inside the base, could not get a spare without buying an unecessary new screen. So took the screen off and a friend's daughter is making daily use of it connected to a separate monitor. The hard drive went dodgy on her tower job, I got it going long enough to save her unbacked-up files. Back-up is now daily, not monthly!

When the flat screen really came in for business they had a special large skip just for the old vacuum jobs at the recycling centre. Still working, just out of fashion. The charity "Computers for Africa" had to rent extra space for donations. They quickly changed to "flat screens only please".
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Arturo on May 14, 2018, 10:21:09 PM
I think at some point it's going to run us all over.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Davin on May 15, 2018, 02:55:11 PM
It already will run us over. We're beyond the point of harm caused by our wasteful ways. We can still do a lot to reduce the problem, but global warming is going to cause us some unavoidable hurt in a few decades. And we're barely slowing down, so it doesn't look like we're in for a fun time. By the time even the most dense humans can no longer deny global warming, it will be too late to do anything about it, well not anything, but it will take at least a century to start to reverse the damage by then.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Arturo on May 15, 2018, 03:35:31 PM
Quote from: Davin on May 15, 2018, 02:55:11 PM
It already will run us over. We're beyond the point of harm caused by our wasteful ways. We can still do a lot to reduce the problem, but global warming is going to cause us some unavoidable hurt in a few decades. And we're barely slowing down, so it doesn't look like we're in for a fun time. By the time even the most dense humans can no longer deny global warming, it will be too late to do anything about it, well not anything, but it will take at least a century to start to reverse the damage by then.

Oh yeah sure that's right. But I meant socially and psychologically and economically it's going to run us over. Well, we will run ourselves over.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Davin on May 15, 2018, 04:08:28 PM
Yeah, many of us are already falling under the wheels. We've always had poverty, but now that the wheels of consumerism are that much bigger, more people getting caught under. The more wealth is hoarded, the more we'll see this until most of the people finally see what is really going on. Unfortunately, things have to get beyond nuanced and studied facts, all the way to undeniable reality before most people will actually do something.

I think that's part of consumerism problem, the distraction from looking too far in the future by all the cool new things right now or coming right up.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Old Seer on May 15, 2018, 06:21:34 PM
Quote from: Dave on May 11, 2018, 12:51:31 PM
Or the consumer attitude at least. I feel this is enough of a thinking, moral thing to find its place here.

Today's BBC "Four Thought" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04md5b0) was on our consumer culture. I think it generalised a bit and left out many facets of the problem because it is such a brief slot - but it invoked thought (as intended). Being a consumer myself (did I really need new photographic kit or was I allowing myself to be led by desire, envy and greed, do I really need three new shirts . . . .) but also the poessessor of a fine guilt complex I am a bit torn.

We are bombarded by adverts, some with audio, some flashing, almost everytime we go on line - thankfully HAF is a haven free from advertising madness. Though I do see the occasional Tappatalk banner do I not? Luckily I am mostly "advert blind", can ignore them. (Except for the occasional outburst of, "NO! I do not want to buy a frigging whatsit, I have just frigging-well bought one!" But even that is a silent outburst and occurs less often with time.)

I do not feel that I am a truly conspicuous consumer, well maybe except a bit for tech gadgets and bits, and will mostly tailor my spends as a compromise with my perceived needs.

What say you on this subject?
Does consumerism equate to materialism.

1- /məˈtirēəˌlizəm/

noun

    1. a tendency to consider material possessions and physical comfort as more important than spiritual values.
    2. the doctrine that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications.

2- con·sum·er·ism
/kənˈso͞oməˌrizəm/

noun

    1. the protection or promotion of the interests of consumers.
    2. the preoccupation of society with the acquisition of consumer goods.

In example 1- A- material things override the recognition of persons, as persons are the spiritual.
                       B- a contradiction of A- Which says 2 things exist in the universe, not one, one being material and the other spiritual.                 Spiritual also equates to person/people.

example 2- Looks OK to me.
But one should appreciate the contribution of all others for their part in being sure we have what we need and the comforts for all that come from the efforts. I think the people should be seen first and the rest follows. It looks to be the opposite. 
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 15, 2018, 07:21:34 PM
QuoteDoes consumerism equate to materialism.

Wow! Old Seer, in the first instant I thought the answer was an easy, "Yes."  Then I thought about the "material" in my posession and what it means to me. Then I thought this could be a matter of considerable thought and research!

I have loads of stuff, most is "aspirational": books I should read to better my understanding, tools that I should put to productive use etc. What puctures hang on my walls have either personal meaning for me or provoke appreciation, joy and/or wonder. Hmm, so I consume that which has meaning but settle, in terms of things like cars, clothes etc, for the utilitarian and with a pragmatic attitude to price and quality.

For others I am sure that consumption, even conspicuous consumption, and materialism are so close as not to admit a 0.01mm feeler gauge between them.

