3 ms·

So, I think you're saying a couple of things. 1) what can you personally do to make a globally detectable change. I can't really think of anything. I can't thin

by jfoutz 6y ago

So, I think you're saying a couple of things. 1) what can you personally do to make a globally detectable change. I can't really think of anything. I can't think of a single person who contributes in a meaningful way to climate change. Atlas is a myth. there is no person holding the world on their shoulders. So, like, don't sweat it. I want to highlight durability and repairability over disposability. I wasn't super explicit about it, so let me say it now. Cheap disposable shit sucks. Costs a lot to make, but it's cheaper than something that's durable, resealable, repairable. I think that there is a huge part of the problem. As a concrete example, my grandma had the same tv for like 40 years, and the cabinet wound up turning into something else for one of my cousins. I'm looking at a big TV, and I'm not super sure I'll be able to plug it into anything in 10 years, if it even still works. I like it, I don't regret my choice, but I really didn't have the option for a full spectrum cost/benefit. They just don't make things like that that will probably work in 50 years. 2) I'm not sure what you mean about consumers suffering climate change. Here's another (perhaps silly example) I got an original iPhone. I'd still use that if it was feasible. I mean, I've got it in a drawer, I could probably figure it out, but the whole system avoids any longevity or resale value. I think it wouldn't take too much effort to shift just a little bit to longevity. I have a fancy pants phone, it's stupid. I didn't have a choice about getting a new phone cause the old one broke. The old one shouldn't have broken, it should have been a lot easier to find someone's hand me down. Right now that's like taking some rando from craigslist cash. ugh. 3) I have complicated thoughts about the military. I absolutely believe the US military is one of the worst offenders. The US military was also one of the first to integrate with respect to race, and later with respect to gender. I think you've identified a real opportunity, that's a place that could absolutely lead the way. Finding the political will do actually do something is pretty tough. all the old arguments will come out - this endangers the safety of the nation. -- final edit -- This is tasteless, I'll honor it. Was perhaps trying to appear committed, but it's more of an arrogant ass thing to close with. -- Tell you what though, if you think you can fix it, I'll donate $100 to your campaign, or charity. my username at gmail. ping me and I'll honor my claim. -- terms and conditions edit -- it's gotta be you. not, of your choice. You. I might also need a link to this to remember how silly I am from time to time.

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
1. Would require legal changes. Until it is less profitable to make cheap junk that doesn't last and isn't repairable companies will not stop ravaging the environment in their reckless pursuit of profit. Consumers are trapped by this. In the exceptionally rare case where a company does manufacturer their products to be durable and repairable they tend to be exceptionally expensive niche items. 2. What I mean is this. Consumers cannot shop and boycott their way out of climate change. Reusable grocery bags/straws may give the consumer a hit of dopamine but these actions amount to little more than virtue signaling in terms of the effect they have on the environment. When no company offers a compromise free environmentally friendly durable and repairable alternative in any category consumers are trapped. This is the case with most products, and is why consumers cannot sacrifice (money, time, convenience) their way out of climate change. 3. Okay? Back to square one. That's the same sort of rhetoric we get about shuttering coal mines. 4. If I think of a way to solve global warming for $100 I'll definitely call on you to pay up.

by jfoutz 6y ago

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago

1. Would require legal changes. Until it is less profitable to make cheap junk that doesn't last and isn't repairable companies will not stop ravaging the environment in their reckless pursuit of profit. Consumers are trapped by this. In the exceptionally rare case where a company does manufacturer their products to be durable and repairable they tend to be exceptionally expensive niche items. 2. What I mean is this. Consumers cannot shop and boycott their way out of climate change. Reusable grocery bags/straws may give the consumer a hit of dopamine but these actions amount to little more than virtue signaling in terms of the effect they have on the environment. When no company offers a compromise free environmentally friendly durable and repairable alternative in any category consumers are trapped. This is the case with most products, and is why consumers cannot sacrifice (money, time, convenience) their way out of climate change. 3. Okay? Back to square one. That's the same sort of rhetoric we get about shuttering coal mines. 4. If I think of a way to solve global warming for $100 I'll definitely call on you to pay up.