rocket mass heater dvd*
Permies likes frugality and the farmer likes The Lightbulb Conspiracy: planned obsolescence permies
  Search | Permaculture Wiki | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


(the sound is wonky for the first 20 seconds)

daily-ish email

micro heaters

rocket mass heater

wofati

permies » forums » living » frugality
Bookmark "The Lightbulb Conspiracy: planned obsolescence" Watch "The Lightbulb Conspiracy: planned obsolescence" New topic
Author

The Lightbulb Conspiracy: planned obsolescence

Joe Frank


Joined: Nov 26, 2011
Posts: 5
The Lightbulb Conspiracy: planned obsolescence:

They are missing the main and most important point IMHO.

If one insists on things that last and you buy less you should also then have the option to work less to earn money to buy useless things
or it's all for naught.

Then if we are smart enough not to let governments steal our leisure time and increased productivity as increased taxes
one could could conceivably work just 3 to 6 months a year.

Think about it. I think we need a new film looking at this perspective.
Tyler Ludens
pollinator

Joined: Jun 25, 2010
Posts: 5320
Location: Central Texas USA Latitude 30 Zone 8
    
  20
Joe Frank wrote:

Then if we are smart enough not to let governments steal our leisure time and increased productivity as increased taxes
one could could conceivably work just 3 to 6 months a year.


I've not found the government stealing my leisure time. I work very little for money. I think the idea "the government" makes us work as hard as most people do is a myth.


Idle dreamer

Joe Frank


Joined: Nov 26, 2011
Posts: 5
You pay these taxes whether you know it or not even if you are totally in the barter economy.

Example: A tiller that would sell for $500 is sold for $700 because corporations can not and do not pay corporate taxes,
the consumer does. The person that buys it must earn approximately $1400 to buy it because half of his income is stolen
in largely hidden taxes.

Now when you barter for this used tiller you must pay let's say $500 for it. because of all the taxes that were paid before you got it.
Notice that this is the price that it should have sold for when new.

The scam continues and most people do not understand that they are serfs that work for the Federal Reserve for 3 months each year
even those that barter. They do not understand our economic system or economics.

If you do not understand this please watch
The money masters http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXt1cayx0hs
or
secret of OZ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swkq2E8mswI
Tyler Ludens
pollinator

Joined: Jun 25, 2010
Posts: 5320
Location: Central Texas USA Latitude 30 Zone 8
    
  20
You seem to be the one complaining about having to work so hard, not me. You seem to be the one who doesn't understand that you don't have to work so hard.

I don't use tillers.

Joe Frank


Joined: Nov 26, 2011
Posts: 5
H Ludi Tyler wrote:You seem to be the one complaining about having to work so hard, not me. You seem to be the one who doesn't understand that you don't have to work so hard.

I don't use tillers.



Hi Tyler!

I understand your point completely, but you missed mine -- because it has nothing to do with tillers.

I myself are part of the underground economy also.
You I think are missing the main point. That is even if you are as you say not working so hard.
You are still working much harder than you should have to because of the implications that I describe above.

In other words ... you are still IMHO aiding a lot of evil unless you venture to change the system.
This is a bit of a shift in topic but still relevant I think:
https://thingsyourlocalpaperwillnevertellyou.wordpress.com/2011/11/18/christians-need-to-be-resposible-for-their-actions/

Nomad, 2nd


Joined: Nov 04, 2011
Posts: 10
You mean like this?:

http://thesurvivalpodcast.com/forum/index.php?topic=8886.0
Joe Frank


Joined: Nov 26, 2011
Posts: 5
I will have to dissent.
This has absolutely nothing to do with what I am trying to get across.

But as a stand alone topic I think he is way off base as to what the economic realities are likely to be.
I hope and pray they are as he see's things. But I prefer to play the odds and the odds say that things
are going to be at least as bad as the so called "great depression".

