I hope you all had a restful holiday week.
I spent my free time last week reading a fascinating new book by the Center for Investigative Reporting’s Mark Schapiro. The book is “Exposed – The Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Products: Who’s At Risk and What’s At Stake for American Power.” In this book, Schapiro compares approaches to environmental and health regulations regarding electronics, chemicals, food and more in the U.S. and the European Union. He documents the differences in the regulations as well as some of the factors leading to these differences.
The overall finding of the book is that the E.U. is adopting a series of new regulations which aresignificantly more protective of health and the environment than the regulations in the U.S. The U.S., in turn, is increasingly becoming the market of last resort for those products too toxic to be accepted in the E.U. or a number of other countries which are following the E.U.’s regulatory lead. For example, theRemoval of Hazardous Substances directive, known as the RoHS directive, requires that six toxic substances — mercury, cadmium, lead, chromium and two chemical flame retardants – be removed from all electronically powered devices made or sold in EU countries. Schapiro explains that “The RoHS directive became law after hundreds of studies suggested the ingredients could have potent carcinogenic and endocrine-disrupting effects. The EU also wanted to see its electronics recycled – and none of those six substances are recyclable. They are too toxic.”
As “”Exposed” explains, prior to the RoHS directive, many European electronic manufacturers and retailers warned of economic catastrophe if forced to redesign their products without these toxic chemicals. But that didn’t happen. Business is humming along fine and European consumers of electronic gadgets are free from a number of known toxics to which we, in the U.S., continue to be exposed.
Mid-way through reading this book came Christmas. My 15 year old nephew got an ipod touch. My daughter and her 12 year old cousin sang and danced to music on her ipod. I went jogging with a Zen portable music player. On the flight home from my family gathering, I noticed that about a third of the passengers had some shiny new electronic gadget to play music or otherwise keep them busy. My guess was that few of these people know that their portable music players contain known toxic chemicals. And fewer still probably know that these same chemicals are outlawed in Europe.
Here’s the deal: I am not against music. In fact, I love music. I am grateful to be able to have music in our lives. However, I don’t think we should have to risk exposureto toxic chemicals in order to crank the tunes. Likewise, the workers who manufacture these devices and who recycle them at the end of their life shouldn’t be exposed to toxic chemicals either.
If it is possible to make electronics in Europe without these toxic chemicals, then it is possible here. We need to demand this.
Schapiro writes “Americans are being exposed to hazards from which their European peers are being protected. In one industry after another, a new double standard is emerging: that between the protection offered Europe’s citizens, and those afforded to Americans. Repeatedly, American companies that have been forced to meet higher standards in Europe, claim to Americans that they cannot do the same thing back in the United States. Why can’t companies do in America what they’re already doing in Europe?”
Schapiro also explains: “The EU has been demanding that its industry take responsibility for the collateral health damages caused by its products, and it has done so with innovations that are leading the world.”
I’d like to suggest some actions for all of us in the New Year.
1. Check out Mark Schapiro’s book Exposed: The Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Products (Chelsea Green Publishing, 2007) Tell your friends, tell your neighbors.
2. Photocopy sections of the book and send them to elected officials and electronics producers asking “Why Not Here?” Why has the U.S. gone from being a leader to a laggard in regulating for environmental and health protection? If companies can make electronics without super toxics in Europe, why not here? Our children, our communities deserve the strongest possible environmental and health protection too!
3. Contact one of the many excellent groups working on environmental health issues in the electronics industry to get more involved. Here are some suggestions; please post other recommendations or ideas also.
Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition
www.svtc.org
Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition is a diverse organization engaged in research, advocacy and grassroots organizing to promote human health and environmental justice in response to the rapid growth of the high-tech industry
Basel Action Network
www.ban.org
BAN works to ensure that exports of hazardous electronic waste (Particularly from the USA) to developing countries, exposed by BAN, are eliminated and replaced with producer responsibility and green design programs/legislation.
