Becoming an ethical consumer (on a budget, hopefully).

Ok so I want to learn:

+ How to avoid things made in sweat-shops or their equivilant
+ How to avoid companies that repress their workers i.e. breaking up unions or not paying farmers their fair share etc.
+ If possible - to try and not fall into the trap of 'Because Coca-Cola are evil, i'll drink Pepsi because they only do half the evil shit Coca-Cola do.' I want a non-evil alternative, or nothing at all.
+ Hopefully to buy more local stuff
+ Hopefully to buy more well-made stuff because quite frankly, investing in something that won't break in a couple months time seems like a holy grail these days
+ When I need to upgrade to 'organic', or whether I should know if GM-type scares are actually good or bad etc.

I also don't want to become what the Americans call a douche in the process.

Is this possible?

Anyone with me?

you are already a douchebag for caring

http://www.cholchol.org/pics/ruca.jpg

j/k

its p cheap not to buy stuff

i do my best to do this stuff. easiest first step is the buy local thing tho, which interestingly enough seems to be crossing a lot of unexpected lines, judging from the people that come in here and talk about that being how they ended up here in the first place. initially when i started hearing about it it was mostly younger lefty types, but it seems to be age independent these days, and also crosses most of the political and social boundries.

I'm j/k too obviously

I don't have any easy answers apart from don't drink soda in general.

buying local as much as possible is in general a good idea.

This will become a rolling thread of many discussions regarding ethics as a consumer, hopefully.

But I guess a good place to start is who to avoid and who seem like a decent company we can rep.

I get that Halliburton is a 'thing' but I don't really know who they are or what they are, this is more to say that Nike are an incredibly shitty horrible company. But I presume Adidas and Reebok and whoever also use sweat-shop labour- i know Adidas got caught out at the World Cup last year. In fact pretty much ever trainer/sneaker company I know the name of seem to be involved in this, or have in the past 20 years. So is there an ethical trainer/sneaker company? That provides cool, cheap and well-made trainers?

kinda digging that the hatred for big corporations seems to be a non-partisan issue nowadays, thats progress imo

I get milk delivered from a farm up here in CO. It's a couple bucks more than usual but actually tastes much fucking better, and it's not some thing I deluded myself into believing to justify the cost.

The jugs are re-used. I also compost/recycle but that's about the extent of it.

buying on a budget and avoiding sweatshop purchases is a hard tightrope tho, which is lame but true, at least re:durable goods

i def do not buy organic tho... i'm not going to deprave myself of costco mega-apples for the sake of eco-karma.

fwiw my bf and i attempted this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_100-Mile_Diet and it still informs a lot of our food purchases although i like restaurants (and coffee lol) too much to ever fully implement it

clothes and shoes are the area where it seems kind of impossible to buy anything that isn't made in a foreign country under questionable conditions. Levi's are kind of the only exception I can think of (what up Steve Shasta)

Regarding the trainer situation, which I just picked because it is an easy one to point at as leading sweat-shop related cunts, I also wonder about the logo issue. I bought Nikes from before I started paying attention to this, but with the logo-as-advertising issue, should I just throw them away or stop wearing them? Or is it questions like this where it gets douchy?

buying on a budget and avoiding sweatshop purchases is a hard tightrope tho, which is lame but true, at least re:durable goods

― cannonball aderall (jjjusten), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 19:29 (59 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I'm kind of hoping to find a middle ground based around 'if it is durable and lasts for ages, that means getting my moneys worth v. having to replace some shitty cheap thing once a year'

localism is never the answer. the answer is to form a a hegemonic force equal to the one in power. destroy, destroy, destroy.

I try not to wear anything with a logo on it because, well logos are fucking ugly and I am not a billboard

xp

Well, fwiw, "throwing away" something you already own isn't being very ethical.

lol throwing away means giving to a charity shop in that sense.

Regarding the trainer situation, which I just picked because it is an easy one to point at as leading sweat-shop related cunts, I also wonder about the logo issue. I bought Nikes from before I started paying attention to this, but with the logo-as-advertising issue, should I just throw them away or stop wearing them? Or is it questions like this where it gets douchy?

buying used trainers from a 'charity shop' is the most ethical choice and you can unstitch the logo if you want. i mean buying unmarked common projects made by union workers is nice, but its still unnecessary consumption and also expensive

"here, you advertise this, I'm morally opposed"

xp

its p cheap not to buy stuff

― the green (Lamp)

"here, you advertise this, I'm morally opposed"

xp

― the boy with the gorn at his side (Edward III), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 19:34 (40 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

oh shiii

its p cheap not to buy stuff

― the green (Lamp)

great but you know, eventually someone on ilx is gonna want a new laptop or set of shoes or oven or television or something to drink or eat etc.

there is also the issue where there are plenty of contrary forces here, recent example in my industry being the whole Gibson guitars issue where buying an american made gibson seems like it avoids the sweatshop issue, but means that you are supporting a wildly unethical stance on wood harvesting, where buying a chinese made instrument largely tends to support renewable woods because they are fast growing and cheap.

