EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

Advertising, including Google, will feel the effect of a slower purchasing cycle. Fewer designers (in all industries) to design a lower volume of products. Less money to promote fewer items being sold. On the flipside, larger per-item transaction values.

To add, It doesn't seem like we could go on indefinitely with ephemeral product cycles consuming increasing amounts of natural resources considering the increasing purchasing power of emerging economies.

How is he trolling by stating the facts? You might wish it were different but the EU Parliament doesn't have any real power. It can call for things all it likes, but it can't make law, which raises the question of why it calls itself a Parliament. The single purpose of a Parliament is to make law, after all.

The wiki page you link to does say that.

Voters have been figuring it out. Turnout for EP elections has been falling steadily since the institution was first created:

http://www.ukpolitical.info/european-parliament-election-tur...

From 62% to around 40% on average. People don't bother voting because the EP can't/won't actually do much except cheerlead for the EU itself and demand it does more.

This sort of story appears from time to time. The EP calls for this, it calls for that. Nobody pays much attention because these "calls" don't matter. The EU's laws can only be changed by the Commission, and EU law is made entirely in secret (unlike every other legislature in the world save North Korea). So there's little point trying to get involved or care what they do - EU law just "appears" fully formed and gets implemented without debate.

https://euobserver.com/institutional/136630

Manufacturers should be made responsible for disposal. This would provide an incentive to make products last and be repairable.

I am unconvinced that more expensive = better quality for a lot of things these days.

There are some anecdotal examples of people with Miele washing machines that have lasted for decades etc (... as an aside I guess we wont know about today's Miele washing machines for several more years at least ...), but in my experience paying a premium for a product more often than not just gives you an as-cheaply-made product but with a brand name you've heard of. I am very happy to pay for decent stuff, but I am not prepared to pay extra for the same quality stuff just to get a brand name.

What seems to be the biggest problem these days for me is not mechanical failures, but what can only be assumed to be software failures - things just going haywire or flashing an LED/error code and not doing what they should.

Perhaps there is some cheap capacitor that has blown somewhere, but it is often a waffly explanation along the lines of "logic board has failed" (and they are always super-expensive to replace due to it being 10 years old and not made/stocked any more etc etc). It is usually more sensible to replace a 5-15 year old appliance with a new one, rather than buying a spare part that costs 50% of an entire new appliance, (plus then you usually get the benefits of improved energy efficiency)

A law requiring a particular material? Unless it’s health or safety related, no way. The last place I want to see government is regulating how a product must be constructed (unless it’s health or safety critical obviously.)

If you want a device without plastic screw holes, pay more money and find one or make one yourself, market it and sell it to other like-minded people.

If I have a toaster that breaks, the time it would take me to go to a repair shop is more valuable to me than the cost of a new toaster – not to mention the cost of the repair itself.

In China, you often do get smaller appliances repaired because the labor cost is so low. So it makes economic sense to get those kinds of items repaired.

But in France, if I want to get a microwave fixed, the item is either still under warranty or the depreciated value is less than the repair cost. Perhaps if government lowered taxes and relaxed the labor code, then repair shops could charge less and it would incentivize people to get repairs on smaller ticket items rather than buying replacements. But I certainly am not going to spend €65 getting a €150 microwave repaired when the microwave is already several years old. I migh spend €20 for that repair if I really liked the microwave.

I certainly wouldn’t be happy if I had to pay several hundred euros more for a microwave because of a law mandating the type of screw holes that must be used. The increase cost wouldn’t even be in materials as much as the buereaucratic cost of implementing such requirements.

Health and safety regulations – of course. Regulations because you’re unhappy with screw holes? Not a chance.