-
hey_thr67
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 299
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:27 am
- Thanked: 9 times
- Followed by:2 members
ANALYSIS OF ISSUE
-----------------
"People often complain that products are not made to last. ! ey feel that making products that wear
out fairly quickly wastes both natural and human resources. What they fail to see, however, is that
such manufacturing practices keep costs down for the consumer and stimulate demand."
Which do you find more compelling: the complaint about products that do not last or the response
to it? Explain your positions using relevant reasons and/or examples from your own experience,
observations, or readings.
The issue above highlights different perspectives in the two arguments. While environmental perspective lobbies for the longetivity of product to avoid over-exploitation of natural/human resources, economic perspective throws lights on the business implications of the limited life of products.Although both the perspective are justified, coming down to a conclusion will take little a bit of analysis.
In consumer markets products can be classified into many categories. Some products may require long durability such as heavy machinary etc but products like clothes, plastic etc.. may not require much longetivity. The purpose of the product is one of the key deciding factor of how the product should be manufatured. Also it is quite possible to recycle products.
As plastic products, clothes etc. are recyclable, these product can surve both purposes by not exploting the human resources much and stimulating demand by limiting the life. Hence Cycle of the product needs to be decided.
Every product has its life.Product's life can be based on many factors such as quality of material used, upgradability and company's intentions. For example, A shoe can only last for 2 years after that it is bound to be outdated. The reason for its exist from market can be the fashion
, quality of its material and its keeper's intentions.In this world of day-by-day innovation, asking for life-long durability of product is cruel to new innovations. The demand and competition play key role in motivating the innovation in the industry.
The demand and competion feed to generation of business. The new business opportunities generates employment and eventually raise in income level of consumer. It is a cycle that can help in maintain the equilibiria. But all the products doesn't necessarily have to be in this cycle. For example
why would a pizza guy need a space shuttle to deliver his pizza. Also, making a space shuttle requires lot of funds.Hence the logetivity of these product can eventually save some money to coutries.
The above argued points can help in evaluating the substance of the discussed point-of-views. I think, both these point-of-views are depenent on each other and hence advote a mixed approach where over-expolitable can be curbed by effective check on the market and constructive business environment can be made using the same.
-----------------
"People often complain that products are not made to last. ! ey feel that making products that wear
out fairly quickly wastes both natural and human resources. What they fail to see, however, is that
such manufacturing practices keep costs down for the consumer and stimulate demand."
Which do you find more compelling: the complaint about products that do not last or the response
to it? Explain your positions using relevant reasons and/or examples from your own experience,
observations, or readings.
The issue above highlights different perspectives in the two arguments. While environmental perspective lobbies for the longetivity of product to avoid over-exploitation of natural/human resources, economic perspective throws lights on the business implications of the limited life of products.Although both the perspective are justified, coming down to a conclusion will take little a bit of analysis.
In consumer markets products can be classified into many categories. Some products may require long durability such as heavy machinary etc but products like clothes, plastic etc.. may not require much longetivity. The purpose of the product is one of the key deciding factor of how the product should be manufatured. Also it is quite possible to recycle products.
As plastic products, clothes etc. are recyclable, these product can surve both purposes by not exploting the human resources much and stimulating demand by limiting the life. Hence Cycle of the product needs to be decided.
Every product has its life.Product's life can be based on many factors such as quality of material used, upgradability and company's intentions. For example, A shoe can only last for 2 years after that it is bound to be outdated. The reason for its exist from market can be the fashion
, quality of its material and its keeper's intentions.In this world of day-by-day innovation, asking for life-long durability of product is cruel to new innovations. The demand and competition play key role in motivating the innovation in the industry.
The demand and competion feed to generation of business. The new business opportunities generates employment and eventually raise in income level of consumer. It is a cycle that can help in maintain the equilibiria. But all the products doesn't necessarily have to be in this cycle. For example
why would a pizza guy need a space shuttle to deliver his pizza. Also, making a space shuttle requires lot of funds.Hence the logetivity of these product can eventually save some money to coutries.
The above argued points can help in evaluating the substance of the discussed point-of-views. I think, both these point-of-views are depenent on each other and hence advote a mixed approach where over-expolitable can be curbed by effective check on the market and constructive business environment can be made using the same.
