• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Planned obsolescence

What do you think about "planned obsolescence"?

  • It's real

    Votes: 14 70.0%

  • It's a myth

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • It's real but as an exception

    Votes: 1 5.0%

  • Dunno

    Votes: 2 10.0%

  • I don't care

    Votes: 3 15.0%
  • Total voters
    20
RadicalModerate said:
More than 80 years ago, GM boss Alfred Sloan figured out the way to keep his factories humming was to convince car buyers this year’s model is better than last year’s. By 1927, every American who could afford a new car already owned one, and as the average life of a new car was seven years, relying on more people being able to afford a new car for the first time, as well as existing customers replacing their old, worn-out cars, clearly was not a viable business strategy. Sloan’s insight became known as “planned obsolescence,” and it helped make GM the world’s largest and most profitable automaker.
Click to expand...
All I'm really saying is that planned obsolescence is clearly a real thing.
Click to expand...
I'm not disputing that planned obsolescence exists. I agree it does (though not always to the depths that some claim). In the case you quoted here... which I have read before, albeit many years ago... to me that is more a case of good marketing rather than actually making the cars a POS.
 
radcen said:
I'm not disputing that planned obsolescence exists. I agree it does (though not always to the depths that some claim). In the case you quoted here... which I have read before, albeit many years ago... to me that is more a case of good marketing rather than actually making the cars a POS.
Click to expand...

Exactly. PO is more marketing ploy than a devious plot to keep consumers funneling their money into the companies pockets.

The trick to advertising is to get the consumer to feel as if they are getting something for nothing, while giving them nothing for something.
 
RadicalModerate said:
Hey, I don't have a problem with diesels. But the Jetta is mostly for trendy young women, and they frankly don't like the knocking sound of the engine or the extra buck or two a gallon to fill up.
Click to expand...
I have a male friend in his mid-50s that would disagree with this. :lol:

I know, you said "mostly", but your comment brought him to mind. He is a serious VW devotee.


RadicalModerate said:
No one ever said Americans had good car sense; we have pretty good taste, but no sense. We have the biggest physical size of cars in any market. We happily sacrifice MPG's for unessecary performance or luxury amenities. We ravenously devour SUVs so we can drive on our paved suburban streets.
Click to expand...
It always baffles me that whenever there's a huge spike in gas prices people suddenly want to drop their gas guzzler, and more fuel-efficient vehicles become more popular. But, as soon as prices fall, that new-found efficiency consciousness is dropped like a hot-potato, and gas-guzzler sales climb right back up again.


RadicalModerate said:
Don't try to apply logic to the US car market. You'll start bleeding from the eyes.
Click to expand...
Word. :thumbs:
 
RadicalModerate said:
Exactly. PO is more marketing ploy than a devious plot to keep consumers funneling their money into the companies pockets.

The trick to advertising is to get the consumer to feel as if they are getting something for nothing, while giving them nothing for something.
Click to expand...

It's sort of both.
 
TNAR said:
Totally off topic, but why don't Americans like diesels?!?
Click to expand...
Because of this:
$4-diesel.jpg
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The fuel economy of diesel is still better. You are used to gasoline at 30 mpg, but diesel can easily exceed 50 mpg in a small car (e.g. VW).
Click to expand...

People normally don't factor that in their heads, they see diesel, and remember that it's about a dollar more, regardless of how much more mileage it gets. Plus there's the problem of association. When people think diesel, especially here in Texas, they think loud noisy jacked up trucks that spew black smoke everywhere, with "truck nuts" dangling from the hitch, and the immature dumb****s who operate them so horribly.
 
I voted fro "I don't care". Why would I care?
 
Matt Foley said:
This topic here was made before mine?
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, I thought you saw it. Next time make sure you check the first page threads at least. Thanks. :)

Now, let's get back to topic.

 
are we supposed to just believe the opening statement about the first light bulbs lasting 2500 hours?
it that isn't true, and I think it isn't, the rest of the video is bogus....
 
Lokiate said:
I have bulbs in my lamps that last for 2 years...
Click to expand...

You mean like 2 years with the lights on?

UtahBill, it may be bogus, that's why I am collecting opinions. ;)
 
New technology that supercedes old is not planned obsolescense, it is progress.
But, purposely making something inferior such that it has to be replaced too soon, is, and it is also short sighted.
When I buy something that turns out to be inferior, I never buy that brand again....
It seems irrational to go cheap in a way that ends your participation in a given market, but it has been done.
 
UtahBill said:
are we supposed to just believe the opening statement about the first light bulbs lasting 2500 hours?
it that isn't true, and I think it isn't, the rest of the video is bogus....
Click to expand...