I subsist entirely on moisture re-absorbed through the wall of my bladder fyi

xp

like i don't think going to live in a cave with the one suitcase of clothes i currently own is an option on account of not living near any caves

great but you know, eventually someone on ilx is gonna want a new laptop or set of shoes or oven or television or something to drink or eat etc.

― GOIT BUZZ TOYS (a hoy hoy), Wednesday, November 9, 2011 2:37 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark

oh, totally, yeah! of course. i'm just echoing lamp because i think not buying anything at all should be the first choice that is considered. then, if you really need something, def consult this thread and other resources! :)

great but you know, eventually someone on ilx is gonna want a new laptop or set of shoes or oven or television or something to drink or eat etc.

reducing your consumption is still the most ethical and efficient way to improve the world. otherwise buy used or, if thats not an option, than local. everything else is mostly window dressing.

part of the root of a lot of this is that to be responsible you pretty much have to increase your spending tolerance - ethical manufacturing costs money, plain and simple.

there is also the issue where there are plenty of contrary forces here, recent example in my industry being the whole Gibson guitars issue where buying an american made gibson seems like it avoids the sweatshop issue, but means that you are supporting a wildly unethical stance on wood harvesting, where buying a chinese made instrument largely tends to support renewable woods because they are fast growing and cheap.

― cannonball aderall (jjjusten), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 19:37 (58 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

+ If possible - to try and not fall into the trap of 'Because Coca-Cola are evil, i'll drink Pepsi because they only do half the evil shit Coca-Cola do.' I want a non-evil alternative, or nothing at all.

But maybe that doesn't cover it. This is a very important issue though and one that freaks me out a little. Hopefully getting a dialogue going means that we can figure out what is the most-ethical option, or how to figure out what needs to be looked at from an ethics standpoint, idk

but if you buy less, then you open up your budget to spending a bit more on ethical goods.
xpost

ethical manufacturing costs money, plain and simple.

yep. and then if enough people do it, costs start to come down. but it can take awhile. like with solar panels!

xp

not buying stuff otm, it's not very complicated!

part of the reason i feel comfortable doing what i do is that i work in an industry built on sustainable goods,repair and reuse - i sell 30+ year old electronics on a regular basis, thats a pretty rare spot to be in now.

reducing your consumption is still the most ethical and efficient way to improve the world. otherwise buy used or, if thats not an option, than local. everything else is mostly window dressing.

― the green (Lamp), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 19:40 (50 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i am down with this. but i'd still like to know whats going on, on a larger scale, you know? also w/ stuff like electronics, buying used seems like something i wouldnt want to trust and i dunno if buying local is a real thing with the perception that the parts come from all around the world or whatever?

well wait "electronics" is pretty broad what kind of electronics are we talking about here

local gasoline

off the top of my head the things I think would be the hardest for people to have wiggle room to make decisions would be gas or any medication they need

Well, say I my laptop broek and it couldn't be repaired. Apple have, iirc, been found to use sweat-shop labour, as have laptop makers like Sony etc. etc.

And who the fuck in Britain just makes their own laptops?

(Yes my laptop is dying and I might be thinking about this more in the future.)

gas is easy - buy an electric car. or don't buy a car at all. or the car with the highest gas mileage you can afford.

buying local is sort of a tiered prospect tho, i mean yes you can buy food that is locally produced sure but not a locally built ipod or whatever. now if you could at least purchase the ipod at a local business, that might help, but obv an ipod is a bad example of that.

am thinking I should get into this homemade laptop market

buy a mac but only use it in a sauna for the first three months to make up for the purchase

And who the fuck in Britain just makes their own laptops?

(as in a small company who gets the material and creates/sells the product here. not just puts parts together mined from environmental disaster area.)

steal from old rich people

frankly unless you are looking at something somewhat artisianal in the electronics spectrum, its unlikely that you have the option to buy either from a local builder or a local vendor. and yeah, those transistors are going to be from overseas, but that ship has already sailed.

