3 ms·

I've seen videos of lots full of perfectly working, but slightly used, appliances waiting to be dismantled and recycled in Japan. They don't even bother blockin

by bane 11y ago

I've seen videos of lots full of perfectly working, but slightly used, appliances waiting to be dismantled and recycled in Japan. They don't even bother blocking entrance to the lot and they're mostly unattended, so anybody could in theory, just drive up and fill their house with all the appliances they need for nothing. You also rarely see old cars on the road because (my understanding is) that taxes incentivize people to ditch old cars quickly and get new ones. My thinking is this extends through various parts of Japanese society, and combined with various taboos, is used by the government to help keep the economy moving. Otherwise, the culturally thrifty Japanese population would just keep everything they have forever and the economy would be in worse shape than it is now.

scratchandsniff 11y ago
This concept is fascinating given the general perception that Japanese products have for reliability and longevity.
- Demiurge 11y ago
  This is probably an example of the non obvious shape of the reliability curve, which has a hump of failures early on, but then trails off. Effort to decrease reliability early on coincides with long term reliability.
rcthompson 11y ago
I feel like it's a fallacy that things need to be constantly thrown out and replaced for an economy to be healthy. If someone doesn't have to spend $1000 on new appliances, it's not like that thousand dollars disappears from the economy. Either the person spends that money on something else or sticks it in their savings account and the bank loans some of it out for someone else to spend. (This is basic econ theory, so I'm sure it's a little more complicated than that.) How is it better for an economy when people have to spend money replacing existing things instead of on buying new stuff?
- abhishivsaxena 11y ago
  Over-saving? Domestic consumption would be lower since savings/investment are higher. Could lead to buildup of inventories, and make existing investment projects non-viable. But I guess in Japan most of the portion of savings goes into international investments, which is good.
- bane 11y ago
  > If someone doesn't have to spend $1000 on new appliances, it's not like that thousand dollars disappears from the economy. Yes it does. Modern economic systems are built on consumerism. Saving large sums of money acts like a vacuum on currency and brings markets to a halt. Flowing money lubricates the economy. That's basically the sum total of the most recent economic crisis, money wasn't moving, so two presidential administrations through gigantic sums of money at the economy, like spraying it down with WD-40, until it started moving again. > Either the person spends that money on something else or sticks it in their savings account and the bank loans some of it out for someone else to spend. The problem is that in aggregate, if nobody is spending money, it doesn't move around at all. If nobody takes out a loan, then that money just sits in the bank. Sitting money means nobody needs to manufacture anything because nobody is buying anything, which means there's no reason to employ anybody, so nobody makes money. Because times are bad, they save what they have even more and spending continues to go down. Fairly quickly the economy goes into a death spiral, and while plenty of people may have money, there's nothing to spend it on anyway. China is using the same economic trick that's been used time and time again, in the U.S., Japan, other places, to kickstart their economy. It's dumping money into the economy in huge works projects, mostly construction related, and letting that money slosh around. Japan did it in the 80s, but it's no longer working as well as it once did, because pretty much everything they need to build is built, and the population is shrinking so they need even less things.
  - seivan 11y ago
    I'm far from an expert but this is from the Keynes camp(?)
  - nosuchthing 11y ago
brobinson 11y ago
>You also rarely see old cars on the road because (my understanding is) that taxes incentivize people to ditch old cars quickly and get new ones. This is correct. You have to pay a hefty bi-annual inspection fee (beginning three years after a new purchase) to keep a vehicle on the road if it's over 250cc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor-vehicle_inspection_%28Japan%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor-vehicle_inspection_%28Ja... At some point in a vehicle's life, it becomes more economically viable to get rid of it than to keep it up to snuff to pass the inspection. The other vehicle taxes are also based on displacement, so you'll see lots of cute little 1.3L or lower displacement inline-four vans riding around. I kept turning my head because I thought I was hearing motorcycles!

by bane 11y ago

scratchandsniff 11y ago

This concept is fascinating given the general perception that Japanese products have for reliability and longevity.

Demiurge 11y ago
This is probably an example of the non obvious shape of the reliability curve, which has a hump of failures early on, but then trails off. Effort to decrease reliability early on coincides with long term reliability.

rcthompson 11y ago

I feel like it's a fallacy that things need to be constantly thrown out and replaced for an economy to be healthy. If someone doesn't have to spend $1000 on new appliances, it's not like that thousand dollars disappears from the economy. Either the person spends that money on something else or sticks it in their savings account and the bank loans some of it out for someone else to spend. (This is basic econ theory, so I'm sure it's a little more complicated than that.) How is it better for an economy when people have to spend money replacing existing things instead of on buying new stuff?

abhishivsaxena 11y ago
Over-saving? Domestic consumption would be lower since savings/investment are higher. Could lead to buildup of inventories, and make existing investment projects non-viable. But I guess in Japan most of the portion of savings goes into international investments, which is good.
bane 11y ago
> If someone doesn't have to spend $1000 on new appliances, it's not like that thousand dollars disappears from the economy. Yes it does. Modern economic systems are built on consumerism. Saving large sums of money acts like a vacuum on currency and brings markets to a halt. Flowing money lubricates the economy. That's basically the sum total of the most recent economic crisis, money wasn't moving, so two presidential administrations through gigantic sums of money at the economy, like spraying it down with WD-40, until it started moving again. > Either the person spends that money on something else or sticks it in their savings account and the bank loans some of it out for someone else to spend. The problem is that in aggregate, if nobody is spending money, it doesn't move around at all. If nobody takes out a loan, then that money just sits in the bank. Sitting money means nobody needs to manufacture anything because nobody is buying anything, which means there's no reason to employ anybody, so nobody makes money. Because times are bad, they save what they have even more and spending continues to go down. Fairly quickly the economy goes into a death spiral, and while plenty of people may have money, there's nothing to spend it on anyway. China is using the same economic trick that's been used time and time again, in the U.S., Japan, other places, to kickstart their economy. It's dumping money into the economy in huge works projects, mostly construction related, and letting that money slosh around. Japan did it in the 80s, but it's no longer working as well as it once did, because pretty much everything they need to build is built, and the population is shrinking so they need even less things.
- seivan 11y ago
  I'm far from an expert but this is from the Keynes camp(?)
- nosuchthing 11y ago

brobinson 11y ago

>You also rarely see old cars on the road because (my understanding is) that taxes incentivize people to ditch old cars quickly and get new ones. This is correct. You have to pay a hefty bi-annual inspection fee (beginning three years after a new purchase) to keep a vehicle on the road if it's over 250cc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor-vehicle_inspection_%28Japan%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor-vehicle_inspection_%28Ja... At some point in a vehicle's life, it becomes more economically viable to get rid of it than to keep it up to snuff to pass the inspection. The other vehicle taxes are also based on displacement, so you'll see lots of cute little 1.3L or lower displacement inline-four vans riding around. I kept turning my head because I thought I was hearing motorcycles!