Most of the worlds economy is a waste of time and space

toughbuttfair

Watched a documentary few months ago that made the claim that by the 1920's mankind had reached a point where it could produce everything it needed for people to survive. It went on to say that post 1920's any economic growth was based on producing and buying and selling goods to each other that are not really needed i.e. consumer goods.

The only reason we buy these goods is because of an advertising machine that convinces us that they are essential for our happiness, and without them we will be total losers. I've come to the conclusion that about 60% of the world's economy is a waste of time and effort.

For example iPhones, smartphones, do we real need an updated one every year? Couldn't we make do with updating them every five years? Same with laptops, computer, T.V's etc. Do we really need Blu Ray? Whats wrong with DVD's? The housing ladder? For me a three bed semi is more than enough. You're only likely to have one or two kids at the most. Why the hell do you need a seven bed mansion with 5 bathrooms? Facebook? It's not like any of this crap is going to make you live longer?

fungun

Some of it is for enjoyment, not just to 'live longer.'

However this thread is a waste of time and space.

Logical Fallacy

toughbuttfair wrote: »

For me a three bed semi is more than enough. You're only likely to have one or two kids at the most. Why the hell do you need a seven bed mansion with 5 bathrooms? Facebook? It's not like any of this crap is going to make you live longer?

Indeed, but the concept of profitability through progress since the 1920's has actually led to quite a bit of stuff that does make you live longer.

ScumLord

toughbuttfair wrote: »

The only reason we buy these goods is because of an advertising machine that convinces us that they are essential for our happiness, and without them we will be total losers. I've come to the conclusion that about 60% of the world's economy is a waste of time and effort.

Making and selling goods is essential to the way the economy works now. If we don't make them then nobody has a job to buy food. While it's a giant waste of time if we don't do it the current shambling system breaks down around us and if there's nothing in place to replace it people will die.

For example iPhones, smartphones, do we real need an updated one every year?

Yes, technological advancements are essential to getting human off this planet.

What's wrong with DVD's?

They're crap compared to Blueray, why would you want crap?


I'm afraid your just going to have to make do, nobodies going to risk what they have for an untested way of doing things. Unless the global economy gets so bad people have no choice but I don't think even that will happen. The global economy is a fantasy that they'll change just enough to keep the power where it is.

im invisible

Meh

Yakult

toughbuttfair wrote: »

For example iPhones, smartphones, do we real need an updated one every year? Couldn't we make do with updating them every five years? Same with laptops, computer, T.V's etc. Do we really need Blu Ray? Whats wrong with DVD's? The housing ladder? For me a three bed semi is more than enough. You're only likely to have one or two kids at the most. Why the hell do you need a seven bed mansion with 5 bathrooms? Facebook? It's not like any of this crap is going to make you live longer?

Terrible examples, please try again.

Sergeant

You could take a stand and reject all these modern conveniences. I look forward to reading your penny pamphlet where you extol the virtues of living a simpler life.

CreepingDeath

toughbuttfair wrote: »

Watched a documentary few months ago that made the claim that by the 1920's mankind had reached a point where it could produce everything it needed for people to survive.

Ah yes, I think you're talking about the documentaries from "Luxstock"
They're available from YouTube here.

YouTube documentary links

Before the 1920's the Americans were frugal, only buying what they needed etc. Then the realm of public relations & marketing came in with the help of psychoanalysts who managed to manipulate people into buying things they didn't need. Getting people to indulge themselves, and obviously that shaped American society from then on.

toughbuttfair

ScumLord wrote: »

Making and selling goods is essential to the way the economy works now. If we don't make them then nobody has a job to buy food. While it's a giant waste of time if we don't do it the current shambling system breaks down around us and if there's nothing in place to replace it people will die.

Yes, technological advancements are essential to getting human off this planet.

We got off the planet way before iPhones were around. Not exactly essential.

Yakult wrote: »

Terrible examples, please try again.

You give us a few then.