Justin and people- are there some things you just think 'aw fuck it, i'm not going to find a more ethical source, i'll just buy [x]'?

again my experience is different because we do a lot to support local builders, and are even starting to do pedal and amp building workshops etc, but thats never going to catch on in the 99% of electronics normal people use.

computers tbh

:-/

xpost to a hoy hoy

there is always the option to steal electronics, which we endorse.

frankly unless you are looking at something somewhat artisianal in the electronics spectrum, its unlikely that you have the option to buy either from a local builder or a local vendor. and yeah, those transistors are going to be from overseas, but that ship has already sailed.

― cannonball aderall (jjjusten), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 19:50 (31 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

ok but i'd at least like to think about my options or try to at least figure this out, you know?

Maybe I should have come at this knowing more about the subject or how to focus discussion but then the fact that I have no fucking idea is kinda the point.

you can buy used laptops that will work well, esp if you have any kind of hand w/software. if youre main concern is labor find a local dude that can build you a computer and emphasize that you want taiwanese or other more ethical parts if theyre available.

tbh i don't want a main concern, because that gets back to the 'lesser of two evils' thing. cunty is cunty in many different ways, but it is still cunty.

I went off on this in the other thread recently but 'buy local' is a really misguided way to save the world

not nec bad for our local businesses/economies but as far as ghg and 'not taking advantage of sweatshop workers' or whatever this is not how we're gonna save the world. doing a better job to incorporate transportation costs into our consumption patterns might help, but nobody is gonna grow bananas in brooklyn and that wouldn't even be 'good for the world'.

And who the fuck in Britain just makes their own laptops?

assembling a computer is p easy, i know a dude that has a reasonably profitable sideline assembling custombuilt computers for ppl there has to be at least one person in london w/ similar skills

(also apols if that not where you live)

xp - well then dont own a computer, go to the library or stay late at work or w/e. most ethical decisions require some kind of compromise and prioritization

ethical manufacturing costs money, plain and simple.

yep. and then if enough people do it, costs start to come down. but it can take awhile. like with solar panels!

xp

― The Uncanny Frankie Valley (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, November 9, 2011 2:42 PM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

How is this true though? With solar panels costs come down as efficiencies are discovered, cheaper manufacturing techniques, more efficient machinery, economies of scale, etc. "Ethical manufacturing" mostly address pay, working conditions, and environmental costs if I understand correctly. I don't really see how these things get cheaper with scale/efficiency.

as far as ghg and 'not taking advantage of sweatshop workers'

these two things are not really related

how does one incorporate transportation costs into their personal consumption patterns? what does that even mean?

With solar panels costs come down as efficiencies are discovered, cheaper manufacturing techniques, more efficient machinery, economies of scale, etc.

Increased demand totally was a huge driver in driving down solar PV costs.

not nec bad for our local businesses/economies but as far as ghg and 'not taking advantage of sweatshop workers' or whatever this is not how we're gonna save the world.

buying local doesn't reduce greenhouse gases?

to grossly oversimplify, China said "hmm looks like there's going to be a huge demand for PV panels in the next few decades, lest invest in that", voila

xp

There is this Ethical Consumer guide to laptops. Sadly, the most anyone scores on it is only 50%!

buying local doesn't reduce greenhouse gases?

iatee was going off on this in regards to production of beef, specifically.

which is totally different than produce, for ex

With solar panels costs come down as efficiencies are discovered, cheaper manufacturing techniques, more efficient machinery, economies of scale, etc.

Increased demand totally was a huge driver in driving down solar PV costs.

― The Uncanny Frankie Valley (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, November 9, 2011 2:59 PM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Right, again, because of economies of scale, resources invested in finding cheaper ways of making the tech, etc. You're not going to find a cheaper way of paying someone a living wage.

buying local doesn't reduce greenhouse gases?

iatee was going off on this in regards to production of beef, specifically.

― The Uncanny Frankie Valley (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 20:00 (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

mad lolz.

Assembling computers is very easy--I built the last two desktops I had, and I'm not all that technically inclined.

Actually, if you really want to buy green with laptops, buy second hand. That's really your best option.

You're not going to find a cheaper way of paying someone a living wage.

what if a company is forced to accept that redistributing its financial resources more equitably results in increased revenues overall..? just spitballing here

like I'm pretty sure Nike's financial resources are distributed something akin to an inverted pyramid

Joining a CSA has really changed our shopping habits. Getting a big box of vegetables every week means we go to the supermarket a hell of a lot less. In general food is probably the easiest area of shopping to get ethical, although I am continually dismayed that Organic is completely decoupled from animal welfare standards in the US (at least for the USDA standard)

Clothing and durable goods OTOH are hard. There are things like the Greenpeace greener electronics guide but that is environmental impact only, nothing on labour standards.

reformist strategies are gifts to the forces in power. even when a reform is successful, it will not change the underlying nature of the existing system. a band-aid will not cure your arm of gangrene. a carefully applied axe, however...

what is a CSA?

localism is the opiate of the middle classes

what is a CSA?