Personally I plan for the worse and pray for the best. I am a realist. (I think)



toan tr


Joined: Nov 26, 2011
Posts: 31
OH EM GEE.

it's cheaper to replace a bulb that burns out than to burn an inefficient one.

toan


Joe Frank wrote:The Lightbulb Conspiracy: planned obsolescence: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5DCwN28y8o

They are missing the main and most important point IMHO.

If one insists on things that last and you buy less you should also then have the option to work less to earn money to buy useless things
or it's all for naught.

Then if we are smart enough not to let governments steal our leisure time and increased productivity as increased taxes
one could could conceivably work just 3 to 6 months a year.

Think about it. I think we need a new film looking at this perspective.
Joe Frank


Joined: Nov 26, 2011
Posts: 5
OH EM GEE.

it's cheaper to replace a bulb that burns out than to burn an inefficient one.

toan



HUH? An inefficient one is the one that burns out often. I fail to see your point.
toan tr


Joined: Nov 26, 2011
Posts: 31
you can define efficiency a few different ways, but let's just say e=lumens/watts (brightness divided by how much money you have to pay to run the light)

i skipped the scroll bar ahead on the video and luckily, i hit it right at that stupid firehouse light bulb, and i spent about 10 seconds total to realize it was complete idiocracy. Now that's a dim light bulb.
Suzy Bean
steward

Joined: Apr 05, 2011
Posts: 940
Location: Stevensville, MT
    
    2
Paul and Andrew discuss CFL fluorescent lightbulbs in this podcast: podcast

They discuss the Lightbulb Conspiracy.


www.thehappypermaculturalist.wordpress.com
paul wheaton
steward

Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 14164
Location: missoula, montana (zone 4)
    ∞
a summary



sign up for my daily-ish email / rocket mass heater 4-DVD set / permaculture playing cards
Al Loria


Joined: Apr 21, 2010
Posts: 395
Location: New York
Interesting topic. Is the conspiracy created specifically to benefit a few, or is it an outgrowth of the capitalist system itself?

Competition has always been the engine that drives better prices for the consumer. It seems like since we are not manufacturing as much within our own country, then there is no incentive for innovation to create cheaper and better products. When the major source of manufacture becomes one country ( in this case china), and the stateside companies become just sales companies, then the consumer gets dumbed down into buying whatever gets marketed to them. And all this gets done under the auspices of a government that can be lobbied.

It's kind of like moonshine. You can't legally make it on your own, so you have to pay the taxes on booze to the government and the consumer pays that in the end pricing of the product. The lightbulbs can't be manufactured here anymore because they are illegal. The price goes up for a CFL, and consequently, so does the taxes paid in the purchase price. Big business wins, and so does the government.

Somewhere along the line, capitalism morphed from a private free enterprise system to a government sponsored one. They can lobby for subsidies, laws, and whatever else they need to make the bottom line larger. They win, we lose.

Now, we have seed that can be legally protected, so the food chain becomes part of the federally protected system. This is no longer a free enterprise system, but something far more sinister.
Richard Kutscher


Joined: Nov 16, 2011
Posts: 40
Location: Sun seeker - on the road
    
    3
YAY, I have a "warm and fuzzy" feeling that our government really cares about us, and they have heard the logical reasoning of our BD, Paul Wheaton...

Ignore all the political kaplooey in the video, but at the end they have "ground breaking" news about our incandescent lightbulbs and the evil fluorescent ones...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHbD5hxRMrg

BTW, Excellent video Paul!
paul wheaton
steward

Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 14164
Location: missoula, montana (zone 4)
    ∞
What they have done is to make the light bulb be banned as of Jan 1, but they are, for the moment, removing the funding for enforcement.

So the bulb is still banned. And at any moment, the program can get funding. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next few weeks.

stayon mywatch


Joined: Dec 11, 2011
Posts: 5
Here is key piece of the puzzle right here! This is as factual as it get's. I have plenty to back this up if anyone is interested!!! I have done just what this lesson teaches We even confronted a former Legislatior. It was Like Run Forest Run !!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkfMuvVuETQ You wont be sorry you got a factual education!!!
Brian Knight


Joined: Nov 02, 2011
Posts: 362
Location: Asheville NC
    
    7
I haven't read all the links so excuse me if this has been covered. CFLs will probably be obsolete in about 5-10 years thanks to the LED. I seriously doubt every single light bulb that is not incandescent enjoys such high subsidies. I think its great that these light bulbs have been subsidized in the development stages because they are saving tons of dirty energy hidden costs just like the PV industry is booming right now thanks to heavy subsidies. Its a good thing in the long term.