Sergeant wrote: »

You could take a stand and reject all these modern conveniences. I look forward to reading your penny pamphlet where you extol the virtues of living a simpler life.

So buying something is equated with complexity?

toughbuttfair

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Indeed, but the concept of profitability through progress since the 1920's has actually led to quite a bit of stuff that does make you live longer.

Did for a while. Now its working against itself

foxyboxer

Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy **** we don't need.

All you really need is oxygen, food, water and shelter.
Anything else is a bonus!

ScumLord

toughbuttfair wrote: »

We got off the planet way before iPhones were around. Not exactly essential.

We need to be able to live in space if we are to keep going the way we're going. Its the only place we can have infinite growth.

EL_Loco

I saw something on the financial system and basically money gets created through borrowing and interest, and it's all a big loop of creating money out of nothing in the hopes of paying it back further down the line. So yeah, it's a bit mad alright.

FoxT

Hmmm.. iphones & bluray players not the most vital things in the whole world, but since the 1920s a lot of work has gone into things like X-ray machines, antibiotics, transport, energy, communications - with the result that for many people, the availability & quality of goods like healthcare, travel, education, housing - have improved immensely.

bullpost

Is that you Joe Higgins?

toughbuttfair wrote: »

Watched a documentary few months ago that made the claim that by the 1920's mankind had reached a point where it could produce everything it needed for people to survive. It went on to say that post 1920's any economic growth was based on producing and buying and selling goods to each other that are not really needed i.e. consumer goods.

The only reason we buy these goods is because of an advertising machine that convinces us that they are essential for our happiness, and without them we will be total losers. I've come to the conclusion that about 60% of the world's economy is a waste of time and effort.

For example iPhones, smartphones, do we real need an updated one every year? Couldn't we make do with updating them every five years? Same with laptops, computer, T.V's etc. Do we really need Blu Ray? Whats wrong with DVD's? The housing ladder? For me a three bed semi is more than enough. You're only likely to have one or two kids at the most. Why the hell do you need a seven bed mansion with 5 bathrooms? Facebook? It's not like any of this crap is going to make you live longer?

toughbuttfair

ScumLord wrote: »

We need to be able to live in space if we are to keep going the way we're going. Its the only place we can have infinite growth.

Totally agree with you on this point. But its not going to happen if our brightest minds spend all of their time coming up with "complex" financial algorithms, or developing faster ways to download porn. There hasn't been any real development in space exploration since the late sixties.

EL_Loco wrote: »

I saw something on the financial system and basically money gets created through borrowing and interest, and it's all a big loop of creating money out of nothing in the hopes of paying it back further down the line. So yeah, it's a bit mad alright.

Thats it exactly; one 300 year old pyramid scheme.

toughbuttfair

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Ah yes, I think you're talking about the documentaries from "Luxstock"
They're available from YouTube here.

YouTube documentary links

Before the 1920's the Americans were frugal, only buying what they needed etc. Then the realm of public relations & marketing came in with the help of psychoanalysts who managed to manipulate people into buying things they didn't need. Getting people to indulge themselves, and obviously that shaped American society from then on.

Yep that's the one.

srsly78

Automatic luddite fail for using the internet.

ScumLord

toughbuttfair wrote: »

Totally agree with you on this point. But its not going to happen if our brightest minds spend all of their time coming up with "complex" financial algorithms, or developing faster ways to download porn. There hasn't been any real development in space exploration since the late sixties.

There have been loads as a matter of fact. Everything we do in relation to low power consumption electronics will eventually be of benefit in space. NASA started the miniaturisation craze as they couldn't send the massive old computers into space.

Everything we do towards environmental concerns will helps us make the most of resources in space. Even bureaucracy has it's place as we'll need to be very careful with our resources in space and everything will have to be done flawlessly to prevent accidents.

The fact is we are in a sense living on a spaceship right now and all the problems we face with over population and limited resources are problems we would face in space on man made ships.

toughbuttfair

ScumLord wrote: »

There have been loads as a matter of fact. Everything we do in relation to low power consumption electronics will eventually be of benefit in space. NASA started the miniaturisation craze as they couldn't send the massive old computers into space.