Community Supported Agriculture. Basically you find a local farm and sign up to get weekly deliveries from them for a fixed fee.

Community Supported Agriculture, you buy a share in the output of a farm or group of farms and they give you a box of vegetables, fruits (and in our case a monthly chicken).

xpost

has anyone tried:

US - http://www.goodguide.com/
UK - http://www.ethical-company-organisation.org/
AUS - http://outware.com.au/shopethical/ShopEthical.html

I've belonged to several since 2000 or so. the first was my favorite but closed down when they lost their lease. Have tried a couple others before settling on the one we have now, which we've been with for 4 or 5 years.

xp

Just some observations:

Any ethical decision that is not immediately clear and obvious is going to require you to weigh a variety of conflicting factors against one another. Often there is no easy scale in which to judge them. That would be true, even if you were familiar with all the facts and all the likely outcomes of your actions.

With globalization, it becomes impossible to know all the facts involved or to weigh the likelihood of various outcomes. This shirt was made in Honduras and the other in Mauritius; how can you decide which purchase does the most good?

One value of buying locally, where possible, is that this increases the chance that you can tie together your action with its consequences. It isn't that local people are better than Hondurans, or more ethical. It's just that local people are knowable, local land is visible, local politics are accessible, and some basis for judgment emerges. Blank ignorance is not conducive to wise decisions.

As for products that are the exclusive province of multinational corporations, like laptops or iPhones, the chances for making a 'right' choice fade to near zero. In such cases, I just fall back to trying not to be wasteful or greedy; iow, examine my own motives and actions, as the only knowable part of the equation.

whoah a monthly chicken!? that would be awesome.

xp

One value of buying locally, where possible, is that this increases the chance that you can tie together your action with its consequences. It isn't that local people are better than Hondurans, or more ethical. It's just that local people are knowable, local land is visible, local politics are accessible, and some basis for judgment emerges. Blank ignorance is not conducive to wise decisions.

yeah this is how I think about it

our CSA is pretty awesome, they act as a hub for a number of local producers, there are add ons for chickens, cheese, mushrooms and a couple of other things.

my laptop was hewn from bedrock

Community Supported Agriculture, you buy a share in the output of a farm or group of farms and they give you a box of vegetables, fruits (and in our case a monthly chicken).

Oh, you mean a co-op? Those have been around for ages.

co-ops don't deliver food to your door on a regular basis, at least the ones in my area don't!

aimless seemingly p otm.

my laptop was hewn from bedrock

― buzza, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 20:14 (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

like i understand i am coming off as being naive itt but fucking hell this issue brings out people just looking like dicks.

shoes are the area where it seems kind of impossible to buy anything that isn't made in a foreign country under questionable conditions.

25% of New Balance shoes are U.S. made, preferably with domestic materials

buying local doesn't reduce greenhouse gases?

iatee was going off on this in regards to production of beef, specifically.

― The Uncanny Frankie Valley (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 20:00 (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

mad lolz.
--GOIT BUZZ TOYS (a hoy hoy)

this is gonna turn into /posts very much in character/ but we should buy local when the total costs (externalities included) of producing and shipping something is lower locally. that's not always gonna be the case, depending on where you live it might not even be the case most of the time. global transit is pretty efficient in the big picture.

'buy local' as a trend for bay area type people is not gonna actually significantly affect the world I guess it's not a bad thing but it's mostly just a way to feel good about your consumption instead if facing the reality that your consumption itself is the problem. we had a thread on this.

living somewhere where it's gonna be most efficient for *all goods and services* to make it to you is a lot more important in the long-run. (suburbs thread) if you actually do the math w/r/t every way on which you yourself affect the world then you have to incorporate a lot more than your daily food consumption habits.

+ not buying shit or buying it used

in which

on the whole, buying local cuts down ghg emissions. there's overlap on certain issues, but it's a good rule of thumb that works. but to me, buying local is much more about preparing for a carbon-constrained future, building resilient communities.

http://www.postcarbon.org/relocalize

buying local is much more about preparing for a carbon-constrained future, building resilient communities.

