|
Author
|
Topic: Too much
|
|
|
|
|
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791
|
posted 21 May 2006 12:54 PM
After home mortgages, cars, SUVs, trucks, and motorcycles are the biggest financial investments we make, and I think it's been traditionally an act of individual expression in selecting the model and colour of the vehicle we wish to purchase. The concerns about waste and the effect of these vehicles on the environment is a relatively modern issue that we're still grappling with. There are other issues associated with this, of course, and, for instance, who wants to be the one that proposes changes that potentially could lead to massive job losses and a perception that we're becoming too regimental (read: "communist"  ) by proposing to vastly restrict the number of choices we have in our consumer choices. edited to improve grammar [ 21 May 2006: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791
|
posted 21 May 2006 01:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by clersal:
Individual expression? My car takes me from A to B. That is all I want to do. I really hate the thought of paying maybe thousands of $ more because we have been brainwashed into believing about free choice and democracy!
I used to be a member of the Motorsport Club of Ottawa, and I raced and rallyed a Mini Cooper. Believe me, for many people out there, choice of model and colour and options is intensely personal. Another example would be all the various types of car and truck clubs: custom cars, off roaders, rapper's designs, drag racing, sports cars, etc..... it's a serious hobby for many. You call it wasteful (I agree, BTW) but it's an act of expression by many. However wasteful it is, there's also issues of the unions, the manufacturers, employment, competition, design, advertising, etc... which is all incredibly big business on this planet. And, yes, democratic choice. 
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791
|
posted 21 May 2006 01:18 PM
On the matter of "too much choice", how about children's toys? Holy cow. Been in the children's section of any of the big department stores recently? Never had anything remotely like that choice available when I was a kid (in the '50s). Back then we had building blocks, puzzles, skipping rope, dolls, and electric trains, and that's about it. Oh, and toy rifles, because of shows like The Lone Ranger and similar stuff.More: Electronics. Holy moley. I thought personal computers were novel when they came out, but look at personal electronics now: gazillions of mini cellphones with video/computer screens - who the hell needs this stuff? And all the mini stuff to play music on. It's all garbage to me. I play music on my stereo at home, or on the in-dash CD player in my small truck. I've never used a Walkman, cellphone, iPod, or indeed anything more novel than my current personal computer and CD player. I still use my electric typewriter from 1969. See: mileage does vary.
edited: spelling
[ 21 May 2006: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
skeptikool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11389
|
posted 21 May 2006 01:22 PM
This is an extremely important and often-neglected issue.I've long maintained that many considered normal in every aspect of their lives will develop borderline insanity when it comes to the automobile. You won't get this from the mainstream media's "safe" auto writers - understandably, perhaps, with about 20 per cent of the media given over to the auto-related industry in one way or another - but very few types of vehicles are necessary to suit all but the frivolous needs of all motorists. Many vehicles sold today can be considered anti-social and should be consigned to scrapyards for recycling. It's about time we start looking at the issue similarly to the ways that tobacco was challenged and with the same vigor.
From: Delta BC | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skeptikool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11389
|
posted 21 May 2006 01:53 PM
First, in answer to clersal's I'm-sure-rhetorical question, yes, all that choice has added monumental costs - and waste.Boom Boom, Can one compare choice of toys with choice of vehicles - even if one admits that the vehicle is sometimes viewed as a toy? On the electronic stuff, I think I'm more concerned with the social implications regarding how they affect youth, particularly. Is its use tending to produce a more insular society? It's power for good can not be denied if one considers the medium we are engaged in this second. It has certainly shrunk the world.
From: Delta BC | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791
|
posted 21 May 2006 01:53 PM
With regards to motor vehicles and personal transportation, I believe the best solution to ugly and wasteful monster trucks and SUVs is to steadily increase the cost of fuel. That has already had an impact: the H1 Hummer will be discontinued in June, due to declining sales, likely brought about by high gas prices. A popular expression wrt SUVs is "ban 'em" which I think is idiotic, because it ain't going to happen. What will happen is high gas prices will force the industry to seriously look at replacing their fleet of gashogs with fuel efficient amd low-polluting vehicles, which can be painted and customized to the customer's heart's desires. Low priced autos will even benefit the poor who have to drive. The H1 is the first to go; the H2, maybe in a few years. [ 21 May 2006: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791
|
posted 21 May 2006 02:04 PM
quote:
Originally posted by skeptikool:
Can one compare choice of toys with choice of vehicles - even if one admits that the vehicle is sometimes viewed as a toy?
