Sweden , sustainability & consumerism

[tazzieman]

This thinking is right up my alley.

https://www.fastcoexist.com/3063935/sweden-wants-to-fight-our-disposable-culture-with-tax-breaks-for-repairing-old-stuff

I enjoy repairing stuff , and I refuse to buy stuff just because someone says it's new , or new technology.
For those getting rich on rampant consumerism , good luck prying $ from older people like me.
But feel free to plunder future home deposits by tempting the younger folk with consumer goods.

[KGB]

You're most obviously a Repairavore.

[tazzieman]

You're most obviously a Repairavore.

Most obviously. It's a useful trait. Women find it sexy.

[thumperson]

Most obviously. It's a useful trait. Women find it sexy.

to use the catch cry of other parts of this forum - "pictures orbit never happened"

[tazzieman]

to use the catch cry of other parts of this forum - "pictures orbit never happened"

Unecessary. A man who reaches for his RAC card when he has a flat tyre probably shaves his legs , which means he probably also shaves his V. Which is  I suppose , DIY, if not exactly MacGyver-like.

[KGB]

Women find it sexy.

And quite often they are in need of repair.

[tazzieman]

And quite often they are in need of repair.

Like many men these days , they may tend towards overanalysis of simple tasks

 

[LeeM]

Unecessary. A man who reaches for his RAC card when he has a flat tyre probably shaves his legs , which means he probably also shaves his V. Which is  I suppose , DIY, if not exactly MacGyver-like.

 Hahahahaha. Spat my coffee out at that! 

[KGB]

Like many men these days , they may tend towards overanalysis of simple tasks.

They're 259 seconds I'll never recover.

[thumperson]

That's 259 seconds I'll never recover.

yep. I feel cheated. One the other hand, contemplating the question raised, none of my cars has a spare tyre. One has run flats the others have compressors and cans of goo. Oh and wtf is a shaved V (open necked part of a shirt)?

[KGB]

Imagine if you were in Sweden, trying to fix it yourself in order to claim the tax benefit, during mid-winter, in the dark natch, and your goo didn't squirt during Elk season.  For sure you wouldn't want to be found in an open necked shirt, or shaving your v for that matter.

*wondering how much longer this thread can continue

[ANF]

From a high tax country, they offer up a tax break here and on the other hand take more than 4 times as much on a new tax! Genius!!

 

[tazzieman]

Would you even trust the goo in your precious Porsche? Our Bardman chose the wise option. If you goo and then goof off a corner , what will your insurer make of that?

And on another note , those who get tyre anxiety when visiting Tassy need to remember there are many mobile black spots and premium fuel is not always just around the corner. So best to travel accompanied by an old Landrover that runs on 70 Octane and can carry several spare tyres  iwth a military satellite phone for ordering pizza.

Now , back to the tenet of the thread. We are trying to save the planet for our precious children are we not?

[KGB]

Like many men these days , they may tend towards over anal ysis of simple tasks

 

Here goes with some tasty thread cross breeding, just for fun;

The more interesting and relevant debate is what constitutes the identity of a car. Forget what Australian law says because law differs in other countries. I am going to use a 73 RS as an example, so we can discuss a hypothetical car with real value, but the same could apply to any car.

If I build a car from all new parts, is it a 73RS? I think all would agree that it was not. If I took a small bit of metal from a genuine 73RS, would it be a genuine car? What if that small bit had the chassis number on it? Or what happens if I use a genuine factory 73RS engine that has never been modified? What happens if i take every bit of running gear, engine, gearbox, interior etc from a 73RS and put it in a newly built shell? How is that different from using an engine from another car in a 73RS chassis? Can we separate the chassis number and engine number to create 2 genuine 73RS's?

Although the above is maybe extreme, I personally believe that a car is more than a single number, be it chassis or engine. It is a collection of components (and numbers). It is why I believe that the whole issue of restoration is so fraught and why we see big differences in values between some restored cars. i believe that if you are doing a proper restoration, you need to do all you can to keep as many components as possible. It is often more expensive and takes longer, because cleaning and reconditioning parts can take longer and cost more than replacing them. Replacing "consumables" is fine, but every time you replace a more significant component, the car becomes something different.