It's no use man, they have an agenda to sell, and logic need not apply. The reason why cheap bulbs burned out faster is because the filaments were thinner. The reason why filaments were made thinner was to make them affordable enough for anyone to buy. By doing so, they vastly expanded their customer base, while greatly lowering production cost. Therefore, the cheaper bulbs became more popular. What isn't stated is that long lasting bulbs (the bulbs I have will last up to 2 years) are available, but at a higher cost. The higher cost is due to higher cost of material and production.
 
Canell said:
You mean like 2 years with the lights on?
Click to expand...
I don't know how they rate them. I just know that I've had them for about a year and a half with no problems so far. If they go out a month early, or whatever, I'm not going to cry about it. These energy efficient 8 dollar bulbs have already paid for themselves, considering the cost saved on both bulb replacement and energy cost. Personally, I only got them because I hate changing light bulbs.
 
Lokiate said:
It's no use man, they have an agenda to sell, and logic need not apply. The reason why cheap bulbs burned out faster is because the filaments were thinner. The reason why filaments were made thinner was to make them affordable enough for anyone to buy. By doing so, they vastly expanded their customer base, while greatly lowering production cost. Therefore, the cheaper bulbs became more popular. What isn't stated is that long lasting bulbs (the bulbs I have will last up to 2 years) are available, but at a higher cost. The higher cost is due to higher cost of material and production.
Click to expand...

some of us Americans seem to think we should get the best of everything at the lowest price because it is our constitutional right.
IOW, we are a spoiled people...
when the big whoop over "banned incandescent light bulbs" debate was going on, I saw an opportunity to buy some of those "gubmint mandated CFL bulbs" at a very cheap price. The local utility was donating them to GoodWill, and GW was selling them for $1 a blister pack of 2 each, in 60 and 75 and 100 watts.....I have enough to last me the rest of my life, or until the gubmint bans them and makes us buy LED bulbs.
 
Lokiate said:
I don't know how they rate them. I just know that I've had them for about a year and a half with no problems so far. If they go out a month early, or whatever, I'm not going to cry about it. These energy efficient 8 dollar bulbs have already paid for themselves, considering the cost saved on both bulb replacement and energy cost. Personally, I only got them because I hate changing light bulbs.
Click to expand...

The kitchen in our AZ house had 8 each 75 watt floods directly overhead....talk about HOT....
I replaced them with CFL floods and now we can cook without getting cooked....
 
UtahBill said:
some of us Americans seem to think we should get the best of everything at the lowest price because it is our constitutional right.
IOW, we are a spoiled people...
when the big whoop over "banned incandescent light bulbs" debate was going on, I saw an opportunity to buy some of those "gubmint mandated CFL bulbs" at a very cheap price. The local utility was donating them to GoodWill, and GW was selling them for $1 a blister pack of 2 each, in 60 and 75 and 100 watts.....I have enough to last me the rest of my life, or until the gubmint bans them and makes us buy LED bulbs.
Click to expand...

Wait, they banned incandescent bulbs? I'm not saying I'll miss them, since I don't use them anymore, but I didn't think they'd ever be banned. If I could ever find LED bulbs that had a regular sized screw in socket, I'd buy them. So far, all I've seen are the ones with the night lite sized sockets. I love LED, all my flashlights have LED bulbs. They don't get hot, they're bright, and they last forever.

The kitchen in our AZ house had 8 each 75 watt floods directly overhead....talk about HOT....
I replaced them with CFL floods and now we can cook without getting cooked....
Click to expand...
This apartment uses florescent tubes for kitchen lighting. Old ones too, so it takes forever to get any light in there. If any bulb needed to be banned, it's those ****ing things.
 
UtahBill said:
The kitchen in our AZ house had 8 each 75 watt floods directly overhead....talk about HOT....
I replaced them with CFL floods and now we can cook without getting cooked....
Click to expand...
Some clothing stores are the same way. Stand near the displays and you sweat to death.
 
Lokiate said:
Wait, they banned incandescent bulbs? I'm not saying I'll miss them, since I don't use them anymore, but I didn't think they'd ever be banned. If I could ever find LED bulbs that had a regular sized screw in socket, I'd buy them. So far, all I've seen are the ones with the night lite sized sockets. I love LED, all my flashlights have LED bulbs. They don't get hot, they're bright, and they last forever.