Electronics Take Back Coalition
www.computertakeback.com
ETBC works to protect the health and well being of electronics users, workers, and the communities where electronics are produced and discarded by requiring consumer electronics manufacturers and brand owners to take full responsibility for the life cycle of their products, through effective public policy requirements or enforceable agreements.
Let’s crank the tunes this New Year’s Eve and into the future while we work together for toxic-free tunes in the U.S. and globally. There is simply no need to have all these toxic chemicals in our music players and other electronics. And if we make our voices heard, we can change this. Europe has already shown that it is possible.
Cheers,
Annie
RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 1st, 2008 at 6:36 am
About your ipod… According to Apple’s website (under ‘environment’):
All Apple products worldwide comply with RoHS standards.
So the EU’s stricter standards are benefiting us already with a few companies.
It’s also worth noting that Apple was more public with their environmental policy after Greenpeace’s ‘Green my Apple’ campaign.
So it’s worth sending those letters and mails to people with power!
January 2nd, 2008 at 4:01 am
I just discovered your video and blog – well done, BRAVO! You have put out to the world something I have been trying to tell people for the past 15 years… this STUFF has a nasty trail every inch of the way!
Four years ago, my boyfriends son came home delighted because he scored the best in a school assignment for that week. I was appalled!
The assignment was for the kids, 10 years old, to figure out ways and where to shop so they get the most STUFF for their money. I bit my lip as long as I could because it is a good thing for a kid to bask in the glory of a high grade.
Then I asked, “did your teacher also have you explore how to look for things that were more sustainable or perhaps suggest that investing the money in something other than stuff might be an option?”
The answer was, “no, what are you crazy we were suppose to find ways to get as much stuff for our money as possible!”
Obviously, I was the skunk at the picnic when I started discussing the path, the nasty trail all this consumerism produces.
If it were my kid, I would have marched down to that school and insisted that if they were going to teach our kids to get as much stuff as they could for their money that they should also be required to educate the kids on the environmental, people, economic, social, and debtor impact of such rampant ill-advised behavior.
They never did teach the kids about the impacts of consumerism. Might I suggest that you also target heavily the school system. The norm of our society today does NOTHING to teach our kids anything other than to nag parents to death over this toxic and wasteful junk that, like you siad in your video, in 6 months from now is going to get thrown out (unless it gets added to the bedroom that the kid an hardly sleep in because it’s filled up with this garbage).
January 2nd, 2008 at 10:22 am
Hi,
Great film. I just watched it for the first time and will be disseminating it widely.
I’m a social work student (with a background in fine arts) who is interested in eventually making an educational film clarifying how alternatives to the national and provincial budgets could work (explaining the benefits of the welfare state and how it’s being threatened by the government’s close ties/favours to corporations).
I am deeply impressed by the simultaneous complexity and accessibility of your film and would love to hear more about how it was made. Any information would be greatly appreciated.
Either way, thanks for putting this out there.
Karen
January 2nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
I am reading ‘The Dollar Crisis’ by Richard Duncan. I appears that the current ’story of stuff’ model has set up a economy bubble as well as have negative eco-effects. Richard Duncan makes a good argument that 2008 will be the year of the next depression. In your opinion, how would a depression effect the ’story of stuff’ model?
January 2nd, 2008 at 9:48 pm
I realize that my little post here is not entirely related to this specific blog entry, but I wanted to leave a note thanking you for this website. I discovered it today. I am 25 and I will never forget a lesson (about the Great Depression) I had in seventh grade during social studies class. The teacher explained to all of us that the Great Depression was caused mainly by the fact that the products created during that time period didn’t break down fast enough. A refrigerator produced back then lasted a person’s lifetime (was the teacher’s specific example). Since things lasted so long, there wasn’t enough buying and selling going on to keep the economy afloat. Hence, depression. He then taught us all the facts that you present here: products are now made to intentionally last only a short amount of time. This prevents another depression according to him. People keep buying things and everything is moving and we are all good. It was done on purpose. However, my seventh grader brain could not wrap around such a concept. How could we keep buying new things all the time? Isn’t that wasteful? Wasteful is such a small word to describe the destruction such a setup has created. I went to college with a plan to major in economics and did not find the answers to the “finite world” problem (which a seventh grader could recognize) in the classes I took.