Everything we do towards environmental concerns will helps us make the most of resources in space. Even bureaucracy has it's place as we'll need to be very careful with our resources in space and everything will have to be done flawlessly to prevent accidents.

The fact is we are in a sense living on a spaceship right now and all the problems we face with over population and limited resources are problems we would face in space on man made ships.

We're about 30 years behind where we should be, walking on Mars, Europa, Titan etc. Instead we're buying overpriced handbags

toughbuttfair

srsly78 wrote: »

Automatic luddite fail for using the internet.

Again you're confusing technological advancement with buying and selling crap.

Red_Wake

toughbuttfair wrote: »

We're about 30 years behind where we should be, walking on Mars, Europa, Titan etc. Instead we're buying overpriced handbags

What makes you think that we could overcome the challenges facing visiting Mars/Europa/Titan?

And in fairness, most people don't give a **** about space exploration. They like consumer goods, so society prioritises the production of consumer goods.

Drumpot

I agree very much with the ops sentiment and have been arguing with friends for sometime that consumerism is less about improving people's lives as it is about feeding a financial system that demands consumption.

I have and love my iPhone. You don't have to hate inventions or indeed not use them to acknowledge that they are not a necessity for the improvement of humans lives. The presumption that choice automatically makes fr better living is naive and a very cOnformed line of thought.

Survival should be our overriding drive as a species. Space exploration, global warming, asteroid protection , disease prevention, health issues should be the single most important things to our most intelligent and suvcessfuk innovators. But vested interests and greed seems to be excused and ignored at what will eventually be to the cost of humanity. I'm not a hippie, I just see the complete and utter stupidity of humanity. I can't change or enlighten the world so I will just run with it and enjoy it for as long as i can.

I just wish I could take a red pill (like the matrix) so I could forget what is obvious ignorance of man and be as non self aware as the majority who confirm to conventional "wisdom". The movie idiocracy is a parody on the world. It's not far off wrong with regards to humans priorities.

AdamD

http://static.moviefanatic.com/images/gallery/tyler-durden-pic.jpg

sup tyler

toughbuttfair

Red_Wake wrote: »

What makes you think that we could overcome the challenges facing visiting Mars/Europa/Titan?

And in fairness, most people don't give a **** about space exploration. They like consumer goods, so society prioritises the production of consumer goods.

The biggest technical challenges to exploring these places have already been overcome such as escaping the Earth's gravity. The main obstacle is a man made one in the form of lack of adequate funding.

People would prioritize space exploration if they realized that not doing so can kill them. The crux of my argument is that we waste a huge amount of time and resources convincing people that they have to engage in activity that wastes a huge amount of time and resources, in order to feel good about themselves.

AdamD

toughbuttfair wrote: »

The biggest technical challenges to exploring these places have already been overcome such as escaping the Earth's gravity. The main obstacle is a man made one in the form of lack of adequate funding.

People would prioritize space exploration if they realized that not doing so can kill them. The crux of my argument is that we waste a huge amount of time and resources convincing people that they have to engage in activity that wastes a huge amount of time and resources, in order to feel good about themselves.

Not exploring space isn't going to kill anyone alive right now you moron

Logical Fallacy

toughbuttfair wrote: »

We're about 30 years behind where we should be, walking on Mars, Europa, Titan etc. Instead we're buying overpriced handbags

I actually don't think so, i reckon we are ahead of the game. Given the period of human history where practically nothing changed...at all...what we have acheived in the last 100 years is nothing short of astounding.

foxyboxer

"If I asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said, a faster horse"
Henry Ford.

If for example the US and Russia planned a joint Mars landing project, they are going to need the funding to achieve that goal. The funding would be derived from taxes so buying a handbag or the latest iGimmick would ironically be partially funding space exploration.

bnt

If I try to put the OP's concerns in to economic language, it comes back to the notion of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) and the flaws with how we measure that. Much of what we call "the economy" consists not of creating wealth, but moving wealth around. If you buy a house, for example, that is counted in the GDP of a country ... but what has been created in that transaction? If you paid more than the house was worth, the seller has gained wealth, but you have lost wealth. The bank gives you a mortgage, and the interest on it is a gain to them - but again, it came out of your pocket, so no wealth has been created.