This apartment uses florescent tubes for kitchen lighting. Old ones too, so it takes forever to get any light in there. If any bulb needed to be banned, it's those ****ing things.
Click to expand...

yu mean you missed the great light bulb debate? what a treat !! people were incensed that the gubmint was going to ban their light bulbs....LSS, there wasn't much of a ban and it was only the 100 watt bulbs, or something like that. Some people were ready to nuke the communists in congess over the issue...I think it was only surpassed by the Michelle Obama nanny state thing over giving school kids healthier options for lunch. Damn that woman! What an evil thing, encouraging our fat kids to give up their fatty foods and offering them alternatives......surely she is a socialist scourge on America....
But, back to planned obsolescence.....have you heard of the death panels? It's a way of getting Americans to replace their old grandparents with newer models, with features currently available on the old models...
 
UtahBill said:
are we supposed to just believe the opening statement about the first light bulbs lasting 2500 hours?
it that isn't true, and I think it isn't, the rest of the video is bogus....
Click to expand...

It possibley is true

Bulbs back then would not put out the amount of light they do now, and the filament was thicker allowing them to last longer. The lower output would put less stress on the filament, and the thicker filament would allow it to last longer

This means that a 5% reduction in operating voltage will more than double the life of the bulb, at the expense of reducing its light output by about 20%. This may be a very acceptable trade off for a light bulb that is in a difficult-to-access location (for example, traffic lights or fixtures hung from high ceilings). Long-life bulbs take advantage of this trade-off. Since the value of the electric power they consume is much more than the value of the lamp, general service lamps emphasize efficiency over long operating life. The objective is to minimize the cost of light, not the cost of lamps.[34]

The relationships above are valid for only a few percent change of voltage around rated conditions, but they do indicate that a lamp operated at much lower than rated voltage could last for hundreds of times longer than at rated conditions, albeit with greatly reduced light output. The Centennial Light is a light bulb that is accepted by the Guinness Book of World Records as having been burning almost continuously at a fire station in Livermore, California, since 1901. However, the bulb is powered by only four watts. A similar story can be told of a 40-watt bulb in Texas that has been illuminated since 21 September 1908. It once resided in an opera house where notable celebrities stopped to take in its glow, but is now in an area museum.[74]
Click to expand...
Incandescent light bulb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Lokiate said:
Wait, they banned incandescent bulbs? I'm not saying I'll miss them, since I don't use them anymore, but I didn't think they'd ever be banned. If I could ever find LED bulbs that had a regular sized screw in socket, I'd buy them. So far, all I've seen are the ones with the night lite sized sockets. I love LED, all my flashlights have LED bulbs. They don't get hot, they're bright, and they last forever.


This apartment uses florescent tubes for kitchen lighting. Old ones too, so it takes forever to get any light in there. If any bulb needed to be banned, it's those ****ing things.
Click to expand...



I have 4 regular socket LED light bulbs

The do not have the Lumen output of incandesent bulbs, but they use 1/10th of the energy and last 4 times as long
They are not cheap however at I think 20 times the price of regular incandescent bulbs
 
UtahBill said:
yu mean you missed the great light bulb debate? what a treat !! people were incensed that the gubmint was going to ban their light bulbs....LSS, there wasn't much of a ban and it was only the 100 watt bulbs, or something like that. Some people were ready to nuke the communists in congess over the issue...I think it was only surpassed by the Michelle Obama nanny state thing over giving school kids healthier options for lunch. Damn that woman! What an evil thing, encouraging our fat kids to give up their fatty foods and offering them alternatives......surely she is a socialist scourge on America....
Click to expand...
Sounds like the usual for American politics. I figure they could have bypassed all of that nonsense by simply offering some kind of incentive to phase out the incandescent. Oh well, haters gon hate. And good for Ms Obama for taking an initiative on childhood obesity. Honestly, I'd have all the junk food removed from schools. All the vending machines, the soda machines, greasy pizzas, all of it. My tax dollars are paying for these kids to go to school and learn, not get fat off crap my tax dollars are providing.

But, back to planned obsolescence.....have you heard of the death panels? It's a way of getting Americans to replace their old grandparents with newer models, with features currently available on the old models...
Click to expand...

I've only heard of it used in reference to universal health care, where the "death panel" is a panel of "judges" or whatever that decides if someone should get healthcare or not. Orwellian hyperbole.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
I have 4 regular socket LED light bulbs

The do not have the Lumen output of incandesent bulbs, but they use 1/10th of the energy and last 4 times as long
They are not cheap however at I think 20 times the price of regular incandescent bulbs
Click to expand...

I've been looking them up since last time, there's some pretty neat developments coming out. Expensive as hell, but factor in that they're projected to last somewhere in the ballpark of 17 years, and the cost really isn't that bad compared to 17 years of changing regular bulbs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom