Why durabilty has been ignored

["Barry Brooks" <barrybrooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear PKT,

If an item lasted twice as long we would only need to produce half as many
to supply demand. As we enjoy economic growth we hasten any future shortages
of non-renewable resources, but the need to make jobs requires a consumer
society and waste.  The increase in consumption is all that has kept
machines from causing unemployment.  Nothing could be more basic: Economic
growth is at odds with conservation, which requires using less.

Conservation could be defined as using less.  Needless to say, business
types don't like the idea of increasing durability to conserve, or real
conservation by any means.  Economists know about to possibility of using
increased durability to conserve, but they never mention it. (Show me
where!)

To avoid resouce and pollution problems we need to build an economy that
tries to minimize consumption, the opposite of the consumer economy.

Effective conservation requires a demand reduction much greater than can be
provided by the investor's desire to maintain the scarcity-value of capital,
which yeilds only a slight reduction in consumption below the possible
maximum level of waste.

For more on durability as a means of conservation see
http://home.earthlink.net/~durable

Sincerely,
Barry Brooks