Think of all the money that moved around within Ireland - and in and out of Ireland - over the last decade or so. What is left behind to be called "wealth"? The Book of Kells? :cool:

If you dig down through the layers in the economy, to see where real wealth is being created, it always comes down to stuff we don't get from other people: fish from the sea, oil and minerals from the ground, and so on. The problem I have with GDP is that "moving money around" is "economic activity" included in GDP, but that's not a true measure of a society's overall wealth.

(Note: I know it's not quite that simple, and macroeconomists do make some effort to account for "externalities", but GDP is still over-used by the media as a measure of a country's success. )

Too much for AH? Tough.

Tiddlypeeps

Drumpot wrote: »

I just wish I could take a red pill (like the matrix) so I could forget what is obvious ignorance of man and be as non self aware as the majority who confirm to conventional "wisdom". The movie idiocracy is a parody on the world. It's not far off wrong with regards to humans priorities.

You're so deep... :rolleyes:

http://xkcd.com/610/

I on the other hand am happy out in my apparent ignorance. I love my iPhone, gps and internet where ever I am has saved me so much hassel and time over the last couple of years. I don't have a smart phone because I was told by an advert that I needed one, I have one because it genuinely makes my life so much easier.

I like that technology has advanced to the point where we can produce so much excess that I don't ever have to look at a farm. Not having to worry about where your next meal is going to come from has left a lot of people with a mighty amount of free time. Time some use to research medicine which helps us all to live longer and more comfortable lives. Some use that free time to create beautiful works of art, I enjoy listening to music and watching movies, I'm fairly certain I wouldn't be happy if I had to spend all my time working and had no time for any entertainment.

So what exactly is so bad about consumerism?

People my be misguided in what makes up a quality, and may be victims of advertising in that respect but that's an entirely different issues.

Spacedog

OP, I have taken the time to watch the documentary you have posted, and you are 100% correct.

toughbuttfair

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I actually don't think so, i reckon we are ahead of the game. Given the period of human history where practically nothing changed...at all...what we have acheived in the last 100 years is nothing short of astounding.

Yes I agree progress in the last 100 years has been impressive. Mankind has made huge technological strides, but its the slowdown in the last 40 years or so which is disheartening.

foxyboxer wrote: »

"If I asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said, a faster horse"
Henry Ford.

If for example the US and Russia planned a joint Mars landing project, they are going to need the funding to achieve that goal. The funding would be derived from taxes so buying a handbag or the latest iGimmick would ironically be partially funding space exploration.

Great quote.

AdamD wrote: »

Not exploring space isn't going to kill anyone alive right now you moron

You can see into the future? On average Tunguska style events happen every 100 years, and ELE every 100,000 years or so.

toughbuttfair

Spacedog wrote: »

OP, I have taken the time to watch the documentary you have posted, and you are 100% correct.

Well probably only 85%

Red_Wake

toughbuttfair wrote: »

The biggest technical challenges to exploring these places have already been overcome such as escaping the Earth's gravity. The main obstacle is a man made one in the form of lack of adequate funding.

People would prioritize space exploration if they realized that not doing so can kill them. The crux of my argument is that we waste a huge amount of time and resources convincing people that they have to engage in activity that wastes a huge amount of time and resources, in order to feel good about themselves.

How about the challenge of feeding a crew long enough for them to reach, explore and return from Mars?

Then there's the psychological challenges facing the crew....

Rented Mule

toughbuttfair wrote: »

For example iPhones, smartphones, do we real need an updated one every year? Couldn't we make do with updating them every five years? Same with laptops, computer, T.V's etc. Do we really need Blu Ray? Whats wrong with DVD's? The housing ladder? For me a three bed semi is more than enough. You're only likely to have one or two kids at the most. Why the hell do you need a seven bed mansion with 5 bathrooms? Facebook? It's not like any of this crap is going to make you live longer?