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Annie,
Mary Hunt directed me to your website. What a great educational piece you have here!
I will be featuring you on my green blog today!
Keep up your awesome work,
cheers,
marguerite manteau-rao
http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com
January 3rd, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Hi Annie.
I discovered your website through Design 21, and I’m glad I did. Brilliant is all I can say.
I’m going to write a little story on my website, with links to yours and the movie.
All the best with your 2008 projects.
Eric
January 4th, 2008 at 2:39 am
Hi Annie-
In California, the environmental and public health communities have been working to pass legislation that bans such toxic chemicals, but we’ve been shut down too often industry interests. Every year the Chamber of Commerce puts out a list to legislators entitled “Job Killers”, falsely claiming that these public health protections would do damage to our economy. (Beware candidates funded by their JobsPAC – they have a pro-industry agenda.) The irony, as you pointed out, is that many of these toxic chemicals that we work to ban have already been axed in the E.U., meaning that alternatives exist. In the meantime, we are left with a federal government that continues to relax regulation of chemicals through such actions as the rollback of the Toxic Release Inventory.
The good news is that California has made some progress and other states have followed in our footsteps, from the setup of e-waste recycling programs to the recent banning of phthalates in baby products.
Thanks for all of the work you are doing to investigate, educate, and remediate.
Beth
January 4th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
In case anyone wants the abridged version, online, Mark Schapiro wrote an article in Harper’s Magazine about the toxic chemical problem. Here is the link: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/10/0081742
January 5th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Hello Annie,
This is creative and concise. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I am not sure how I missed the Berkeley screening on December 6. Our church meets in the Gaia Arts Center on Sunday mornings, and we have an office there. I don’t know how much interaction you have had with churches, but we are working to get them mobilized in the Bay Area through Project Peace (www.projectpeaceeastbay.org). We are hosting a discussion on Tuesday February 22 – “The Sustainable Church: Pursuing the Triple Bottom Line.” Would you be interested in joining us? Many thanks.
Jonathan
January 6th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Jut a thought as I was listening to/watching your wonderfully informative presentation…doesn’t it use more energy to have white background and bright colors on your website? I thought I read something about it…this website seems very white and perhaps it would be more “efficient and energy friendly” if it was darker or had black background…
Thanks though! Awesome work!
January 8th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Your video was great and right to the point. I agree 100% and try my best to recycle and I am a hopeless curbside treasure hunter — it is crazy what is out on the street on trash day, wasted and could at least be donated to be reused. I try not to buy something unless I absolutely need it as well and I have an old computer bc as you said it isn’t necessary to buy SOTA everything. If it works I am keeping it for as long as I can or will rescue it as we did a 27″ perfectly good tv– we needed one bc ours died after 15 years and there it was so we saved 2 TVs in essence. We are not saving the world but it is a small start.
I also firmly believe that kids diagnosed with autism has risen dramatically due to this whole ridiculousness of consumer waste and toxic ingestion. We have a massive trash to steam plant 5 miles down the road in the POOREST area of our county. People there don’t have a voice and right next door is an adjoining medical waste plant. I won’t go on a tangent about this or that but it is ECONOMICS that these places are where they are even in this country and they take trash and medical waste from up and down the east coast. Poeple in this area de of cancer at a young age…
Anyway …your video gave me hope and inspiration that there are people out there that think and really care. Thanks and I have passed this on to everyone I know and will send a link to a teacher I know in our area as well.
January 8th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Great video! I especially liked the reinforcement that we need to change from a linear to a closed system.
One clarification regarding the RoHS Directive in the EU. RoHS actually stands for the RESTRICTION of Hazardous Substances, not removal. The toxic substances you listed are NOT banned by the directive. Instead, maximum concentrations have been established.