^^^this

which also applies to this:
living somewhere where it's gonna be most efficient for *all goods and services* to make it to you is a lot more important in the long-run

which is one of the major reasons why I live where I do (incidentally, in the Bay Area)

like, I live in a port city surrounded by abundant agriculture and a local body politic that is heavily oriented towards sustainability (practically ever city has a climate action plan, aggressive GHG reduction goals, renewable generation programs, aggressive composting/recycling programs). These are reasons I do not move to the 'burbs.

honestly the consumption choice I feel most awful about in the last few years is fucking diapers. ugh.

oh man i want to avoid this argument for sure, but assumptions of how efficiently things reach you is pretty lol-worthy a lot of the time and based on pretty different belief sets. the one constant is that by the time that laptop arrives at your doorstep, it has traveled an awfully long way no matter where you live.

not addressing shakey there, but peeps as a whole.

ya and you live there with like 800,000 people and nobody else can move there cause nobody's building any more 'san francisco' also most of the rest of the bay area - where almost everybody lives - is shitty sprawl like the rest of the country. that's a far more pressing issue than 'buy local'.

xp to shakes

i mean for example, taking living in a coastal/port/hub city as a net good for this sort of stuff presupposes the consumption of largely imported goods, no?

are we really turning this into a "suburbs are awful" argument

right but you can def consume produce responsibly in SF that is far less possible in NYC right? so its a double edged sword

xpost please god no i dont want to add another thread to the never read this again list

where people live very much affects the transit patterns behind how shit gets to them! it's impossible not to turn this into that, unless people just want to feel good about buying local vegetables, if so, hey w/e, welcome to San Francisco

xp

we should buy local when the total costs (externalities included) of producing and shipping something is lower locally

I detect a problem here. It doesn't matter how good your metric is, if it cannot be applied by ordinary people as an integral part of their decision-making process. This metric would do me about as much good as saying that my purchases must be dictated by the number of decayed carbon isotopes in ppb.

exactly that's why it needs to be addressed politically via the tax structure

basically it is easy to go down the path of A) WE R ALL DOOMED GONNA SPRAY AEROSOL CANS INTO THE AIR BECAUSE WHY NOT B) redefining the terms to shoehorn your choices into a lifestyle that you can feel ethically comfortable with. thats why stuff like this and actually doing it isnt a quick simple answer, it is highly dependent on your situation and how you can make a positive effort.

sometimes i just want a pineapple, and i don't have $5 to buy an "ethically sustainable" one and obv. local isn't always the option, so i don't understand what i'm supposed to do but buy the $1.99 walmart one and get snarked at by wealthier friends who won't eat it b/c of "the pesticides"

that is trolling on account of i don't have any wealthier friends

pineapple is disgusting anyway

and iatee - look dude, I agree with you, carbon taxes let's have it! Better urban design yep let's have it (I love urban planning and architecture and community planning!) But I am where I am, I don't/can't live on a farm and it's basically my job to make my immediate community more sustainable and less energy intensive so cut me some slack eh

I'm not gonna trill this thread much more but main points:

a. isolating your consumption of *one individual product* and not reflecting on the larger effects of your lifestyle totally misses the point and it's just using 'buy local' or whatever is mostly to feel good about yourself. it's not 'bad' but its not 'the answer'. buying local vegetables for a year is offset by that one plane trip you took thy one time.
b. not consuming stuff is always agl
c. let's turn San Francisco into a futuristic skyscraper city and then let's all move there

that one time*

not gonna 'turn this thread'

god I hate writing this shit on a phone

troll

ffs

i mean for example, taking living in a coastal/port/hub city as a net good for this sort of stuff presupposes the consumption of largely imported goods, no?

No, because goods that arrive at that port aren't processed/warehoused/distributed from there. They almost certainly go by rail or truck to somewhere else for that stuff regardless.

I'm sure there are exceptions but basically....

sometimes i just want a pineapple, and i don't have $5 to buy an "ethically sustainable" one and obv. local isn't always the option, so i don't understand what i'm supposed to do but buy the $1.99 walmart one and get snarked at by wealthier friends who won't eat it b/c of "the pesticides"

sometimes you cant have what you want...

buying local vegetables for a year is offset by that one plane trip you took thy one time.

but...if buying local vegetables for a year is equivalent to one plane trip (for the sake of argument), then NOT buying local for a year means you just added another plane trip's worth of emissions. So why not buy local? no one's saying that it solves all the world's problems, just that it helps.

it's the all or nothing attitude that totally baffles me. some people will seriously make an argument like "but it's possible to eat a grass-fed, local beef that is less carbon-intensive than buying organic vegetables, so...eat meat all the time and don't worry about anything!"

laurel i think you might be misreading what i am saying there, what i am getting at is that in order to see port cities as having a net good effect, you have to base that on importation of goods, because otherwise what utility do ports have on localized consumption?

localized consumption

I need to buy more often from the organic market in my nabe, but cost is def a factor.

