Ramanisblog

Tag: consumerism

  • 10 Ways to Stop Corporate Dominance of Politics.Video On Consumerism


    Sensible suggestions.Substitute ‘US’ with any country, it is still good.
    Story:
    It’s not too late to limit or reverse the impact of the Supreme Court’s disastrous decision in Citizens United v. FEC. Here’s how.
    1. Amend the U.S. Constitution to declare that corporations are not persons and do not have the rights of human beings. Since the First Amendment case for corporate spending as a free speech right rests on corporations being considered “persons,” the proposed amendment would strike at the core of the ruling’s justification. The push for the 28th Amendment is coming from the grassroots, where a prairie fire is catching on from groups such as Public Citizen, Voter Action, and the Campaign to Legalize Democracy.
    2. Require shareholders to approve political spending by their corporations. Public Citizen and the Brennan Center for Justice are among the groups advocating this measure, and some members of Congress appear interested. Britain has required such shareholder approval since 2000.
    3. Pass the Fair Elections Now Act, which provides federal financing for Congressional elections. This measure has the backing of organizations representing millions of Americans, including Moveon.org, the NAACP, the Service Employees International Union, and the League of Young Voters. Interestingly, the heads of a number of major corporations have also signed on, including those of Ben & Jerry’s, Hasbro, Crate & Barrel, and the former head of Delta Airlines.
    4. Give qualified candidates equal amounts of free broadcast air time for political messages. This would limit the advantages of paid advertisements in reaching the public through television where most political spending goes.
    5. Ban political advertising by corporations that receive government money, hire lobbyists, or collect most of their revenue abroad. A fear that many observers have noted is that the Court’s ruling will allow foreign corporations to influence U.S. elections. According to The New York Times, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-New York) and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland) are exploring this option.
    6. Impose a 500 percent excise tax on corporate contributions to political committees and on corporate expenditures on political advocacy campaigns. Representative Alan Grayson (D-Florida) proposes this, calling it “The Business Should Mind Its Own Business Act.”
    7. Prohibit companies from trading their stock on national exchanges if they make political contributions and expenditures. Another one from Grayson, which he calls “The Public Company Responsibility Act.”
    8. Require publicly traded companies to disclose in SEC filings money used for the purpose of influencing public opinion, rather than for promoting their products. Grayson calls this “The Corporate Propaganda Sunshine Act.”
    9. Require the corporate CEO to appear as sponsor of commercials that his or her company pays for, another possibility from the Schumer-Van Hollen team, according to The New York Times
    10. Publicize the reform options, inform the public of who is making contributions to whom, and activate the citizenry. If we are to safeguard our democracy, media must inform and citizens must act.

    The measures listed above—and others that seek to reverse the dominance of money in our political system—will not be easy. But grassroots anger at this latest win for corporate power is running high. But grassroots anger at this latest win for corporate power is running high. History shows that when the public is sufficiently aroused, actions that once seemed impossible can, in hindsight, seem inevitable.

  • Our Lives Are Filled With Worthless Crap That’s Destroying the Earth: Here’s What You Can Do

    If made durable and repairable, where is the profit?
    Story:
    The way to lower the quantity of energy required to make and distribute short-lived consumer goods is to make them durable, repairable and upgradeable.

    As the middle-class daughter of a refugee mother and a Depression-era father, I grew up straddling two worlds. My parents could afford much more than they were willing to buy. Most things that broke could be and were repaired. My German grandmother’s aphorisms lingered in the air: “Waste not, want not,” “A penny saved is a penny earned,” “A stitch in time saves nine.”

    By the time my own children were born, America was flooded with cheap and cheaply made goods. So while my parents continued working at the sturdy antique desks they inherited from my grandparents and sleeping beneath a hand-crocheted bedspread, my children and their friends became the first and last owners of a seemingly endless supply of plastic toys and particle-board furniture.

    I was part of the transitional generation. Building blocks were still made of wood. Comforters were still filled with down. I recall the meticulously machined pencil sharpeners with “made in West Germany” stamped on their sides that lasted until I lost them. Even the cheap items—the ones “made in Japan”—tended to hold up pretty well.

    Now nearly everything is produced in China and made to be discarded. According to a 2008 report by the Economic Policy Institute, the United States imported $320 billion in Chinese goods in 2007. In that year alone, this country imported $26.3 billion in apparel and accessories, $108.5 billion in computers and electronic products, and $15.3 billion in furniture and fixtures from China.

    The manufacture, distribution and disposal of an ever-growing mountain of short-lived consumer goods has taken an enormous environmental toll. Annie Leonard’s website “The Story of Stuff,” which has garnered more than 7 million views in less than two years, has helped spread awareness of that cost far beyond the usual environmentalist circles.

    We can’t, however, only blame the quantity and quality of Chinese goods for the environmental and other consequences of this transoceanic factory-to-waste stream. For that we can blame the two horsemen of the modern consumer apocalypse: functional obsolescence and fashion obsolescence.

    Functional, or planned obsolescence is the purposeful decision by designers and manufacturers to ensure things don’t last, so that consumers must buy new ones. Fashion obsolescence is the related decision to offer new features and aesthetic changes to entice consumers to discard their old items in favor of updated and supposedly better ones.

    Ironically, product obsolescence was once seen as the remedy for what ailed our country. Lizabeth Cohen, chair of the History Department at Harvard University and author of A Consumers’ Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America (Vintage, 2003), traces the origins of mass consumption to the period immediately before and after World War II, when a demand-driven economy was seen as the key to our nation’s recovery and prosperity.