I didn't start the thread, but why not expand it to include consumer waste in general? Some - me - will not take the issue seriously if you concentrate only on motorized vehicles. The industry set up to manufacture unnecessary consumer electronics can be just as wasteful as any. By the way, China has been said to be the largest developing consumer market for motorized vehicles - all the manufacturers are lining up to start operations there, so good luck on scrapping cars and trucks. I think the industry in North America (and Japan) is revving up to start exporting in quantities never seen before to mainland China, besides actually setting up manufacturing there. And, China will be exporting their Chery car to North America next year, so I've read. The Japanese automakers are expanding their manufacturing base in Ontario also, by the way. It's complicated. I'm in favour of raising gas prices to at least the $2/litre level in Canada to slow things down a bit - others may cry 'foul'.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370
|
posted 21 May 2006 03:01 PM
quote:
However wasteful it is, there's also issues of the unions, the manufacturers, employment, competition, design, advertising, etc... which is all incredibly big business on this planet. And, yes, democratic choice.
You said it Boom Boom, Big Business! I don't agree with democratic choice though. We have been fed this stuff about democracy. Isn't the Shrub making the world democratic? Aren't we happy about that? quote:
I have no desire to adopt Henry Ford's dictum wrt to the Model T: you can have any colour you want, as long as it's black. Screw that.
What is the cheapest and most visible colour to paint a car? What ever it is all cars should be that colour.Corvettes, Mustangs and Ferrari's? Please is this really a need in our lives? It is only complicated because we make it complicated. If we thought about what we were doing instead of calling it free choice and democracy we wouldn't be going extinct.
From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
skeptikool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11389
|
posted 21 May 2006 03:06 PM
Boom Boom: quote:
...why not expand it to include consumer waste in general? Some - me - will not take the issue seriously if you concentrate only on motorized vehicles.
I believe a stand-alone discussion is warranted because of how our choices in transportation hugely impact many aspects of our lives including the environment and, yes, the economy. There are many other consumer issues that deserve their own threads. I believe that lumping all together may give you a one-day-wonder of diluted messages.
From: Delta BC | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791
|
posted 21 May 2006 03:25 PM
quote:
Originally posted by clersal:
What is the cheapest and most visible colour to paint a car? What ever it is all cars should be that colour.]
This is the kind of response that genuinely makes me roll my eyes. Variety is the spice of life, you know. quote:
Corvettes, Mustangs and Ferrari's? Please is this really a need in our lives?
Yes, of course, as are Smart Cars, Mini Coopers, Volkswagens, etc... different strokes for different folks, and all that. Your needs may not be my needs. But NO ONE needs an SUV in the city.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791
|
posted 21 May 2006 03:54 PM
The 'disposable culture' is insane. Consumer electronics become out of date (according to advertisers) and everyone needs to have the latest iPod, cellphone with TV, etc... and the original gets dumped. There definitely needs to be more recycling. I'm still using a 1990 SONY stereo system, works fine. I still use a 1968 electric typewriter - in perfect condition. My 1996 CCM bike will probably last ten more years. I have books and magazines that I bought 40 years ago, all in new condition. My television is from 1995, works perfectly. Why should I be interested in replacing any of these? Corporations producing consumer electronics push innovation over need. I've watched endless advertising on TV and in tech magazines for the latest in miniature electronics, and it's getting completely insane, and highly wasteful, and highly polluting - extremely toxic chemicals involved, which eventually leach out of landfills where they've been dumped when 'obsolete'. It's business, and profit, and labour intensive (I saw a doc on the manufacturing of these things - in one segment, there were roughly 400 people in one over-lit 'clean room' wearing masks and hygenic clothing assembling small, delicate electronic stuff). What's the answer?
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlawBlaw
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11570
|
posted 21 May 2006 07:18 PM
quote:
Originally posted by clersal:
If we had less choices wouldn't the prices plummet for the consumer?
Liquor privatization in Alberta is a fairly good example of this. When they made the change from a state monopoly to private sellers, prices and absolute quantity of alcohol consumption remanined relatively stable. The two big changes were in the wages of workers and the choices available to consumers. As a unionized, government employee I think that liquor store clerks were making $15.00 per hour or so, while a private store clerk makes about half of that. What expanded were the number of locations, the number of products available, and the more flexible hours to buy booze. Consumer choice has a cost for everyone. Monopolisitc competition is first year economics, and the norm for most markets. It is not as efficient as perfect competition.
From: British Columbia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