Yuh ZS otm. None of us are in a powerful position enough to change carbon taxes, so until the day when yr name on a petition changes anything, all you can do is buy local to offset emissions and just try to help things in any small way.

and there are def incremental and easy things that can be done to change this stuff! it isnt that hard to decide that walmart is evil and just never buy from them again, for example, you dont need a ten point plan to improve the world to make some basic decisions.

it's the all or nothing attitude that totally baffles me. some people will seriously make an argument like "but it's possible to eat a grass-fed, local beef that is less carbon-intensive than buying organic vegetables, so...eat meat all the time and don't worry about anything!"
--double whooooaaaaa! (Z S)

people who feel like they are already making the world a better place when they are actually just making the world a less better place more slowly are gonna be less likely to realize and accept the types of real sacrifices necessary to make the world a better place (like moving to futuristic blade runner san francisco)

I meant to quite yer previous post

quote! I give up

i don't know man, not trying to argue but i just disagree with that argument. aren't you again assuming that people who take steps to cut down on consumption/reduce energy-use/buy local/etc think that they're doing everything that they can, that they've "done their job"? that may be true of some people, but certainly not everyone. and actually, i'd argue that people that are already being proactive about changing their lifestyles and consumption habits are MORE likely to realize and accept the types of real sacrifices they may be forced to make in the future, not less likely.

ZS OTM throughout the thread.

this is esp true in the parts where he quotes me approvingly...

I found it was very hard to avoid shopping in my supermarket if I worked 9-5 - the very few local butchers/greengrocers etc tend to be open only during these hours. Everyone I know (in UK) who has a local veg box delivered raves about it, though - it's probably worth looking into (and I know they often do more than just veg). Abel and Cole is one name I keep hearing.

zs

problems are
a. we are linking 'the good deed' to an act of consumption which already is misleading
b. this is a small sacrifice in the big picture ($) and something people w/ extra money can do pretty easily to feel better about themselves while changing nothing really (remy brought this up in another thread)
c. it's the wrong issue to be focusing on and putting energy into

XP ^ actually that Abel & Cole site's really come on since I last looked at it a few years ago. You can add any grocery item - bakery, meat, herbs, tins - it's like Sainsburys online.

this is esp true in the parts where he quotes me approvingly...

I lol'd

c. it's the wrong issue to be focusing on and putting energy into

but... this is not a zero sum game

a. we are linking 'the good deed' to an act of consumption which already is misleading
as i mentioned earlier, the first option should be not consuming at all. after that, if it's really necessary, consume wisely. you're going to have to consume at least a little bit no matter what you do, unless you exist in a different dimension where the laws of thermodynamics don't apply. i'm no fan of consumption, but labeling absolutely all consumption as evil is like telling people not to masturbate.

b. this is a small sacrifice in the big picture ($) and something people w/ extra money can do pretty easily to feel better about themselves while changing nothing really (remy brought this up in another thread)
yeah, there is a genre of people who do this. i have one, really rich uncle, and he always tell me how green he is, and he has 4 EVs/Hybrids/NG vehicles in the garage of his overbloated mcmansion. there are always going to be people like that, but that doesn't mean that my own (perfectly reasoned, noble) attempts to reduce consumption aren't valid.

c. it's the wrong issue to be focusing on and putting energy into
shakey otm, there are more than enough bright people on this planet to put tons of time and energy into anything that helps to solve the problem.

er, didn't mean to put B in bold, sorry!

political activism is a zero sum game tbh you have to pick certain things to focus on. skyscrapers in sf is much more important but for some reason less of a hot topic for green ppl in the bay area.

also, on the accidentally bolded B, as i mentioned earlier, buying thoughtfully and locally helps to build up local economies, communities, and resilience. when the shit hits the fan, the places that have put no thought into all of this stuff are going to be absolutely fucked. you don't build stuff like that overnight - it takes decades. in contrast, places that have taken strong steps to develop self-sustaining local food systems and economies will draw in people in dire need of stability.

Armando Iannucci empathises (thinking of the bit at 8.10):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IZvShAjKq0

I don't want to lapse into self-parody here, and like iateeegah! I've already trolled on a lot of these threads. So what I want to say is that, ethically speaking, there's nothing better any of us can do (w/r/t consumer culture) than buying the most socially- and environmentally-conscious products we can reasonably afford; limiting our quantity of purchase; and reusing whenever prudent and possible. "Ethical" purchasing shouldn't be wholly the privilege of the affluent; of those with expendable incomes. CSAs, local retailers, and farm stands are lovely for folks with access and ability, but buying from them when it's disadvantageous (logistically, financially) is just... self-destructive. As with the relative "goodness" of charitable donations – a millionaire donating $10,000 or an unemployed high schooler donating $1 - there's no sliding scale of rectitude or conscionable-ness, and the 'most ethical reasonable purchase' any person can afford should remain a private, personal decision.

in other words, i want my $1.99 pineapple, and fuck any haters who say i have to pay $5 to buy an ethical one or learn to go without. pineapple is delicious.

political activism is a zero sum game tbh you have to pick certain things to focus on.