I thought that it was an excellent decision to post this on Boards.ie.

toughbuttfair

Drumpot wrote: »

I agree very much with the ops sentiment and have been arguing with friends for sometime that consumerism is less about improving people's lives as it is about feeding a financial system that demands consumption.

I have and love my iPhone. You don't have to hate inventions or indeed not use them to acknowledge that they are not a necessity for the improvement of humans lives. The presumption that choice automatically makes fr better living is naive and a very cOnformed line of thought.

Survival should be our overriding drive as a species. Space exploration, global warming, asteroid protection , disease prevention, health issues should be the single most important things to our most intelligent and suvcessfuk innovators. But vested interests and greed seems to be excused and ignored at what will eventually be to the cost of humanity. I'm not a hippie, I just see the complete and utter stupidity of humanity. I can't change or enlighten the world so I will just run with it and enjoy it for as long as i can.

I just wish I could take a red pill (like the matrix) so I could forget what is obvious ignorance of man and be as non self aware as the majority who confirm to conventional "wisdom". The movie idiocracy is a parody on the world. It's not far off wrong with regards to humans priorities.

Yes I love my iPhone too, but I don't want a new one every 12 months. One every 5 years or even 10 years. Let's cure cancer or go to Mars.

toughbuttfair

Red_Wake wrote: »

How about the challenge of feeding a crew long enough for them to reach, explore and return from Mars?

Then there's the psychological challenges facing the crew....

Easy, make a faster spaceship. Stop relying on 12th century technology.

Drumpot

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

You're so deep... :rolleyes:

http://xkcd.com/610/

I on the other hand am happy out in my apparent ignorance. I love my iPhone, gps and internet where ever I am has saved me so much hassel and time over the last couple of years. I don't have a smart phone because I was told by an advert that I needed one, I have one because it genuinely makes my life so much easier.

I like that technology has advanced to the point where we can produce so much excess that I don't ever have to look at a farm. Not having to worry about where your next meal is going to come from has left a lot of people with a mighty amount of free time. Time some use to research medicine which helps us all to live longer and more comfortable lives. Some use that free time to create beautiful works of art, I enjoy listening to music and watching movies, I'm fairly certain I wouldn't be happy if I had to spend all my time working and had no time for any entertainment.

So what exactly is so bad about consumerism?

People my be misguided in what makes up a quality, and may be victims of advertising in that respect but that's an entirely different issues.

I wouldnt of used the matrix movie as an example if I wanted to be "so deep" ! !

And in my post I said that I love my iphone . . The fact that you completely ignored the main point of my posts suggests that while you try to ridicule part of my comments, you actually agree with the sentiment . .

As humans, we do plenty of things that are self destructive - drink, eat to excess or to little, take drugs, self harm etc . These are simply habits we just couldnt be arsed changing for our own ignorant or compulsive reasons.

We like to think that we are the most intelligent species ever, but the wasted resources (time, money, intelligence) on insignificant appliances/goods is just a reminder of our impulsive and stupid self destructive nature.

Wanting something that we perceive as quality is not wrong. The problem with consumerism, certainly in its current format, is that it creates a desire for goods/services thats only goal is to appease a short term impulse that in many cases adds little to humanity.

People presume that the concept of growth in markets and sales etc is a positive. . Why exactly ? Oh yeh, cause thats drives the creation of wealth and the innovation of more meaningless sh*t that we dont need.

And btw, just because you like the way technology has advanced, doesnt disprove my point. I am happy the way technology has advanced, like I said, because I love my iphone. But I dont think the world would be a much worse place if the iphone hadnt been invented.

Your presumption, regarding not having to goto farms for food, is based on the principle that technology is being used for the betterment of man, which it clearly isnt. This is the hub of the point, most driving factors are greed/profit, not for the progression of humanity. Sometimes we are lucky when things that actually help improve humanity (like food producing plants/strategies) are invented, but the sad thing is that nowadays nearly everything that is invented is done so out of a desire for profit and is driven by consumer demand (as opposed to what is practical).

