Earlier quoted context omitted.
>here is strictly no reason for each person to own a TV, PC, dishwasher, washing machine, etc. - most of that could be shared so as to reduce electronic waste and increase sustainability. This sounds nice in theory, but doesn't work out well in practice. You get a tragedy of the commons situation where people don't take care of the equipment and it gets broken, or dies early. Also, some people are just really bad wit…
This is a overgeneralization and a sad belief to hold on to. There are many many communities which share resources where things do not fall into tragedy of the commons. There are communal houses, coliving spaces, makerspaces, people co buying second homes, tool libraries, heck! libraries themselves. There is a whole advertising culture that is trying to reinforce the "we couldn't possibly share things" narrative, I u…
Co-buying second homes? How many people are involved in a transaction like that? That's not communal at all, that's a partnership. Of course you can be selective with whom you partner and only partner with someone trusted, plus you both have a strong economic interest in taking care of the property. Same with your so-called "communal houses": it's not like dozens or hundreds of people are going to live in a house. Makerspaces, etc., can screen their members, and keep track of who does what to penalize people who abuse things.
Libraries have occasionally had trouble with people abusing books (ever seen a loaned-out book with folded-down corners, or writing in them?). However books don't need nearly as much care and maintenance as complex machinery (i.e. power tools) so of course you don't have to worry about it as much, and normal libraries budget and plan for books having a limited lifetime anyway. Extremely rare and valuable books aren't left out for random people to handle either.