I endeavour to remain discrete in my consumption.

I would recommend "The Midas Plague" by Frederich Pohl - ties in overproduction  and the threads about robots nicely. There is another whose title escapes me.

Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Arturo on May 15, 2018, 07:42:20 PM
Quote from: Davin on May 15, 2018, 04:08:28 PM
Yeah, many of us are already falling under the wheels. We've always had poverty, but now that the wheels of consumerism are that much bigger, more people getting caught under. The more wealth is hoarded, the more we'll see this until most of the people finally see what is really going on. Unfortunately, things have to get beyond nuanced and studied facts, all the way to undeniable reality before most people will actually do something.

I think that's part of consumerism problem, the distraction from looking too far in the future by all the cool new things right now or coming right up.

The "right-now" distraction is actually the best part because that is the right hemisphere of your brain that has to do with emotions. Which is why advertisements are always flashy, loud, or just obnoxious in some way to get your attention. The good news is that you can take that back from the advertisers by focusing your attention in the present moment with meditation. That's actually what meditation is all about really. Focusing on the now, forgetting the past and not anticipating the future.

Sam Harris has admitted that he meditates as well. And he went by saying the starting part is always the hardest for people because you sit with your mind and just let it happen. Just let your thoughts and feelings flow freely. And that is actually a source for a lot of anxiety in people. Especially hard working people because they use work as a distraction. But sitting alone with one's own mind is the beginning part of taking back your mind from the advertisers and the brain washers who have been bombarding us with stuff since we were children.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Old Seer on May 15, 2018, 09:15:38 PM
Quote from: Dave on May 15, 2018, 07:21:34 PM
QuoteDoes consumerism equate to materialism.

Wow! Old Seer, in the first instant I thought the answer was an easy, "Yes."  Then I thought about the "material" in my posession and what it means to me. Then I thought this could be a matter of considerable thought and research!

I have loads of stuff, most is "aspirational": books I should read to better my understanding, tools that I should put to productive use etc. What puctures hang on my walls have either personal meaning for me or provoke appreciation, joy and/or wonder. Hmm, so I consume that which has meaning but settle, in terms of things like cars, clothes etc, for the utilitarian and with a pragmatic attitude to price and quality.

For others I am sure that consumption, even conspicuous consumption, and materialism are so close as not to admit a 0.01mm feeler gauge between them.

I endeavour to remain discrete in my consumption.

I would recommend "The Midas Plague" by Frederich Pohl - ties in overproduction  and the threads about robots nicely. There is another whose title escapes me.
I agree with your input on consumerism--it's time for a change. But, will putting people first retard material production and  what one acquires. Changing to recognition of people/person over material may mean changing to an altruistic system, the very thing lacking in commercial systems. We are not all the same in our temperaments, mental abilities and aptitudes. Also consider that "Preoccupation" denotes something is purely mental, not physical/material. Consumer is not person, but can be only if wanted to be. Fire consumes and it's not a person. So consumerism is a non person, so looking at one as "consumer" is recognition as an object, or stomach. 
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 15, 2018, 09:43:46 PM
Trouble, as you imply, Old Seer, is there's consuming, consuming and consuming.

Back three centuries or so ago there were things like 17 course dinners, and each one heaped high, in England. Consumption was, and still is, a badge of image, even power. Never mind about the lesser orders! (But pictures often show very plump servants because they ate that ehich their betters left, still lots.)

Few go that far now but maybe their inage demands iPhones, Calvin Klein, Gucci or whatever. True, you pay money and you usually get quality, just so long as it stays in fashion long enough to get decent use.

On the "consumption creates jobs" front another sc-fi short story had legal limits on how long you could own your car before replacing it - to keep all the car and their supply industries in work. No robots and the government could not afford the benefits if those industries collapsed. Of course planned design life was in months rather than years.

Would "hand crafting" as much as possible improve quality, ptoduct life, employment etc? Despite unemploynent in the UK many industries, especially farming and construction, are crying out for staff. If Brexit seriously reduces immigration a lot of industries will shrink or even close to the detriment of all.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Old Seer on May 15, 2018, 11:18:44 PM
Quote from: Dave on May 15, 2018, 09:43:46 PM
Trouble, as you imply, Old Seer, is there's consuming, consuming and consuming.

Back three centuries or so ago there were things like 17 course dinners, and each one heaped high, in England. Consumption was, and still is, a badge of image, even power. Never mind about the lesser orders! (But pictures often show very plump servants because they ate that ehich their betters left, still lots.)

Few go that far now but maybe their inage demands iPhones, Calvin Klein, Gucci or whatever. True, you pay money and you usually get quality, just so long as it stays in fashion long enough to get decent use.

On the "consumption creates jobs" front another sc-fi short story had legal limits on how long you could own your car before replacing it - to keep all the car and their supply industries in work. No robots and the government could not afford the benefits if those industries collapsed. Of course planned design life was in months rather than years.

