“However, the problem with collecting Stuff is that there is always more Stuff being made, so we need to buy more Stuff to keep up.”

No we don’t.

It’s easier to make a fire using matches, but you don’t need to. You can make it with a steel and flint, or a bow drill, the way people used to, before this Stuff was available. It’s harder, but that’s not the fault of the makers of matches.

“Does it really matter if your shoes cost $90 or $130?”
Yes. You’ve got to give up more matter to get the $130 ones. And for the higher price, the maker can afford to make them of a higher quality.

“Are you going to get $40-worth of extra wear out of the more expensive brand?”
You could. It’s a subjective judgment.

“And if so, how can you measure that?”
You can’t measure the benefit, because it’s subjective. But that doesn’t mean it’s not real or valuable.

“Can you judge whether they’ll be $40 more comfortable?”
Yes. You may turn out to be mistaken, but you can still judge it. How could it be otherwise?

“No matter how you look at it, it is all just Stuff.’
Well so is food, clothing, and matches.

“So there we have it - a world full of Stuff; an artificial means of keeping the economy going and food on our tables.”
You’ve got it back-the-front. You’re not buying the stuff to “keep the economy going”. The makers of it are making it in hopes of you choosing to give them something valuable in exchange for them satisfying your wants: it’s called social co-operation.

“After an hour or so walking through the mall I was well and truly stuffed and needed some fresh air…”
Good for you. You don’t need to buy stuff if you don’t want to. But you are in no way “subservient” to the makers of matches, doonas, shoes, or anything else for which payment is voluntary.

The capitalist system requires both producers and consumers to buy stuff and to keep buying stuff.

If the producers don't have enough demand, they build obsolescence into their products and/or change the design every few months by adding some new gimmick.

The producers fill the newspapers and television with imperatives to buy their stuff instead of someone else's stuff. They appeal to our more base instincts with points like 'you'll look better driving this car, more wealthy.'

Stuff doesn't make us happy but stuff does make capitalists wealthy which is all they're interested in. They don't care if you go bankrupt as long as you keep buying their stuff even if you can't afford it.

Capitalism is near the end of its road. The sooner it ends, the better it will be for the environment and for most of the world's people.

Stuff the stuff!

I wish my wife could grasp that simple concept, Peter.
The way she's going, I'll be completely stuffed by the end of the year :(

Peter's musings on why we need "stuff" are of limited interest, and very dated. Efforts to limit the production of "stuff" have been tried in command economies (mostly the old socialist regimes) and have been abandonded. In fact all large scale efforts to share the means of production and limit consumption (notably communes and kibbutzes), have all long been ditched. A few idealists keep the idea alive on a very small scale here and there, but that's about it.

Peter G - I was interested in your revival of the long dead idea that producers build in obsolesence. In fact they don't - although for cars in particular, they don't build them with a long life in mind - but obsolesence does occur through government regulation. The one place where I know it to be systematic and put in to maintain demand for cars is Japan. Cars in Japan are subjected to annual inspections so rigorous that no car car possibly last more than 10 years on the road. NSW has something similar, although no where near as bad .. so cars can last much longer..
Leave it with you..

"Capitalism is near the end of its road. The sooner it ends, the better it will be for the environment and for most of the world's people."

Well said DavidG.

The irrational, anti-social, anti-democratic and grossly wasteful mode of production, distribution and exchange currently dominating the world's social and politico-economic relations (Capitalism)is unsustainable and, like its counterpart Soviet experiment (State Capitalism), is nearing a state wherein it it will hopefully implode under the weight of the endemic contradictions belieing such a pernicious system.

A good essay which sums up the situation of the world altogether.

Peter has obviously done his home work.