Please see the attached UK government website for more info:
http://www.rohs.gov.uk/
January 8th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Just watched the ’story of stuff’. It’s great. Thanks. So straightforward.
Am an environmental educator here in New Zealand. Smaller country, same problems.
Have downloaded the clip and can’t wait to share it around….
January 8th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
This is a superb video. i have shared it with many people in the few days I’ve had it. As far as it goes it does a great job. But doesn’t go far enough. Consuming isn’t just about stuff. When I talk to people about consumption I simply describe their consuming habits by asking them to subtract their savings from their total income including gifts and godsends and everything else. The difference is how much they are really consuming. There are people that spend a hundred thousand a year but fully believe they have done so wisely. Do you not think that Bill Gates and Donald Trump believe that they spend their money wisely? Is it eco wise for a couple to build a twelve million dollar house that is off the grid?
The video misses the mark on that score.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Great website! Thanks.
A study regarding toxins in humans was done on some Oregonians earlier this year. It was well published throughout the Sate, and would be a worthwhile effort for others to replicate and report the finding. I wish I had been one of the participants!
Check out: http://www.oeconline.org/pollutioninpeople/report/keyfindings
January 11th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Thank you for the time, energy, and passion put into this film! I’m going to link to you from my blog.
http://www.blog.aaronhavens.com
keep up the good work
January 11th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Annie,
I was just curious, are you at all religious? Because a lot of what you said in your video is very much inclined with the “being good stewards of nature” found in the Hebrew Scriptures.
January 11th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
hi Annie and thanks for putting this site together – great stuff!
One point I don’t recall you mentioning in that 20 min presentation is the impact of bank created debt on the economic processes you describe. Can I ask whether you have read a book called The Grip of Death (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1897766408/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top)? If not I would ask you to consider taking the time out to read it…
All best wishes to you for the future.
January 11th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Hey I watched the “Story of Stuff” movie and really liked it. I’ll be glad to translate it into Hebrew, so if you want me to please contact me on my e-mail :O)
January 13th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Great information. Too bad the tone is smarmy and smug. Is the population so dumbed down that you have to but this in the tone of a children’s video? I felt like I was watching sesame street.
January 13th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Annie, thank you so much for your activities and for the film. This approach will go a long way to making the the necessary paradigm shifts happen. I am committed to a similar shift in Customer Satisfaction a customer centricity, and posted a your link, as the ULTIMATE customer satisfaction play. I believe true customer centricity and the benefits thereof, go beyond the purchase or use of the product. What better way to show respect for the customer than to protect them from harmful affect of our products.
Thanks
Rudy Vidal
http://www.willtheybuyagain.wordpress.com
January 14th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Excellent information! Thanks very much for a persuasive film. It made a point at the very end about local sustainable economy; in addition to purchasing locally grown goods it would be beneficial to encourage purchasing other locally produced goods. Or even better: growing one or two items of your own food, and producing one or two items of your own consumption. Make a few extras and trade your work with neighbors who have other skills – removing another “yellow arrow” purchase!
This theory points towards a society of self-sustaining communes as an ideal, and I thoroughly agree that such a society model has enormous advantages. Unfortunately it’s hard enough to get our American consumerist culture to purchase Fair Trade coffee or CFL bulbs; the utopian vision you allude to may be too far a leap for many. I’d like to see more from you then! More films – one for each of the linear steps, detailing some of the more egregious ways we are screwing things up, then indicating actions that individuals can take to address issues affecting that step.