What if more research was spent on cures for cancer, alzheimers or heart disease instead of being pumped into , differant kinds of cars or tvs. . How much is spent or wasted on trying to come up with the next "iphone" or the next fizzy drink. If all the money spent on advertising around the world was pumped into space exploration or on trying to come up with ways to ensure the survival of man from asteroids/global warming/disease etc, would that really be a bad thing ? Or would it simply be a bad thing for the consumerism model that needs consumption to survive and grow?

The main point of my posts are that we are wasting our intelligence on profit driven consumerism as opposed to using it for the betterment of mankind. You are arguing about what you want or desire which a differant topic altogether.

RichieC

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Ah yes, I think you're talking about the documentaries from "Luxstock"
They're available from YouTube here.

YouTube documentary links

Before the 1920's the Americans were frugal, only buying what they needed etc. Then the realm of public relations & marketing came in with the help of psychoanalysts who managed to manipulate people into buying things they didn't need. Getting people to indulge themselves, and obviously that shaped American society from then on.

First thing I thought of when I read the OP. highly recommended Documentaries. as are, indeed, all of Adam Curtis's. Information heavy.

RichieC

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

You're so deep... :rolleyes:

http://xkcd.com/610/

I on the other hand am happy out in my apparent ignorance. I love my iPhone, gps and internet where ever I am has saved me so much hassel and time over the last couple of years. I don't have a smart phone because I was told by an advert that I needed one, I have one because it genuinely makes my life so much easier.

I like that technology has advanced to the point where we can produce so much excess that I don't ever have to look at a farm. Not having to worry about where your next meal is going to come from has left a lot of people with a mighty amount of free time. Time some use to research medicine which helps us all to live longer and more comfortable lives. Some use that free time to create beautiful works of art, I enjoy listening to music and watching movies, I'm fairly certain I wouldn't be happy if I had to spend all my time working and had no time for any entertainment.

So what exactly is so bad about consumerism?

People my be misguided in what makes up a quality, and may be victims of advertising in that respect but that's an entirely different issues.

Nothing inherently bad about it, just that the way we are going it is unsustainable.

c_man

toughbuttfair wrote: »

Yes I love my iPhone too, but I don't want a new one every 12 months. One every 5 years or even 10 years.

Then don't buy one...

steve9859

Drumpot wrote: »

Your presumption, regarding not having to goto farms for food, is based on the principle that technology is being used for the betterment of man, which it clearly isnt. This is the hub of the point, most driving factors are greed/profit, not for the progression of humanity. Sometimes we are lucky when things that actually help improve humanity (like food producing plants/strategies) are invented, but the sad thing is that nowadays nearly everything that is invented is done so out of a desire for profit and is driven by consumer demand (as opposed to what is practical).

And Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" has been somewhat corrupted by Big Business since 1759 unfortunately.....


"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages"

Edit: 1776, of course, and the Wealth of Nations, not 1759

Red_Wake

toughbuttfair wrote: »

Easy, make a faster spaceship. Stop relying on 12th century technology.

It would seem I've been trolled.

Drumpot

c_man wrote: »

Then don't buy one...

You are missing the point . .

We have iphones, now invent something else, not another version of the same thing simply to flog the same product but with a "version 1001" sticker on it . . All these differant iphones or smart phones only add choice to an already invented product which is what the conformed consumers want, not need. Oh great, the samsung galaxy lets you use more applications, well isnt that a giant leap forward for smart phones . .

Like most windows versions are a rehash of the previous one with very few upgrades. The fact that people buys them is not as important as their lazy "extras" or slightly altered versions designed simply to squeeze every penny out of a cash cow.

On a similar level, the reason we have the likes of the mindnumbingly dumb/boring "big brother" is because there was/is a demand for crap reality tv. So people can now watch other people doing nothing on tv, thats a real giant leap for mankind . .

