this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023

19 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26350 readers

1509 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

candyman337@lemmy.world

Bluetreefrog@lemmy.world

TheSaneWriter@lemm.ee

TheSaneWriter@lemmy.thesanewriter.com

candyman337@sh.itjust.works

Asudox@lemmy.world

can@lemmy.ca

lemmy_bot@lemmy.world

beefbaby182@lemmy.world

AsudoxDev@programming.dev

Should luxury brands be banned? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by CaspianXI@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I was doing research for my blog when I stumbled across a staggering amount of evidence that an increasing number of brands are deliberately trashing their own products to create scarcity and drive prices up.

We're talking about an incredible carbon footprint that goes into creating products that go straight to landfills.

How is this even legal?

top 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] MisterMoo@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We need to transition from a culture that implicitly believes that infinite waste is not a problem. According to a story I read in the NYT this morning, more than 10 million tons of office furniture in the United States end up in a landfill every year. Ten million tons! And it's all just handled by people doing their jobs, nobody able to stop the cogs and ask if we've lost our minds.

The guy who invented Keurig, with its disposable plastic pods, later said that he regretted it after seeing how much waste it created. I think if we had a healthy culture, Keurig couldn't have been invented as it was because the inventor would've foreseen the waste and found it totally a nonstarter.

[–] Action_Bastid@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Bingo.

When you stop treating negative externalities as though they don't exist, you can start to properly account for their cost in economic models. A lot of industries exist that wouldn't if they were to have to actually pay to remediate the problems they cause rather than getting to offload the problem onto the greater community.

[–] Izzy@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think the answer is no, they shouldn't be banned. What should be banned is this practice of artificial scarcity through trashing perfectly good product. They should either produce less of them or lower the price to match the demand.

[–] CaspianXI@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

The problem stems from the fact that brands want their products to be made readily accessible to anyone who wants to order with next-day delivery, which means there needs to be a surplus to satisfy customers' cravings for instant gratification... but a surplus would drive prices down, which is why they mass-produce products, then immediately trash whatever is not sold.

It sickens me to know this is even a thing. But what can be done to prevent it?

[–] blackbelt352@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

This isn't a practice limited to luxury brands, Abercrombie and Fitch did the same thing and their ass ugly CEO (back in 2013) said he didn't want ugly people wearing his clothes.

The practice should be banned.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How would it be illegal?

[–] purahna@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 year ago

If you make perfectly good products and then order them trashed when a single human being must go without food, let alone a birken bag, you go to jail. Ez.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

We're talking about an incredible carbon footprint that goes into creating products

You can stop the sentence there. The major issue is the negative impact manufacturing stuff has on the planet. If all the fancy clothing they made was purchased, would it make a difference? The planet is still fucked, but now everyone is looking sharp!

[–] ezchili@iusearchlinux.fyi 3 points 1 year ago

Luxury as in intentionally scarce yes, high quality or in demand no

[–] Hypersapien@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why don't they just not make as much?

[–] CaspianXI@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

When you order something with 2-day delivery, it not only needs to be in stock... but it needs to be in a warehouse in your city. This requirement means there needs to be a surplus.

They don't know where the orders will come in, so they make enough to send them to every warehouse in the country. But if all of them got sold, the supply would drive the price down. So, they wait until a certain number gets sold (say... a few hundred) and then destroy the rest.

It's sickening that this is even a thing. But that's the world we live in.

load more comments