I would love to believe that government of the people, by the people, and for the people, will actually one day begin to act again in the interest of the people rather than corporations… but I don’t think that day will come within our lifetimes. Positive action needs to be taken by individuals, and then when enough individuals have taken action maybe government will act too. Maybe. Help enough individuals take action on each of those linear steps though, and corporations may have been affected without government intervention. That seems to be how all parties like it best.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:19 am
This video is not the way to educate anyone, adults or children. If the tone was more adult – and the video meant for adults, specifically those of us that are evironmental educators-fine…but this is way too technical and frankly, scary and full of “conspiracy theories” for students of school age to be able to handle. I spend my life educating children and adults about the environment – but I find that true inspiration comes from teaching respect and wonder for the natural world – thereby leading people of any age to make better choices. Teaching by frightening and downing the goverment is not the way to go. As the saying goes – ” You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.”
February 3rd, 2008 at 10:01 am
I’ve watched the Story of Stuff twice now, and tend to agree with most of it. My problem is I am also a consumer in some of the ways described. I’m on the receiving end of that consumption chain.
LCD flat-panel monitors reduce power consumption, and are far less hazardous than CRT monitors. This is a change for the good. CRTs have lead, phosphorous, and probably a few other nasty surprises I’m not aware of. Should you run off and replace yours, well, perhaps, but not just for a new shiny. They are also sharper, and therefore less stressful for your eyes. They take less power, so less power needs to be generated. I have no CRTs in my house anymore, but all mine were replaced as I moved or as they failed.
I am also a programmer. This means I tend to need newer computers. Do I need top of the line quad-core CPUs? Nope. Don’t have any. I don’t run Microsoft Windows, which requires you to have a very modern computer. I run NetBSD, which is Unix based, and while it is not as snappy and pretty as Windows, it runs on 5 year old computers without a problem. For compiles, I log into a server (without any graphics at all) and do my work from there. Why upgrade when you really don’t need to?
Part of the push to upgrade computers — a big one for many — is games. Without the latest graphics card, CPU and its associated compatible motherboard, you are left in the dust. I play a MMORPG, with many many others, and you need graphics speed. Even single player games are going full 3D amazing graphics — it’s part of the “wow factor” — as in “Wow, that’s amazingly pretty!”
Also, I dabble in electronics in my spare time. That is, I design, build, and program microcontroller based systems. Yea, I’m a nerd. The RoHS push in Europe has helped the US people a lot in the electronics world. Most places will not want to design and build two products — one for the US, one for Europe — because it costs more for them to do so. Also, most people making chips for computers, in order to sell to European markets, have to be “RoHS compliant.” This means that they can either have two fabrication plants — one that is RoHS compliant, and one that is not — or have one. They choose one RoHS compliant one.
Some things cannot be made without hazardous materials. Remember, the “R” in RoHS is “Reduction.” It’s not “Elimination.” Some things just cannot work without rather nasty things.
Good things like recycling batteries — all batteries — by communities; organized recycling centers or curb-side pick-up of recycling, etc. have not made it to all parts of the US yet. Here in Norman, OK we have voted in curb-side recycling. That was a year ago… there was no time line on when it would start, or what form it would take. In the mean time, one recycling center was closed down, leaving only two for the whole city.
As for corporations being the biggest consumer of our governmental resources… ‘Nuff said.
You need to get on the Daily Show.
–Michael
February 11th, 2008 at 12:10 am
While a lot of the info in The Story Of Stuff may be true, there is no reference for some of the claims. I know for a fact that the mention about why computers are obsolete so quickly is absolutely untrue. The whole segment is simplistic and misleading, as well as completely inaccurate. And the claim that 99% of everything we buy goes in the dump within 6 months – where does that figure come from? Does it count a piece of gum as having the same value as a television or car? If you remove consumables (food and energy) does the percentage stay the same?
Inaccuracies distort the more important message. It allows critics to say the whole thing is nonsense, even if they know the main points are legitimate.
If Ms. Leonard wishes to be taken seriously, she should create another presentation that backs up her claims with legitimate sources and double check her facts. Offer realistic alternatives, or at least offer possible solutions that take into account the current world situation – particularly China.
On a personal note, I would be very happy if ALL of the “disposable” stuff like disposable cameras and phones (and Styrofoam cups and plates, for that matter) were taken off the market right away! We don’t need ‘em!
