Follow

On the right to repair 

It seems to me that if we actually paid the full ecological cost of the electronics we choose to buy, nobody would tolerate electronics that could not be repaired. In which case there would be no need to separately enforce a right to repair.

On the right to repair 

@freakazoid my thinking too on fossil fuel. Make power plants and customers at the pump bear the externalities - rather than subsidizing them

On the right to repair 

@freakazoid it seems that many of these schemes end up just being a ludicrous tax on the consumer when in fact the real problem behind it is a combination of lazy consumers and companies enabling them

On the right to repair 

@tsvety I don't consider it "lazy" to not want to do more work. We can say people should know better, but huge resources are going toward preventing them from knowing better, which may be what you mean by "enabling". If lithium is not mined in the US because the ecological regulations are too expensive, we should be making it even more expensive to mine it in China where the regulations are looser. Internalize the externalities so that people aren't forced to make decisions based on "global" information which is impossible to have even in theory.

On the right to repair 

@freakazoid buying anything requires work and taking the easy way out is objectively lazy when considering the pros and cons of the easy option most of the time.
what are some resources preventing them from knowing better? there's certainly withheld information, and perhaps even false information, but all it really takes is taking a moment to think about the consequences of the making of a product, and then doing a little research. 1/2

On the right to repair 

@freakazoid shifting industry to lax areas isn't just a lithium problem, it's an everything problem. even china has this issue re: junked electronics going to vietnam. levying a bonus tax on the consumer is still just dodging the issue of companies enabling this behaviour. the tax won't hurt them, it's passed on right to the consumer. (see: battery recycling fees). you don't need to have "global" information to realize that perhaps buying loads of iot devices is bad (ex.) 2

On the right to repair 

@tsvety If it's passed on right to the consumer, and it truly covers the ecological cost, then a) it can be used for equivalent cleanup/whatever, and b) consumers will buy new things less often.

If you feel cleanup is impossible, then just keep jacking up the tax until the behavior changes. If consumer electronics stop being a thing, problem solved.

On the right to repair 

@tsvety It's implicit in this, and probably not obvious, that I consider the "right to repair" to really mean that we lack two other rights: the right to throw things away, and the right of manufacturers to force us to pay a premium not to have to throw something away the moment anything goes wrong. Which is a good pairing, because manufacturers would act as a monopoly on repair.

Though I do think "remanufacturing" is potential path to the same end, as long as it can be made sustainable. I figure if externalities are properly internalized then manufacturers will choose it when it makes economic and thus ecological (by definition of "externalities being properly internalized) sense.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
R E T R O  S O C I A L

A social network for the 19A0s.