agree. the main idea is to shift away from buying new to buying used, bartering, using cash. there’s such abundance of used goods in the US people actually wouldn’t have to compromise their lifestyles and this could continue on for months and months and months.
Thanks edited my OP to advertise this. i like passive resistance, it takes much fewer resources, non-violent etc.
but a lot of the demand can be met by buying used stuff
Firstly, the covid pandemic was a multi year event.
The initial shocks happened in the first 3 months.
Secondly, publicly traded companies were enriched greatly from that time. Also it wasn’t conscious degrowth or a lack of ability, it was supply chain issues that caused products not to be available for purchase.
Yup, that’s why the control here is in the consumers’ hand and again, it’s sort of like reducing your consumption so it starts hitting the metrics enough for corporations to realize the risks.
I already barely buy shit. I’ve always said “if the economy hinged on my purchasing habit, the country would go bankrupt”.
well, you’re already part of the movement:)
should all buy less and be more mindful of where our money goes. I think we should buy locally and promote businesses that you agree with on levels beyond the value of the good or services they offer as often as possible. However, I don’t think we can effectively protest this way unless it was a true lifestyle change for a large portion of the country.
I’d disagree, we saw it with COVID how vulnerable corporations are. They’ll always focus on stock buybacks and stuff like that over recession-proofing. Also, this is quite an equitable movement. Those who can’t afford new shit are already contributing to it.
Ask yourself what that means to business contracts which depend on those laws to be guaranteed,
Agree. If they feel the rules of engagement can be changed unilaterally, we can show that this can go both ways.
n the strike is over. If the company can anticipate well enough, they’d raise prices when the demand comes back and come out ahead in the long run.
You have to use/consume less, and for an extended time period, not just change when that purchase happens.
But yes, with that caveat, use less, and choose the lesser evil when you do need to buy something. The individual effect is small, but small things add up.
The mitigation is to focus on used goods so it is much less painful. Unlike gas, people don’t need that new TV, or that next phone, gaming console, their Nth streaming sub and use alternative (wink) ways to consume entertainment media.
it’s like the 3rd repost of this Cherrypicking galore: They literally took 27 which is the fire deaths from rear-ending only (vs 41 fire fatalities from a 2.5 year period instead of the 9 years they mention They conveniently did not use the 1,626 pinto fatalities from those 2.5 years. They used the total number of pintos produced, not the number of pintos on the roads at the end of the analysis, which would be less than 2.2M. At least they did get your clicks.
I think this energy density math really depends on whether only the core or the whole surface area is taken into consideration.
A headline without calling it an “Artificial Sun”?!
tech and age, need for investment.