But more ethical consumption habits are something that can also be picked up by people who would never get involved in political activism. The fact that it's easy is a good thing! And there's not necessarily anything wrong with ethical consumption being a sort of a fad or fashion statement for some people, because that can help spread better consumption habits to people who would never otherwise be open to more radical sacrifices. It's a way to change consumption habits using forces like marketing which govern consumption to begin with. Changes to tax codes and urban planning are important too but they're not something that the average person will become involved with in their day to day life.

xpost to remy

just out of curiosity, how would you react if the price of the pineapple rose to reflect the true costs of producing it, and it ended up costing $5?

what I don't understand is how do you ever get to the point politically when you can overcome Dole's lobbyists and change the laws so that the pineapple's price reflects the true costs and at the same time convince remy to vote for these new higher prices?

_political activism is a zero sum game tbh you have to pick certain things to focus on._

But more ethical consumption habits are something that can also be picked up by people who would never get involved in political activism. The fact that it's easy is a good thing! And there's not necessarily anything wrong with ethical consumption being a sort of a fad or fashion statement for some people, because that can help spread better consumption habits to people who would never otherwise be open to more radical sacrifices. It's a way to change consumption habits using forces like marketing which govern consumption to begin with. Changes to tax codes and urban planning are important too but they're not something that the average person will become involved with in their day to day life.
--the wheelie king (wk)

or when they do - even in the bay area - they tend to take the nimby pov. 'slow growth' cause everyone who doesn't live here doesn't matter.

xp

Z S,

My finances are tight enough that even a $1.99 pineapple is a rationed luxury in the way taht a $5 pineapple might be for somebody living above the poverty line. In a theoretical future where produce is priced according to true production cost, I'd be correspondingly paid a lot more for my labor and more able to purchase it.

I don't want to lapse into self-parody here, and like iateeegah! I've already trolled on a lot of these threads. So what I want to say is that, ethically speaking, there's nothing better any of us can do (w/r/t consumer culture) than buying the most socially- and environmentally-conscious products we can reasonably afford; limiting our quantity of purchase; and reusing whenever prudent and possible. "Ethical" purchasing shouldn't be wholly the privilege of the affluent; of those with expendable incomes. CSAs, local retailers, and farm stands are lovely for folks with access and ability, but buying from them when it's disadvantageous (logistically, financially) is just... self-destructive. As with the relative "goodness" of charitable donations – a millionaire donating $10,000 or an unemployed high schooler donating $1 - there's no sliding scale of rectitude or conscionable-ness, and the 'most ethical reasonable purchase' any person can afford should remain a private, personal decision.

― free banana man! free banana man! (remy bean), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 21:52 (35 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

in other words, i want my $1.99 pineapple, and fuck any haters who say i have to pay $5 to buy an ethical one or learn to go without. pineapple is delicious.

― free banana man! free banana man! (remy bean), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 21:59 (28 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

this is great and all but i started the thread because i know no alternative to the cheap evil pineapple and there could be a cheap good pineapple, an expensive good pineapple or maybe i should just stop eating pineapple. ya get me?

I just wanted to drop in and say that even building yer own computer isn't that much more ethical than buying a prebuilt one

all the parts are still made in east asia/SE asia. you're just the one snapping the pieces onto motherboard and screwing some screws in, instead of the factory worker. but the manufacturing processes involved in making PCBs are still incredibly toxic and leak tons of heavy metals into the environment.

also am just going to point out that there are a lot of very impoverished people whos livelihood depends on working in sweatshops, unfortunately, so there's that to take into account

I have been trying very very hard to not opine on the irony of this entire conversation happening on the Internet but I just lost the battle with myself.

In a theoretical future where produce is priced according to true production cost, I'd be correspondingly paid a lot more for my labor and more able to purchase it.

eh not really, unfortuantely. iatee's specifically referring to carbon tax that would just makes stuff more expensive, not raise wages.

the whole concept of the true cost pineapple is kind of flawed tho because it imagines that certain purchases are more priveleged wrt cost allotment than others - when in fact everything we buy is operating in some way on a subsidized level, its one of the great efficiencies of communal living. pineapples being locatable and seemingly exotic in origin make them an easy strawman, but they arent actually any different than buying apples from mn when you live in manhattan.

btw apropos of nothing, I spent the weekend with my dad in Chicago who spent about 14 hours raving about how amazing MN apples have become

honeycrisps are good its true

not as good as fujis tho

and i can eat them guilt free! hooray for america!

xpost nah we got a whole new apple going on right now that i cant remember the name of, gala something maybe?

sweet tango?