February 14th, 2008 at 1:58 am
I just have one question, and I know people are going to be angry that I am asking this, but..Why, do you offer stuff on your website, …If you want to make a big impact…don’t sell dvd’s for ten dollars. I was really excited about this, until I saw that you, like everyone else, are just trying to make a buck. I mean we are all in the struggle for money, and I just realized now that I am at college that STUFF doesn’t matter. I think you should REFUSE to sell stuff. Every classroom in this campus has a computer with a projector. Honestly…they could watch it off the internet, and even in high school we could get a projector for a class if we needed one. The internet should be enough. Just a suggestion..Don’t make anyone else rich by buying their blank dvd’s. Even if you are helping spread awareness, you could help stop all the stuff!!!!
SORRY!!! i don’t mean to be a bitch!
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Have you looked at the EU regulations for Electrical waste – WEEE as its called – it puts the responsibility of disposing of eqipment back ontothe manufacturers. This seems a good way of making sure that the disposal and recycling of equipment is built into the design of the product – instead of obsolesence.
http://www.netregs.gov.uk/netregs/275207/1631119/1631167/?lang=_e
February 27th, 2008 at 11:35 am
I found this movie on Yahoo answers where someone posted the link and then claimed that they counted 47 bold lies, and 6 questionable assertions (in the movie) without stating any proof or details of those lies and assertions.
So below is my reply.
Excellent presentation – thank you for that. I must make sure to send that link around to all my contacts, so more people will know about it.
I actually agreed with everything she said. And just from my own observation and reading, I know she was telling the truth. I especially like the fat heels/skinny heels argument – how advertising deliberately changes fashions so that you feel like you are forced to go out and buy the latest fashionable shoes to feed the “golden arrow of consumerism”. And not just shoes, but clothes, computers, gadgets like i-pods and Wii’s, cars, toys, etc, etc.
You know that saying – “Keeping up with the Joneses”? Well that is what that means – going out and buying new stuff – not just to keep up with the neighbours – but because the advertising says you must. Most people have no idea of just how much they are being manipulated.
I REFUSE to be manipulated. In my house we ALWAYS turn the TV sound off when the ads are on TV. Have you ever noticed how the sound is always turned up (at the station) when the ads start? It is very annoying, so we just turn our sound off. That way we do not get influenced or manipulated by the ads.
In my house we have 2 computers. one is nwe with a flat screen (now 2 years old), and the other is the very old computer – now 8 years old – it used to have Windows 98 but has been upgraded to windows XP. The RAM cannot be physically increased, so its slowing down a lot more because there are a lot more websites out there that need more than 512 KB of RAM to run. My son uses it and he gets very frustrated when some sites dont work, because we dont have enough memory or we have some “very important piece of must have software” missing. We will not go out and buy software just because the internet says we need it. Software is expensive. If my son has to miss out on that particular website – well he can find another site that does not need to use such sophisticated software.
As far as I am concerned – the advertising can go jump in a lake. I will buy what I choose to buy when I choose to buy it.
And if you think she was telling lies about the Americans consumer buying, invading other countries for their resources, spending 50% of the taxes on the military – hello? where have you been for last 6 years???
I’ll bet you sit there with your fingers in your ears going la,la,la,la,la, ignoring you, ignoring you – just like my kid does when he doesnt want to hear the truth.
February 28th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
THANK GOD you are getting the information out!
Materialistic consciousness = anxiety & depression.
Please continue your endeavors!
March 4th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Hey Annie,
I just read two articles about toxins. One was the release of the multi-year study that showed toxins to be present even in pristine areas of National parks. The other was an article in the LA Times about a respected scientist with the EPA who was dismissed from the committee regulating the toxin deca because the chemical company lobby pointed out that she openly believed deca was dangerous. The chemical company lobby pushed for her dismissal on the grounds that she was not “impartial”. After studying the toxin, I would imagine that she would develop a stance on the issue, and I imagine that it would be impartial in favor of public health. Do you know how citizens can effectively respond to this injustice?