"But thats what people want" some people have been saying . . Again, this is a differant argument, the point of this post is that much of our resources/time/money are wasted on our impulses for sh*t we really dont need because of our consumerist tendancies and the rewards that society bestows on those who invent and rehash the most consumerist orientated goods/services.

Most people who drink too much on a night out or have regular takeaways know its not a health thing to do, but do it anyway. You wouldnt say to them "well dont eat or drink so" . . Likewise, I think its fair to buy an iphone and like using it, but to awknoledge its relative significance to humanitys survival/progression . . What people consider important to them or indeed what is really popular, is not necessarily important to humanity.

AdamD

Drumpot wrote: »

You are missing the point . .

We have iphones, now invent something else, not another version of the same thing simply to flog the same product but with a "version 1001" sticker on it . . All these differant iphones or smart phones only add choice to an already invented product which is what the conformed consumers want, not need. Oh great, the samsung galaxy lets you use more applications, well isnt that a giant leap forward for smart phones . .

Like most windows versions are a rehash of the previous one with very few upgrades. The fact that people buys them is not as important as their lazy "extras" or slightly altered versions designed simply to squeeze every penny out of a cash cow.

On a similar level, the reason we have the likes of the mindnumbingly dumb/boring "big brother" is because there was/is a demand for crap reality tv. So people can now watch other people doing nothing on tv, thats a real giant leap for mankind . .

Most people who drink too much on a night out or have regular takeaways know its not a health thing to do, but do it anyway. You wouldnt say to them "well dont eat or drink so" . . I think its fair to buy an iphone and like using it, but to awknoledge its relative significance to humanitys survival/progression . . What people consider important to them or indeed what is really popular, is not necessarily important to humanity.

In your opinion.

c_man

Drumpot wrote: »

We have iphones, now invent something else, not another version of the same thing simply to flog the same product but with a "version 1001" sticker on it . . All these differant iphones or smart phones only add choice to an already invented product which is what the conformed consumers want, not need. Oh great, the samsung galaxy lets you use more applications, well isnt that a giant leap forward for smart phones . .

Under your rule surely phone development would have stopped ages ago with the first generation of landlines and possibly the first gen of mobiles?

ScumLord

toughbuttfair wrote: »

Yes I love my iPhone too, but I don't want a new one every 12 months. One every 5 years or even 10 years. Let's cure cancer or go to Mars.

That's not just down to consumerism though it's the natural rate of technological advancements, every time we make a new piece of technology it inspires a load more advancements. I think technological advancements are essential to the survival of the human race and possibly life on earth. It's the next stage of intelligent life. Even if consumerism wasn't there I'm pretty sure there would be the desire in people to continue pushing the envelope to see what's possible. It's kind of hard to judge whether our economy is encouraging or hampering the advancement. You could say consumer products for the most part are being made to be cheap and affordable but that encourages it's own advancements in production and manufacturing. Plus there's a whole other pro side to technology that's developed to be robust and over manufactured so that side of manufacturing is addressed it's just most people couldn't justify spending the money as it's above and beyond what they require.

EDIT: Consumer tech also leads into advances in important sciences like medical. New camera technologies and even the xbox connect have gone on to inspire uses in other fields.

Drumpot wrote: »

As humans, we do plenty of things that are self destructive - drink, eat to excess or to little, take drugs, self harm etc . These are simply habits we just couldnt be arsed changing for our own ignorant or compulsive reasons.

I wouldn't see these as destructive, eating and drinking to excess is something animals do, it's hard wired into us because live typically isn't easy and life knows to make the most of good times. Drugs have been a huge benefit to the human race and helped raise us out of our primeval mindset.

Drumpot

c_man wrote: »

Under your rule surely phone development would have stopped ages ago with the first generation of landlines and possibly the first gen of mobiles?

No, under my "rule" (as you put it) we wouldnt have hundreds of versions of the same phone/tv. . You dont have to have 20 differant smart phones before something new is invented with relation to progressing phones. The reason we have differant kind of phones and differant kinds of iphones is so they can exhaust the profits from the product, not because they want to enhance its users experience.