Values reflect originality - the closer a car is to how it came out of the factory, the more it is worth. It may not be the most perfect pricing mechanism, but it is logical and reasonable. Otherwise, the logical conclusion is that if we took a car built with new parts to exactly the 73RS spec, it should be worth the same amount as a concourse, perfect original 73RS, which we all know would be crazy to suggest, even though they would both look the same and drive the same.

[tazzieman]

Here goes with some tasty thread cross breeding, just for fun;

 

Your brain is operating like woman's , even though I will get castrated for making that sort of comment.
But 2+2 = 4 and the quickest way from A to B is not via Z

[KGB]

What if Z is placed in the middle?

 

[tazzieman]

What if Z is placed in the middle?

Comrade , I'm surprised your controller didn't teach you such basics 

[SimonN]

I really support the idea of trying to make people repair rather than replace. Australia is one of the worst societies for this, particularly with consumer goods and........housing! The number of knock down/rebuilds going on around my part of Sydney is crazy. Of course, this is because of the dire quality of the houses that were built, say, 20-30 years ago. The worrying thing is, the new houses being built aren't that much better, so the cycle will continue. In the UK, I lived in a house that was built in 1904 and nobody would consider knocking it down to build something newer and it wasn't an exception to the rule. 

The problem isn't just with housing. More than many other developed countries, there is a real obsession on price without regard to quality - manufacturers build down to a price in Oz rather than up to a standard. It is really tough to make buying decisions based on longevity of product, although maybe I am preaching to the choir seeing we are drawn together by a quality car.

Finally, in the spirit of the above quoted post of mine, just make sure you do your repairs using matching numbers parts and keep it as original as possible 

[KGB]

...like anything is possible?

[thumperson]

He looks like he Might shave his V. 

[tazzieman]

He looks like he Might shave his V. 

At the rate he's going he will end up with a broke back.

[LeeM]

I really support the idea of trying to make people repair rather than replace. Australia is one of the worst societies for this, particularly with consumer goods and........housing! The number of knock down/rebuilds going on around my part of Sydney is crazy. Of course, this is because of the dire quality of the houses that were built, say, 20-30 years ago. The worrying thing is, the new houses being built aren't that much better, so the cycle will continue. In the UK, I lived in a house that was built in 1904 and nobody would consider knocking it down to build something newer and it wasn't an exception to the rule. 

 Blame crap tv reno shows and over committed bored people for knock downs, and building 4, 2 storey boxes on one block of land. I would say Sydney is the prime candidate for cashed up developers jumping on the 'Must maximise profits' more than the state of the old homes. Tom's reno is fantastic, as he's kept the facade of the home true to it's heritage. There should be more of it, not knocking them down to put up boxes

 

 

 

[KGB]

Paddo Heritage Conservation Area.  Couldn't knock it down.

[SimonN]

<rant>

The houses that were built 20-50 years ago were of such poor standard that it really isn't worth keeping them. We don't see a lot of the sort of houses that Tom lives in being knocked down, or, for that matter, much pre-war, unless it is to make way for multi unit development because they are solidly built and are worth updating. The real problem is that we have learnt nothing and the companies doing knock down/rebuild project homes are producing houses that will get knocked down in another 30-50 years time, due to poor choices of construction methodologies driven by price rather than by what produces the best buildings. I am constantly being asked why it costs more to build a house designed for you by an architect and I answer that I could design the house to cost not much more than the average project home, but that once I explain what the alternatives are, clients want to pay the extra. They choose the materials and construction methodology based on what will give them the best house, not what will make the developer the most profit. They will pay for the inclusions they want, not the ones the builder can get the best deal on. They will choose extras not from the limited offering from the builder based on what is most profitable, but based on everything that is on the market. These homes don't need knocking down every 50 years because they will last for 100's of years. And contrary to what most people seem to think, this will be reflected in resale values. A very few enlightened developers are waking up to this, but regulation allows builders to construct rubbish.

</rant>

[KGB]

Gross generalisation; cost is what most people understand and base their decisions upon, not value.  Value requires patience and vision = time.

Everyone's too busy to have time.