    “In the 1940s and ’50s, there was a much closer connection between consumer demand and factories and jobs,” Cohen says. “That was a completed circle more than it is today. When people were buying things, they were buying things that were made by American workers.”

    The only way to guarantee continued demand was to ensure that people would keep replacing the things they owned. The literature on planned obsolescence makes frequent reference to statements by industry analysts and strategists of that era. “Our enormously productive economy … demands that we make consumption our way of life, that we convert the buying and use of goods into rituals, that we seek our spiritual satisfaction, our ego satisfaction, in consumption,” retailing analyst Victor Lebow said in 1948. “We need things consumed, burned up, worn out, replaced and discarded at an ever increasing rate.”

    This applied to male as well as female consumers, and to styling lines on cars as well as hemlines on skirts. Allied Stores Corporation’s Chairman B. Earl Puckett, speaking to fashion industry leaders in 1950, said, “Basic utility cannot be the foundation of a prosperous apparel industry. We must accelerate obsolescence.” And General Motors’ design chief Harley Earl said in 1955, “The creation of a desire on the part of millions of car buyers each year to trade in last year’s car on a new one is highly important to the automobile industry.”

    Business people and politicians weren’t the only ones pushing this idea, Cohen says. “Labor really bought into this package. Purchasing power was the answer to how people would be employed and have a better life. Consumers would fuel the powers of factories that would provide jobs that would put money in peoples’ pockets.”

    http://www.alternet.org/story/144204/our_lives_are_filled_with_worthless_crap_that’s_destroying_the_earth:_here’s_what_you_can_do

  • Credit Card Companies-Mal practices.

    Very good, though a belated move.Credit card companies fleece customers by-
    -Offering Credit card for free for a fixed period,usually for a year, with out a fee, but charge under some other head much higher fee.
    -increase credit limit with out your asking and debit charges for the same.
    -keep a minimum balance payable and keep quiet for some time and one fine day over due payments include higher minimum payable per month
    -hide the fact establishments charge 2 and a half percent extra for credit card purchase.( India)
    -provide add on card and charge later.
    -call for balance transfer to some other banks saying no charge will be levied, but charge later
    -the interest rate will work out to be more than 36 percent per annum at the minimum if you know how to calculate correctly.
    Time some body reins them.
    Story;
    The Government is considering rules which would mean the most expensive debt is paid off first, as well as raising minimum monthly repayments from their current low level to avoid customers taking decades to clear borrowings.

    Kevin Brennan, the Consumer Minister, said: ”Card companies have to get their act together and do more for consumers.

    ”My opinion is clear, the current relationship between card companies and consumers cannot go unchallenged. We need to put the customer back in the driving seat.”

    Other moves being considered by ministers are a ban on increasing credit limits without prior consent – possibly by forcing consumers to opt-in – and restrictions on rate hikes on existing debts without proper explanation.

    ”It is not acceptable for card companies to impose complex and confusing terms and conditions that can leave people baffled, or to increase interest rates without a proper explanation,” Mr Brennan added.

    ”Consumers have a real responsibility to manage their finances properly, but they also have a right to clear information to enable them to do that. Consumers should not feel each month as if they’ve been exploited or disadvantaged.”

    The Government said in July’s Consumer White Paper that it would tackle the way credit card repayment policies could lead to bigger than expected interest charges. It is already legislating to ban unsolicited credit card cheques in November. The current consultation will run until January 19.

    Fiona Hoyle, head of consumer finance at the Finance and Leasing Association, said: ”Many of the measures proposed today by the Government have been under discussion with the industry for some time and reflect rapidly-changing market conditions.

    ”The industry’s commitment to helping consumers is shown by the many measures already taken in recent months.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/creditcards/6443566/Credit-card-companies-told-to-get-their-act-together.html

  • The Reality Moment-US Economy.

    US economy has been built on spending beyond means at the individual level.Normally people save for the future; in US people spend for the future;they pile debts in anticipation of income.Prudence calls for savings, not increase in wants.Why blame the Government?It is National Character.Unless people in US start spending on essentilas,reduce consumerism, stop collecting junk as possessions,stop using plastic money,they can be sure that the worse is yet to come.

    Story.
    ‘That which can’t continue doesn’t. A nation can spend and spend, pile debt upon debt, but eventually there comes a reality moment when some leader emerges to say enough is enough and when decent people, looking around at themselves and their own best nature, respond by demanding a return to responsibility’.-NYT 16 Oct
    2009.

  • I had a car.

    I had been dreaming about buying a car for quite some time.Wanted to have the latest model, with State of the art music system,Radial Dial,air -conditioned , automatic gear et al.I slogged, saved ,borrowed and bought one.
    The joy of owning a car and showing it off to others was a thrilling experiece.
    Time went by.
    Every day I had to attend to the car to maintain it;ihad to crawl in the rush hour; find parking space, often the parts needed replacements;needed to renew insurance; has to plan loan repayment,had to avoid parking tickets.
    It was too much.
    I appointed a driver.
    I was not sure as to when he shall report sick;nor could I anticipate when he will involve the car in an accident;nor how he would gyp me on gas.
    I had to worry about loan repayments .
    One fine day I decided to do away with the car.
    No longer I needed to worry about the car, its maintanence, gas bills, loan repayment,no worries on finding a parking space,no fear of Police on Parking tickests,no question of managing a driver.
    I am free.