Re: Durability as a means of conservation...
Thomas: Again, I find these comments having something to say that relates to Arthur's Posting on used clothes. -- From: tom abeles [EMAIL PROTECTED] Durability is an interesting idea, let me puzzle on it and get your thoughts First, non-durability or a short half-life seems to be a very recent invention along with the idea of the "modern". Probably starting in the late 30's along with the 1939 World's Fair as discussed so brilliantly by David Gelernter in his book, 1939, The Lost World of the Fair. We were to be blessed with technology to cure all our ills and bring utopia. Only utopia never came. But like the carrot tied to the milk horse, there was always the promise that the next version would be the final solution...and the next... and the next where most "nexts" were more cosmetic than actual changes... and still utopia eludes is Thomas: It seems from the above paragraph, we are in some science fiction timeline in which the reason why we keep doing what we are doing has been forgotten and no one has the time to think about it, we just have to keep replicating the formula - next, and next, and next till we collapse. Sort of like mice on a treadmill in a laboratory experiment. Tom Non durability is the Myth of the eternal hope that humans with technology can find the optimum solution Thomas: The optimum solution - the final solution - the mind wanders in this maze of what if... Tom: Durability is a smooke screen and a misdirection from the larger issue and the hard questions Thomas: I can see the insight in your statement. The solution of durability requires more definition - such as value of items - need, equity and future responsibility. And though Barry has mentioned these, they perhaps need to be emphasized even more. Respectfully, Thomas Lunde thoughts? tom abeles
Re: Durability as a means of conservation...
Thomas Lunde wrote: Dear Barry: I have been missing your clear voice of reason for a long time. I have always liked your idea of durability [snip] I second that motion! One of the benefits of working on things that endure is the good feelings the activity gives to the worker. I also recall something Peter Drucker wrote: Cleverness carries the day, But wisdom endureth. I also remember the example of the 14th century craftsman, Goivanni de Dondi, who spent *13 years* building a (ca. 35 inch high) astronomical clock (there is a replica of it in the collection of the Smithsonian Institution). Fortunately, there is now a fine web site about this clock: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3551/copiainglpresastr.htm Also, let me cite the advertising slogan for Patek Philippe watches: You never actually own a Patek Philippe. You merely take care of it for the next generation. In my opinion, only things which either meet that criterion, or, as "consumables" (e.g., food), *contribute* to the further realization of such things in the world, deserve to exist. As for everything else, I think of some words from Sophocles' Oedipus at Colonus (taken out of context): Best of all [for them] never to have been born; Second best [for them] to have seen the light and gone back swiftly whence they came. \brad mccormick -- Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] 914.238.0788 / 27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua, NY 10514-3403 USA --- ![%THINK;[XML]] Visit my website: http://www.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
Re: Durability as a means of conservation...
Durability is an interesting idea, let me puzzle on it and get your thoughts First, non-durability or a short half-life seems to be a very recent invention along with the idea of the "modern". Probably starting in the late 30's along with the 1939 World's Fair as discussed so brilliantly by David Gelernter in his book, 1939, The Lost World of the Fair. We were to be blessed with technology to cure all our ills and bring utopia. Only utopia never came. But like the carrot tied to the milk horse, there was always the promise that the next version would be the final solution...and the next... and the next where most "nexts" were more cosmetic than actual changes... and still utopia eludes is Non durability is the Myth of the eternal hope that humans with technology can find the optimum solution And from this stem all the cosequences- the sexier toothpast, the faster car, the bigger TV. The fear of death and the need to acquire are inexorably tied together The latest version of this is the "lease". Interface carpets leases you the floor covering, replaces it and recycles the old into new. The lap top computer manufacturers who lease you a computer, replace it every 2 years and move the old to the developing world and thence, who knows where. Germany which now requires that cars be recyclable is another example. Yes we have now coated that carrot in front of the milk horse with an environmentally responsible paint. Now we can quest after that elusive fountain of youth with a clear conscience that we are earth friendly. Now we all know about the law of entropy but maybe, with time, nanotech will conquer the final frontier, the guiltless eteranal quest via technological alternatives. Durability is a smooke screen and a misdirection from the larger issue and the hard questions thoughts? tom abeles
Durability as a means of conservation...