There is a lazy argument made that you need to have loads of versions of the same thing for improvements to be made. Many companies do not strive to improve their product, only to rehash the same thing in a differant package with a differant color or something on those lines.

Heres an idea, how about instead of working on their own differant "perks" for phones, if all the brightest in the mobile phone industry worked together to come up with the perfect phone - small, great signal, internet, smart, touchscreen etc. Has this happened yet ? of course not, because phones, like many products are introduced into the marketplace before they are even finished. And that aside, is there really a motivation to introduce the perfect car/phone etc ? Where do you go then ? If you invent a phone/car that never breaks down, has perfect benefits and doesnt need to be replaced, then where do you go from their ? Consumptism needs more sh*t to be invented, not the perfect product . .

And anyways, in many ways technology can be driven by government projects (military inventions helped the likes of mobiles and GPS - companies piggybacked on these technologies for profits, not to invent something useful).

ScumLord

Drumpot wrote: »

No, under my "rule" (as you put it) we wouldnt have hundreds of versions of the same phone/tv. . You dont have to have 20 differant smart phones before something new is invented with relation to progressing phones. The reason we have differant kind of phones and differant kinds of iphones is so they can exhaust the profits from the product, not because they want to enhance its users experience.

There is a lazy argument made that you need to have loads of versions of the same thing for improvements to be made. Many companies do not strive to improve their product, only to rehash the same thing in a differant package with a differant color or something on those lines.

I think your being somewhat unfair to companies there. Yes, making more and more money is the main objective but they do put considerable thought into making products that people want to buy. They can't just make a completely new product that's light years ahead of the last one. For one thing a complete overhaul of the product would more than likely mean a complete overhaul of the factory that makes the product. It means investing loads of money into something that's essentially unproven and they would have to pass all those costs onto the consumer who won't pay it.

If they have a product but a competitor comes out with something more popular they will use what they have to make a competing product of their own. These changes may be cosmetic but if people buy it the company almost has no choice but to make these changes if they want to stay in business. It doesn't take a cold person to make a product that way either, especially when there's a few thousand people depending on a pay check. It's the nature of the beast not a conspiracy against the general public.

Irish Steve

Before the 1920's the Americans were frugal, only buying what they needed etc. Then the realm of public relations & marketing came in with the help of psychoanalysts who managed to manipulate people into buying things they didn't need. Getting people to indulge themselves, and obviously that shaped American society from then on.

Not in the way you meant it, but yes, you got that bit well right:D

No one has said it in the thread yet, but one of the reasons we're not making the progress in things like Space, or even in more mundane things like reducing our energy footprint, or reducing our water wastage, or many of the other things that are not helping what's happening around us is very simple



TOO MUCH IS BEING SPENT ON WEAPONS OF WARFARE AND THEIR USE

If the money that's been spent on creating weapons, and using them, was being spent on creative ways to improve the lot of the world population, we'd have already seen a massive number of changes that would have reshaped our world for the better, but no, we waste trillions on local wars that do very little to change what's going on in the area that they happen in, but they sure do generate a lot of economic activity in the countries that provide the weapons, and the tools to use them, and the transport to get them to the scene of use........and.......and........I think the picture is clear.

Imagine what the Space program could have achieved if the money spent in Iraq and Afghanistan (to name just 2 countries, there are others) had been spent on developing new space vehicles and techniques. Would we still be seeing the famines and droughts? Would we still be fighting over oil if there had been real progress made on finding and developing alternatives? Our world statesmen and religious leaders have a lot to answer for, and maybe, one day, they really will answer for what they have, or more often, have NOT done.

It's AH, it's Friday, enough:P

cock robin

toughbuttfair wrote: »

Yes I love my iPhone too, but I don't want a new one every 12 months. One every 5 years or even 10 years. Let's cure cancer or go to Mars.

Why would the powers that be cure cancer. There is no money in the cure only in the medicine.