Would Applying The Milwaukee Magnum Principle Cause Capitalism To Implode?

Question

Excessive consumption drives capitalism. But at the same time it is destroying our environment.

The Milwaukee Tool Company build an electric drill, called the ½ Inch Chuck Magnum Drill that was virtually indestructible. Most of these drills built over a forty year period are still in use today and are respected worldwide by people in the building trade. Milwaukee’s Principle was simple enough: 'Build a product that would last a lifetime and people would buy it.' Although it cost more than cheaper drills people bought it because it lasts.

But most products are made to self-destruct, forcing the consumer to constantly buy replacement products and equally causing the quickened depletion of our natural resources.

So I ask, is it a myth that capitalism would implode without forced excessive consumption or are there viable options we can use that ensures capilalism can survive without destroying our planet?

(What's this question doing in philosophy? Think about it.)

Sarah, implode means to cave in on itself, to self-destruct inwardly.

If most products were build to last a lifetime then less products would be sold (we're not talking about eating food here). My question was simple enough: Could capitalism, as we know it today, withstand a radical reversal in consumption? Or would it, as we know it today, self-destruct (implode)? Other than drastically rasing prices to maintain profit levels what else could happen and what else could be done as a corrective measure?

Answer 1

No. Rampant and wasteful consumerism is a recent phenomenon. Just look at the huge landfills of today compared with the small dumps of just 50 years ago. Capitalism was built on the Milwaukee Magnum Principal. It has just lost it's way today because of greed. And this is not the greed of the huge corporations. This is the greed of the small consumer who doesn't care if their precious products ruin the environment or were made by children in virtual slave labor. All that matters is getting the next new thing and throwing the last old thing out. If there were no demand, there'd be no supply.

Answer 2

First, I do not think that the workings of the market system depend on the 'intentional' self-destruction of products. even now, there exist secondary markets where people are buying and selling goods that were already purchased once from the original producer.
society is never stagnant.
If you have a sweater (that in theory will last forever) but it is too big for you because you've lost weight, but someone else has gotten fatter and would like your sweater, that's still a market transaction- voluntary exchange (for money, or a smaller sweater, or eggs, or whatever) in a capitalistic system (the sweater is yours, the eggs are hers, you have the legal right to do what you want with them). the sweater having a long lifespan has nothing to do with that.
And so even if the average lifespan of goods increases drastically we could hypothesize that the transaction rate will decrease. that wouldn't make the system implode- whatever that actually means (back to substinance farming? a switch to a command economy?)

In addition, the idea that all goods could potentially be engineered as lasting forever is not realistic- simply consider food, for one thing.

people buying something, having it fall out of fashion or having it break, and therefore purchasing a replacement product is not in and of itself contemptible.
however, i understand taking issue with people feeling the need to buy massive amounts of trendy objects 'just because' if their production is "destroying our planet". but there IS a bit of a check and balance system, instituted by government intervention or no- in the long run, humans would rather have a planet than not. and anyway, better, cleaner, less wasteful production processes (which is the goal, yes?) do not necessarily lead to products that are meant to last forever anyway.

EDIT:
i know what "implode" means.
i was referring to what form an imploded market system would take- what it would look like.

Answer 3

My understanding of the Milwaukee Magnum Principle is quite different. The MMP was first posted by a third year bio chem major at Stanford University. In which the student states that if all current consumers of domestic beer would commit to only purchasing Milwaukee's Best ( or The Beast in some circles ) the implications on the American economy would be devastating. One would think the added income afforded to common consumers of domestic beers via the significant discounted price of the untasted liquid would bolster retail spending and the like. In fact, the acidic taste and lingering bitterness would drive Americans to drink less, and therefore limit large ticket purchases at Adult Entertainment Venues and popular night spots. Subsequently the industry most effected by the streamlining of purchases would be the legal system. With gross reductions in DUI, DWI, and Divorce cases lawyers would be faced with some difficult decisions. Many families with a lawyer as the primary bread winner would be forced n to lives of poverty, driving economically sound Honda's and Toyota's in lue of BMW's and Mercedes. New in ground pool sales would plummet leaving 1000's of middle class workers unemployed. The answer is a resounding YES, implosion is inevitable all because of THE BEAST.