It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
STU - wrote (see)
JW - yes the media encourages us to keep consuming and keep wanting. We consume too much. We have to consume food to sustain us and we all need shelter etc. Great to have stuff to help us communicate and travel and move people and goods around. We have the technology to make stuff that will last a lifetime but this technology will not be promoted and invested in because the system needs constant regualr consumers. They make stuff that doesn't last in spite of the technology we have. That aint fantasy but a fact. Watch the videos and see what you think after.
Ok, I've only just wandered into this thread and confess I haven't read all the way back.....but my opinion, for what it's worth -
Yes the media encourages us to keep wanting & consuming, but hey I have a brain and can make my own decisions. I would hate to live in a society where there was even more intrusion into what I should and shouldn't do and what I could and could not have. There's already too much of that.
In terms of do we need debt in the economy......yes we do. I'm not an economist, but do have a certain level of understanding. To be able to save and gain interest on the savings, the banks have to earn money through lending to be able to pay money to savers........or do you want a society where there is purely a status quo? Also, with an ever increasing population, ignoring wanting the latest gadget etc, we need to produce more to be able to sustain more people. I mean in terms of essentials like food and water etc. Very few businesses have money at their finger tips to pay for increased production....they need to borrow to invest in capital.
Just my opinion and I've probably been over simplistic and will happily stand corrected
Dave The Ex- Spartan wrote (see)
TimR wrote (see)The thing about capitalism is it hinges around people buying shiny things that they don't need. People are told they need shiny things and believe they need them NOW.. Coupled with the speed that "must have gadget" technology moves you have a nasty situation.
TimR wrote (see)
No one is saying you must have....... You are being seduced by baubles and trinkets
Years ago, I spent an afternoon educating my daughter on the difference between want and need.
That's bang on DTEX
I replaced my washing machine when it became uneconomical to repair. I replaced my deeply unfashionable mobile phone when it stopped working. I still have my prehistoric generation 2 iPod. The battery is wearing out a bit now but it still works - I'll get a new one when it's finally knackered.
You don't HAVE to be suckered into all this "must have the latest gadget" crap - I am an advertiser's worst nightmare.
Saffy - the media is pretty subtle in how it promotes stuff and many of us do just swallow a load of stuff and believe we need this and that. A lot of folk have complained here about the young not knowing the difference between want and "need" and struggling with not getting what they want. Some of us are savvie saffy a great many are not. What is important in some lives is getting the latest designer item or upgrading their mobile and if they cannot afford to do that they have big style tantrums and do feel deprived. A system that wants you to consume doesn't want you to use your brain and weigh stuff up but loves it when you feel you "need" what it offers.
We can provide all the genuine basic needs and they do not need promoting really -we all will eat and find shelter. A lot of stuff is unnecessary .
The biggest advantage that rapidly growing economies like China and India have over us at the moment is that they have a large resource of cheap labour. This has been true of most successful economies throughout history, even to the extent of slavery for example in America or the Roman empire.
So what we need is a resource of cheap labour. I suggest that anyone that misses a credit card payment should have all their possession seized by the state and sold to repay their debts. They should then be taken into ten years of forced servitude working unpaid for the good of our country and fed only gruel and water. Their children could be made to work in Nike sweat shops here in the UK so at least we would be able to get decent running shoes cheaply.
The boost to the economy should largely be used to reduce the taxes paid by decent hard-working people like me. Anyone that disagrees with this new policy should have their severed head stuck on a spike outside the Tower of London (sorry about that Stu).
. What is important in some lives is getting the latest designer item or upgrading their mobile and if they cannot afford to do that they have big style tantrums and do feel deprived.
back to parental responsibility again (typed on a 4 year old HP lap top)
You do tend to make a lot of sweeping statements though stu without the facts to back it up. "a great many" just sounds like something out of a tabloid (sorry to keep making that comparison but thats what it reads like).
yeah a lot of stuff IS unnecessary, clearly, but some of us can afford the unnecessary stuff without getting into huge debt, the people that can't but do, well more fool them. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out what you can and can't afford, you do have to be greedy though.
KRYTEN FOR PRESIDENT OF THE WORLD!!!
Screamapillar wrote (see)
JW - I could back 'em up and do sometimes a lot of times can't be arsed really. From a sociological perspective there is general patterns and observations. Society is very complexed as you well know and social facts are not hard cold facts like those that exist in the physical world as you probably know.
I am influenced by Marx on how ideology works but would not consider myself a Marxist. He did under-estimate it's power and could not have predicted today's media. Communism, however never worked for a lot of reasons , some that Marx would have said "told you so" others because communism didn't develop out of the collapse of Capitalism. Now Capitalism is global but still its nature remains self destructive. We need something different altogether IMHO and I would prefer we set it up sooner rather than later as later would mean a lot of suffering and wars over oil and stuff
"Ad men" somehow manange to sell stuff even when they tell you up front that their advert is lying ("lashes enchanced in post-production" anyone?)
I shudder to think what that says about their target market.
Many ads are lies and many financial products are flim-flam.
Its not just about "being strong and resisting" the hype; it's also about expecting commercial organisations to display at least a rudimentary level of ethical behavour, and if they don't, govts should force them to.
I would add further comment but it may lead to me being labelled a Nazi for the first time ever. And for what it's worth, I don't think the Nazis were all that big on individualism and capitalism. They were more into resocialising...
. We set up regulators but they are either with the corps
So now you are accusing the Advertising Standards Agency of corruption ?
I do wish I was as white as you are
that is very true SVT - what I objected to was the implication that certain groups should be targeted and left to rot if they didn't work for the system or simply could not afford to live in it. (just short of gas chambers IMHO) That is neo Nazi to me. As I have said "some views". Crude individualism is another thing I object to but that aint much to do with nazism.
yes I do -I find it pretty funny at times -truly
SQTMS, I think.
Or, its more recent and more explosive follow-up, STOOMNOKL.
kittenkat wrote (see)
sqgqtms ... Damn, I've forgotten what it is!
SQTMS = Sub-Quality Thread Material Stu?
WWTFENTBA. CWJSSEO? IWOHWT, TWHTTTIO.
Wondering why the f*** everything needs to be abbreviated? Can't we just start spelling everything out? If we're on here wasting time, then we have time to type it out.