Is built in obsolescence a necessary way to keep the economy going or a drain on the environment?

Many people thrive on novelty and get so excited when a new (for example) phone comes out. But do they really need it? The new phones have very minor differences from the old ones. But they say yes, they do need it - their battery won't charge any more, the phone keeps turning off unexpectedly. In this way, the technology industry keeps us buying new things in two ways - by advertising which makes us think it's exciting to have a shiny new thing, and by simply breaking the old thing. They even make sure we can't fix the old thing, by making it impossible to install new parts, like replacing the battery. Obviously a skilled person can get around this by working out how to replace the battery - but then we come to the other problem. The cost of skilled people fixing things, in the UK at least, exceeds or comes close to the price of a new product. I was quote £55 for new heel tips and a new zip on my boots the other day, and the cobbler actually said to me not to bother but to get new ones. In the event I fixed them myself - but even the cost of a new zip, thread, leather needles, rubber soles and filler for the heels came to about £20. Now I could fix another five pairs of shoes with the glue and thread and needles I've got, but I'm not a cobbler so don't need to. It's frustrating how difficult it is to get things fixed even if you want to.

0
icon