Sustainable Economics by Barry Brooks Introduction: Durability is the key to building a sustainable affluent economy. The use of durability would be simple and painless if it didn't conflict with job creation. Our present leaders insist that we need to produce and waste more and more forever so we can keep "workers" busy. For the leaders of the business world durability is not seen as a means of conservation, rather it is seen as a threat to expanding sales. Waste is good for the economy as we define it so we have waste instead of durability. We can have a sustainable economy, but first we must find a way to end our dependence on growth and waste. We don't have to get bigger and bigger. Today's System: Most of us agree that we should manage the economy to do more than just providing goods and services. We also want the economy to provide enough jobs to go around. Recently, our economy has been able to provide goods, services, and jobs even during the rapid introduction of labor saving technology. The market insures that producers will either use the latest labor saving automation to cut labor costs or go out of business. We have learned from experience that automation will cause unemployment if we don't consume more as we can produce more. Our adoption of automation and the corresponding need for growth have made the consumer economy a necessity. Since the industrial revolution, economic growth has been the key to making enough jobs. Growth has compensated for the loss of jobs due to increased use of labor saving machines and computers. Our history of economic growth explains why machines haven't caused unemployment. Machines have given us affluence instead of leisure. The Problem: Economic growth has been a great success in providing goods, services, and jobs, but now the economy has grown so large that it is having a negative impact on natural systems and natural resources. Our economy has reached the vast scale where it can cause the extinction of whole populations of fish, clear-cut forests, pollute most water, and dirty the global atmosphere. This problem of being too large a burden on our planet threatens the survival of all human civilizations. The limits to growth have become common knowledge. One response has been that we have a new goals for the economy. We would like the economy to make the best use of scarce resources. We would like to keep our wealth and have a sustainable economy too. The big question is; how can we adjust to the limits to growth without accepting a lower standard of living? There seems to be a dilemma in the need to stimulate the economy to make jobs which is opposed to the need to slow the economy to avoid upsetting the natural balance too much. Federal reserve policy is being used to slow the economy, while congressional tax/borrow and spend is being used to stimulate the economy. It's like driving with the brakes and the accelerator pressed together. Our inconsistent use of use of fiscal vs. monetary policy implicitly confirms that we can't continue economic growth, but we can't give it up either. Since economic growth can't be a permanent compensation for the replacement of human labor by computer-controlled machines, we must look for some other solution to the unemployment problem. . The Solution: The dilemma of choosing between expanding and contracting the economy is not a real problem because the production of ample goods and services does not require us to stay busy as we have assumed. Our goal of having plenty of goods-in-service doesn't require the high rate of production we have today. We can use increased durability to provide more goods-in-service without the need for high resource consumption. Increased durability is a substitute for more production. The quantity of goods-in-service is proportional to both the rates of production and the life-span, or durability, of the goods. If we build products that last a long time we can own a lot of wealth without high resource consumption. The real meaning of sustainable is to last over time. Sustainability of the system we all depend on which produces physical goods will come from our use of durability. What else could be so effective? Population stability combined with the use of increased durability will allow inheritance to provide durable goods for future generations without a need for high rates of replacement production. While we focus on earning our livings we tend to ignore what we have been given. We just take wealth from nature with no payment. We are parasites on our shrinking planet, yet we make decisions based on money, while prices only reflect labor-cost and ignore the resources inputs. Other ways of making decisions have had declining influences since the world takeover of market ideology and market politics. Our economy needs to find an alternative kind of income for people to depend on since wages and paid jobs will
Durability as a means of conservation...
Sustainable Economics by Barry Brooks Introduction: Durability is the key to building a sustainable affluent economy. The use of durability would be simple and painless if it didn't conflict with job creation. Our present leaders insist that we need to produce and waste more and more forever so we can keep "workers" busy. For the leaders of the business world durability is not seen as a means of conservation, rather it is seen as a threat to expanding sales. Waste is good for the economy as we define it so we have waste instead of durability. We can have a sustainable economy, but first we must find a way to end our dependence on growth and waste. We don't have to get bigger and bigger. Today's System: Most of us agree that we should manage the economy to do more than just providing goods and services. We also want the economy to provide enough jobs to go around. Recently, our economy has been able to provide goods, services, and jobs even during the rapid introduction of labor saving technology. The market insures that producers will either use the latest labor saving automation to cut labor costs or go out of business. We have learned from experience that automation will cause unemployment if we don't consume more as we can produce more. Our adoption of automation and the corresponding need for growth have made the consumer economy a necessity. Since the industrial revolution, economic growth has been the key to making enough jobs. Growth has compensated for the loss of jobs due to increased use of labor saving machines and computers. Our history of economic growth explains why machines haven't caused unemployment. Machines have given us affluence instead of leisure. The Problem: Economic growth has been a great success in providing goods, services, and jobs, but now the economy has grown so large that it is having a negative impact on natural systems and natural resources. Our economy has reached the vast scale where it can cause the extinction of whole populations of fish, clear-cut forests, pollute most water, and dirty the global atmosphere. This problem of being too large a burden on our planet threatens the survival of all human civilizations. The limits to growth have become common knowledge. One response has been that we have a new goals for the economy. We would like the economy to make the best use of scarce resources. We would like to keep our wealth and have a sustainable economy too. The big question is; how can we adjust to the limits to growth without accepting a lower standard of living? There seems to be a dilemma in the need to stimulate the economy to make jobs which is opposed to the need to slow the economy to avoid upsetting the natural balance too much. Federal reserve policy is being used to slow the economy, while congressional tax/borrow and spend is being used to stimulate the economy. It's like driving with the brakes and the accelerator pressed together. Our inconsistent use of use of fiscal vs. monetary policy implicitly confirms that we can't continue economic growth, but we can't give it up either. Since economic growth can't be a permanent compensation for the replacement of human labor by computer-controlled machines, we must look for some other solution to the unemployment problem. . The Solution: The dilemma of choosing between expanding and contracting the economy is not a real problem because the production of ample goods and services does not require us to stay busy as we have assumed. Our goal of having plenty of goods-in-service doesn't require the high rate of production we have today. We can use increased durability to provide more goods-in-service without the need for high resource consumption. Increased durability is a substitute for more production. The quantity of goods-in-service is proportional to both the rates of production and the life-span, or durability, of the goods. If we build products that last a long time we can own a lot of wealth without high resource consumption. The real meaning of sustainable is to last over time. Sustainability of the system we all depend on which produces physical goods will come from our use of durability. What else could be so effective? Population stability combined with the use of increased durability will allow inheritance to provide durable goods for future generations without a need for high rates of replacement production. While we focus on earning our livings we tend to ignore what we have been given. We just take wealth from nature with no payment. We are parasites on our shrinking planet, yet we make decisions based on money, while prices only reflect labor-cost and ignore the resources inputs. Other ways of making decisions have had declining influences since the world takeover of market ideology and market politics. Our economy needs to find an alternative kind of income for people to depend on since wages and paid jobs will