June 13th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Let’s get this straight. The government is not supposed to take care of us. A lot of the problems we have now are because the government stepped-in. Flame retardants? Who do you think makes a pillow manufacturer dip their pillows in retardants? Or my kids’ pj’s?
And you know we can’t just throw away those new light bulbs. My house is full of them now. What are we going to do in 4 years when all of our environmentally-friendly lightbulbs burn out and we can’t take them to the dump?
I’ll bet Al Gore has invested in the one company that will make that all possible, because he cares so much.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
alexander the great and population of the world…
Thanks for the information, love it….
July 23rd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
As someone with some background as a technician in both the electronics and computer industries,as well as considerable experience in the automotive field, I can only observe that there used to be a different relationship between manufacturers and their customers when things were less commodified. In the “good old days”, there were companies like IBM, Hewlett Packard, Digital, BMW, Mercedes Benz….virtually any iconographic manufacturer you could name, took pride in what they made, and viewed that every sale was the beginning of a life long relationship with a valued client. This relationship also extended to their employees and their communities,which were viewed as assets,and the source of their strength as a company. This has all changed in recent times, as more and more companies only exist as virtual entities marketing cheaply made and shoddily designed “product” sourced from the lowest cost vendor, with no consideration to future maintenance or repair. What was once considered a ‘durable’ or ‘capital’ product, is now relegated to the status of ‘disposable’. Where there used to be “lifetime” product support ( I’ve gotten repair parts for twenty-something year old computers, and an 80 year old British car in the past, but I doubt that the same level of service exists today ) The only difference that I can see in my knowledge of these companies,is that once they were privately held companies,and the ideals of committed service and excellence in design of their founders was the corporate culture and byword. When control passed from their founders to outsiders as holders of publicly offered stock took control, their products degraded from being a personal design or values statement to being a ‘financial instrument’, or more succinctly, from being an ‘heirloom’ product into being disposable crap. The attitude toward their customers changed as well,from being lifelong clientèle to being regarded as ‘marks’ in an elaborate con game. The companies that didn’t erode from the inside, had to go along with the trend as Americans voted with their pocketbooks and bought mountains of cheap, disposable junk; as the image of being affluent was more important then the actuality of owning something durable and high quality. The evils of what is currently known as ‘corporatism’ can not be overstated. It has deprived many of us in having pride in our livelihoods, our standard of living, -as the search for expanding profits in a saturated (and sated) market forces them to reduce their costs at the weakest point; their labor, and in some cases, even our lives themselves, as corporate polluters leave society at large to take their responsibility so they can make a fast profit.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I found your site on technorati and read a few of your other posts. Keep up the good work. I just added your RSS feed to my Google News Reader. Looking forward to reading more from you down the road!
October 14th, 2008 at 1:03 am
Hey Annie
I have another question about Ipods.
After I watched the story of stuff I went to the apple web page, they clame to have a disposal program but it dosnt say if they re-use any of the material from returned products.
How do I find out more about a company’s recycle program/how can I lobby to improve it?
Thanks
October 14th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Some very intresting ideas and comments. I came across this page whilst looking for cheaper energy prices [/url]http://cheaperenergy.wordpress.com My bills haven risen by 35% this year and am now facing yet another increase by these greedy energy companies. (Thankfully I only rent so don’t have to worry about a mortgage as well.) Has anyone tried this green and cheap renewable energy? If so, be intrested to know how it worked for you.
November 6th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Kds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls…
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view…
December 16th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Annie,
That was outstanding!! We would love to
put a link on our site that points here, if that’s ok. Check out http://www.wholeearthpackaging.com for
biodegradable and compostable products.
August 23rd, 2009 at 7:47 am
???????, ??? ???? ?? ????? ?????????? ??????, ??????? ? ?????-???? ?????
. ?????????? ??????, ?????????? ???????????. ??? ???????! 
August 30th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Thanks for writing this great blog I really enjoyed.