Here is great result of the planned obsolescence of the light bulb: If there were millions of dirty incandescent light bulbs out there in the world burning away with 100 year lifespans there would be no reason to change them over to the new efficient LEDs (NOT CFL). Lighting with inefficient, resistance electricity accounts for HUGE amounts of dirty energy and hidden costs. The fact that we are now set up to easily make the transition to a cleaner technology is a good thing.


"If you want to save the environment, build a city worth living in." - Wendell Berry
paul wheaton
steward

Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 14164
Location: missoula, montana (zone 4)
    ∞
Please take a look at http://www.richsoil.com/CFL-fluorescent-light-bulbs.jsp

I think incandescents are the cleanest, most eco and best bulbs on the market today. They are all I use. And I spend about $1 per month on power to run them. The incandescent is a clean and simple design that can be made even better. It has far fewer toxins than any of the others, including LEDs.

But this topic is better served in the article, and in other threads on permies.


stayon mywatch


Joined: Dec 11, 2011
Posts: 5
Al Loria wrote:Interesting topic. Is the conspiracy created specifically to benefit a few, or is it an outgrowth of the capitalist system itself?
In NC you can make moonshine it is on the books you just have to pay taxes on sales although my friend her late husband was the Legendary Moonshiner Popcorn Sutton. Now Hank Williams Jr now has a distillery with the Late Popcorns recipe and legally makes it second Distillery coming soon! SO some places Monshine is legal if you can believe that
Competition has always been the engine that drives better prices for the consumer. It seems like since we are not manufacturing as much within our own country, then there is no incentive for innovation to create cheaper and better products. When the major source of manufacture becomes one country ( in this case china), and the stateside companies become just sales companies, then the consumer gets dumbed down into buying whatever gets marketed to them. And all this gets done under the auspices of a government that can be lobbied.

It's kind of like moonshine. You can't legally make it on your own, so you have to pay the taxes on booze to the government and the consumer pays that in the end pricing of the product. The lightbulbs can't be manufactured here anymore because they are illegal. The price goes up for a CFL, and consequently, so does the taxes paid in the purchase price. Big business wins, and so does the government.

Somewhere along the line, capitalism morphed from a private free enterprise system to a government sponsored one. They can lobby for subsidies, laws, and whatever else they need to make the bottom line larger. They win, we lose.

Now, we have seed that can be legally protected, so the food chain becomes part of the federally protected system. This is no longer a free enterprise system, but something far more sinister.
paul wheaton
steward

Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 14164
Location: missoula, montana (zone 4)
    ∞
The full screenplay / script / transcript / whatever for the Mr. Stinkypants thing:

Once upon a time there was a guy named Mr. Stinkypants. He sold light bulbs.

He sold a million light bulbs per year where he made 5 cents per light
bulb. He earned $50,000 per year.

Sometimes a competitor would sell a better light bulb for less. Mr.
Stinkypants worked harder and came up with an even better light bulb
which he would sell for even less money!

One day Mr. Stinkypants got together w+ith his competitors. Somebody
mentioned that competing is wrong, and cooperation is good.
Everybody agreed that they were getting stressed out and surely there
must be an easier way. They decided to try cooperation! Everybody
agreed to the same price for the same product. Everybody.

Ahhhhh.

Then somebody got the idea that if they could shorten the lifespan of
their lightbulbs, they could all sell ten times more light bulbs.
They all liked the idea of making more money, so they did that.

Now Mr. Stinkypants sold TEN million light bulbs per year, so he made
$500,000 per year and didn't have to work nearly as hard. Life was
good.