Would "hand crafting" as much as possible improve quality, ptoduct life, employment etc? Despite unemploynent in the UK many industries, especially farming and construction, are crying out for staff. If Brexit seriously reduces immigration a lot of industries will shrink or even close to the detriment of all.
Hand crafting-. definitely. We, us Old Seers, recommend establishing local economies. !00 families/individuals produce one item and sometimes a few more depending. Basically this is going back to the 1890s in certain respects. This system leeches off the present one until it is established.  The items are taken to a central distributing point (the store)and instead of present money--your time that you spent in production is your money. If your items are worth 24 hours of you time you can trade time for anything else others have produced.  IE- a Quart of pickles is worth 8 minutes, which is deducted from your time total. Each person strives to produce one over winter amount for each in the economy. This economy can produce anything that anyone wants. In this case. time is truly money. The money and time idea is to prevent free loaders. No predator ism/profiteering allowed as such persons conjure ways to own everything, one reason the present economy is as it is.  Yada yada yada. We have this on our meager website because we know that if floks finally acquire living peace ----peace will ruin the present one. Each small economy is connected to the neighbor economy for things/needs that arent available in yours. You need a job and can't find anything to do---common labor pays just as much as every thing else. The biz owner merely attaches your time to his product, and credits your account with the time. No one can cheat without notice---very simple. This is about needs not greeds.
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Old Seer on May 16, 2018, 04:51:27 PM
Quote from: Tom62 on May 14, 2018, 05:16:02 PM
Customer "support" gone bad...

The thing here is--floks have gotten used to all manner of services to help customers which they made more money by getting rid of the "buyer beware" concept. Now, they know it's was better because it' takes less people to run their business via "buyer beware". So, they want to get back to it. What most people don't understand (unless you have business edu), the object of business is first to make money, and then everything else. Ethics isn't in the line anywhere. Business accrues more money from buyer beware. Don't be surprised if the "turkey" you buy next thanksgiving turns out to be an oversized rooster. Have you noticed--- the more technology the less ethics.  :)
BTW. In my business instruction I don't recall any time that ethics was introduced, may have been but don't remember. Quite a number of things and procedures from back then I deem unethical now.   
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Dave on May 16, 2018, 05:09:54 PM
Not only would I not buy an Apple product but . . . Unless it was the only possible means of achieving a goal thst I must achieve I would not take one as a free gift (except to sell it on).

Those professionals relying on Apple products, and it seems that the media world swear by them, must be changing their underwear every time their machines glitch a little!
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Arturo on May 16, 2018, 09:25:04 PM
There is this style of music called "vaporwave". I'm sure Davin has heard of it because his job is to work with computers. But there was a description I heard of it a long time ago where it is supposed to spoof consumerism. Whether or not that is true I don't know because most of those songs have no lyrics. But they do go have weird music videos and as far as the genre goes it is very hard to define. There is no single defining thing about the genre to be able to say this is it because it kind of branches into a lot of other internet born genres as well.

But that was my little tidbit for the thread. Now I can post a video but there aren't any defining ones like I said. So I guess you can do a search on youtube and look for yourself but I wouldn't necessarily call those vaporwave. They are mostly chill tunes but a song being slow paced and relaxed doesn't make it fit into a single genre.

Though one thing I could say perhaps is that they all have some sort of affiliation with consumerism. Some have sounds and voices sampled from tv shows or video games or even computers. I would say that the computer versions are the one's that define vaporwave, while the ones that sample tv shows and have a low fidelity with a bass track are called "lo-fi hip hop". And then there is simpsonwave which is...well I will show you for that one.

Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Davin on May 16, 2018, 10:02:49 PM
I'm familiar with vaporware, but I'm not sure it's because of my interest in computers. The consistent things with all vaporware seems to be defined by its name, that it consists of little musical things. Like the beats are slight and sparse, and any other instruments or light and airy. And there are not many different kinds of sounds used per song (not talking about the samples, those range from one sample to dozens).
Title: Re: Is it time to kill The Consumer?
Post by: Arturo on May 16, 2018, 11:49:26 PM
Quote from: Davin on May 16, 2018, 10:02:49 PM
I'm familiar with vaporware, but I'm not sure it's because of my interest in computers. The consistent things with all vaporware seems to be defined by its name, that it consists of little musical things. Like the beats are slight and sparse, and any other instruments or light and airy. And there are not many different kinds of sounds used per song (not talking about the samples, those range from one sample to dozens).

There are actually live streams of those now. Specifically the ones that I am familiar with are lo-fi hip hop and simpsonwave. They run 24/7 like a radio program on youtube. But with no commercials. But I assume they make money, but I use adblock software so I never see ads on youtube. However I do see that they get donations from time to time. At least very early on they were when live streaming was first introduced about a year and a half ago. So I don't know if that really counts as spoofing consumerism now since they have become apart of it? It sure still has the affiliation with consumerism now more than ever.