I think it's SweeTango(TM), although based on how my dad was going on about them they should be called CrackOrgasm.

also am just going to point out that there are a lot of very impoverished people whos livelihood depends on working in sweatshops, unfortunately, so there's that to take into account

― ASPIE Rocky (dayo), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 22:39 (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

eh when you get paid less than the cost of two meals a day cost in your town, let alone afford shelter or proper clothing etc. to work 18 hour shifts every day, 'depends on working in sweatshops' is a p huge misnomer.

you just stacked the deck there but even so oftentimes its better than the backgrounds and pisspoor places they're coming from

I don't think the "sweatshop workers don't make that much anyway so it's better if none of the money I spend doesn't go to them" argument is particularly ethical

(by which I really mean, there isn't really a good answer to this conundrum)

alternatively, "its better if my money goes towards manufacturers actually getting that money"

actual question T/S: sustenance-level farming vs. sweatshop

er should be subsistence-level there

haha please feel free to argue that on my thread overseas manufacturing in developing countries

anyway, the idea is not to punish workers at sweatshops with unemployment, but to force their employers to pay them better. Unfortunately, finding mechanisms to counter capitalism's ever-present drive to cut labor costs as much as possible is pretty difficult

public shaming imo

Apart from a few derfred obvious boycotts (Nestlé, News Corp), last year I found an Australia-specific list of ethical products that has almost completely redefined our shopping habits. Finding truly free-range eggs is still a nightmare though.

make a logo for it and we're in

just don't eat eggs, they're gross anyway

who wants to go lick some lichen off of rocks with me

i have evolved so i just derive protein from oxygen

ETHICAL CONSUMER talk about an oxymoron!!!!!

Finding truly free-range eggs is still a nightmare though.

My freinds used to raise chickens on the scraps from their kitchen. Best eggs ever.

oxy moron

get a brain oxymoran

get some oxy clean brain

buy ethically!

http://www.popsci.com/files/imagecache/article_image_large/articles/image002.jpg

Things I do:
- never ever buy bottled water. Its a waste of plastic, money, water and add to landfill. Biggest scam going. Almost mnever buy any other bottled drinks too, unless i'm caught out and it is a hot day.
- secondhand clothes. The money is usually going to a decent charity, the clothing is cheap. Sure it is likely it was still made somewhere dodgy to start with but it helps a little, I'd like to think
- locally grown veges and eggs and, at the least, australian-produced/grown meats and other produce. Not always possible, but I try where I can
- to add to that ive started growing a lot of my own veggies. This is fun, and I know theyre fresh, and organic.

Srsly though, bottled water, stop drinking that shit y'all.

But yeah as others have said, then I fall down on the computer front :( (tho my cellphones and iphone have all been hand me downs)

http://youtu.be/hpAMbpQ8J7g

I can't say I am impressed by that Zizek talk. He calls the act of buying an apple an act of "egoistic consumption" (btw, if you listen carefully he says this is not just true for an organic apple, but for any apple). wtf, a person has to eat.

Maybe he acquires apples only by standing at the base of a long chute the upper end of which is cloaked in mystery, down which random objects rattle, among which are, at times, apples.

"the real aim is to try & recostruct society on such a basis that povrety will be impossible" .

- never ever buy bottled water. Its a waste of plastic, money, water and add to landfill. Biggest scam going.

If I'm out and I don't have water, I'll sooner buy some than dehydrate and get an 'eadache, but I'll also go to ridiculous lengths to find cheap water. Also (and I know this is not you) there are people who rail against paying $4 for a bottle of water but will happily pay $4.20 for a soft drink, i.e. exactly the same thing with a bit of flavouring and colouring.

Oh and I agree its just as bad with soft drink, yep. Esp those fricking nutrient waters (which we've all railed at elsewhere). Its just a particular gall for water - especaially as it isnt even "mineral water" anymore, it's just cleaned up drinking-supply water.

Apparently in some countries, the production of plastics to create water bottles pollutes the area's water supplies so badly, that they need to... BUY BOTTLED WATER because the water supply is undrinkable. Funny that.

Everyone has an ethical bonnet-bee. That one's mine.

Fiji's a good example of designer water causing local damage. They flog Fiji brand water at exorbitant prices and the locals are short of drinking water.

Actually that might be being addressed.