Eventually, a new kind of light bulb was invented. It was expensive
and people didn't really like it. Mr. Stinkypants sold about 100 per
year and he made about $2 per light.

Mr. Stinkypants had a dream: wouldn't it be great to sell 10 million
lights per year and make $2 per light? He would then have TWENTY
MILLION dollars EVERY YEAR! But that will never happen because the
other lights now sell for just 50 cents. Why buy an expensive light
when you can buy one for just 50 cents?

One day Mr. Stinkypants shares his dream with Mr. Halitosis. Mr.
Halitosis says "If I make your dream come true, would you give me
half?" "Oh, yes, absolutely!"

So Mr. Halitosis talks to politicians. Somehow, the politicians
decided to subsidize the expensive light with tax money so it looked
like it was almost as cheap. Some people bought the new lights, but
most people still bought the old lights.

Mr. Halitosis talked to the politicians again. The politicians spent
lots of tax money to tell the people that it was wrong to buy the old
lights, and right to buy the new lights. About half the people
bought the new lights. But the other half, kept buying the old
lights.

Mr. Halitosis then convinced the politicians to BAN the old lights.
Then people could only buy the new lights!

Mr. Stinkypants and Mr. Halitosis both lived happily ever after.

The end.
duane hennon
volunteer

Joined: Sep 23, 2010
Posts: 348
    
    2


Al Loria wrote:
Interesting topic. Is the conspiracy created specifically to benefit a few, or is it an outgrowth of the capitalist system itself?


It is what Capitalism is about
there is no "free lunch" and there is no "free market capitalism"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/free-market-economics-critique_b_1155820.html


Why Free-market Economics Is a Fraud


If there's one thing everyone in America knows, it's that free-market economics is true and free markets are best.

After all, we're not Communists, are we? They starved and lost the Cold War because they believed otherwise. And their watered-down European cousins, the socialists? More of the same, only less so. Even liberals get this nowadays. All hail the free market!

Trouble is, things "everyone" knows are often wrong. And this is no exception.

It's time to start getting honest about a very simple fact: Nobody, but nobody, really believes in free markets. That's right. Not the Republican Party, not the libertarians, not the Wall Street Journal, nobody.

Here's why: a truly free market is a perfectly competitive market. Which means that whatever you have to sell in that market, so does your competition. Which means price war. Which means your price gets driven down. Which means little or no profit for you.


Brian Knight


Joined: Nov 02, 2011
Posts: 362
Location: Asheville NC
    
    7
I think electric resistance lighting and heating is one of the dirtiest, most wasteful uses of energy in this country. However, sometimes they are the right fit for a particular situation. I continue to use some incandescents and will do so until they burn out at which point I will replace them with the most efficient, longest lasting bulb that is conveniently available.

Occupant behavior is a much bigger factor than the type of lighting. Unfortunately we cant control people's behavior very easily. When someone leaves a light on in Atlanta GA, I have to breathe the carbon and swim in the mercury that is belched out by the coal fired power plant that is downwind from me. Just like the Appalachian and Adirondack pristine wilderness is being poisoned by the contribution of my 5$ worth of incandescent lighting energy. Lighting energy in this country represents a huge amount of environmental damage. Because coal is so cheap, there is not much motivation to change peoples behavior. Thank you US govt for picking the lowest hanging fruit to address this countries big energy problems.

Thank you planned obsolescence of the light bulb for setting up an easy transition to a FAR superior technology: LEDs.
Al Loria


Joined: Apr 21, 2010
Posts: 395
Location: New York
duane McCoy wrote:
It is what Capitalism is about
there is no "free lunch" and there is no "free market capitalism"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/free-market-economics-critique_b_1155820.html


Excellent article.
Al Loria


Joined: Apr 21, 2010
Posts: 395
Location: New York
[quote=Springtime
"Unfortunately we cant control people's behavior very easily."

"Because coal is so cheap, there is not much motivation to change peoples behavior. Thank you US govt for picking the lowest hanging fruit to address this countries big energy problems."

I'm taking these quotes somewhat out of context, but, it still remains that we don't want to be told how we should behave. We'd be going down the path of the former Soviet Union. And, we all know how that turned out. Being green might be great, but some just don't see it that way, and they do have a right to their opinion.

Coal is cheap because there is so much of it. It just happens to be dirty. If there was a true groundswell of concern for clean energy, then we would already have clean coal burning equipment.

I'm not criticizing you in any way. Just wanted to bring up a point that I think is relevant to the conversation.


paul wheaton
steward

Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 14164
Location: missoula, montana (zone 4)
    ∞
From a frugality perspective, my lightbulb junk boils down to this:

1) I currently spend about $12 per year on electricity for lighting with incandescent. If I buy one CFL for $3 (instead of 50 cents for an incandescent) and try to put it where it could be the most efficient, then that would have to be to use it on the one light that I have on the most often. In that spot, it should last about two years and save me about $3 per year. So I spent $2.50 more and got $6 back. For all other lights in the house, I think CFLs would not save money because the bulb would burn out faster.

2) The CFL is subsidized. If there were no subsidy, then the light would cost about $11. So I would be paying $11 to get $6. Therefore, the CFL does not actually earn it's keep.

3) With the subsidy, the light is even more expensive because of all the red tape for all the subsidies.

4) When the light is running, it contributes to sickness. Sickness costs.

5) When the light is dead, it contributes to pollution which contributes to sickness. Sickness costs.



Al Loria


Joined: Apr 21, 2010
Posts: 395
Location: New York
paul wheaton wrote:From a frugality perspective, my lightbulb junk boils down to this:

1) I currently spend about $12 per year on electricity for lighting with incandescent. If I buy one CFL for $3 (instead of 50 cents for an incandescent) and try to put it where it could be the most efficient, then that would have to be to use it on the one light that I have on the most often. In that spot, it should last about two years and save me about $3 per year. So I spent $2.50 more and got $6 back. For all other lights in the house, I think CFLs would not save money because the bulb would burn out faster.

2) The CFL is subsidized. If there were no subsidy, then the light would cost about $11. So I would be paying $11 to get $6. Therefore, the CFL does not actually earn it's keep.

3) With the subsidy, the light is even more expensive because of all the red tape for all the subsidies.

4) When the light is running, it contributes to sickness. Sickness costs.

5) When the light is dead, it contributes to pollution which contributes to sickness. Sickness costs.





And, the CFL costs us more because it is we who pick up the tab for the subsidy. No free lunch...
paul wheaton
steward

Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 14164
Location: missoula, montana (zone 4)
    ∞
Good point.

Oh, and:

6) is there not some expense at "proper disposal"? Not just with the time and expense of delivering it - but the folks that process it from there don't just do it for free. They pass that cost onto us.
Al Loria


Joined: Apr 21, 2010
Posts: 395
Location: New York
And, they need to use energy to dispose of the used up CFL. No winner I can see in this technology.
Brian Knight


Joined: Nov 02, 2011
Posts: 362
Location: Asheville NC
    
    7
Price is the best argument to keep incandescents especially in the hands of people who are conscious of their energy use and impacts. Problem is the operational cost (price of energy) is kept artificially low through much higher and more environmentally damaging subsidies.

Heavily subsdized industries keeping the cost of energy artificially low:
Nuclear
Oil
Coal power plants and Mountain Top Removal
Natural Gas and Hydrofracking for NG
Hydroelectric

The numerous subsidies to these industries keep the price of running incandescents artificially low. The real problem is the millions of Hidden Costs that these industries impart on the environment and society. I think the sickness imparted by this dirty energy is much bigger than that of different lighting sources.
 
 
subject: The Lightbulb Conspiracy: planned obsolescence
 
Similar Threads
planned obsolescence (documentary)
cast iron skillet 49er

more from paul wheaton's glorious empire of web junk: cast iron skillet diatomaceous earth sepp holzer raised garden beds raising chickens lawn care flea control missoula electric heaters permaculture videos permaculture books