World Consumption and GDP Images

Idiocracy

A review of Idiocracy, the movie Hollywood doesn't want you to see (and you've probably never heard of): http://www.slate.com/id/2150627/

More On Smaller Houses, Dumb People and Trash...

It has been pointed out to me that my previous post was harsh and bordering on elitist. Fair enough.

M says: I was thinking of pointing out that point 3 isn't likely accurate if what they toss has lasted (i.e. not broken). Also, I would have changed the wording of part 2. You made the language strong and negative. It's not necessarily that the owners are dumb. From a different view, big house owners are spending all their money on the house, so they can't afford to replace their stuff. I also suspect that many of them thought "hey, if I put this out, the vultures will take it away. I'm not really throwing it away, just giving it to someone in need." It would explain why so many people placed them so the nice stuff would be obvious, not hidden away. I also wonder if many people are just not educated as to what they can do with their stuff. They can donate many things to Goodwill or the ReStore. They can also sell it on eBay or Craigslist. Or, if they want it out of the house, they can sell it on consignment. But seriously, I wouldn't be surprised if most people aren't even sure what's allowed to be donated to Goodwill, let alone anything else.

I would argue that apathy has a lot more to do with the trash versus donation decision than a lack of education does. Also, apathy does not correlate positively with a successful life. My feeling is that the following thought goes through a lot of people's minds when cleaning out their homes: "Should I donate this or just toss it?" At that point, the environmentalist will donate it so less waste is produced. The social activist will donate it so a poor person will benefit. An apathetic person will simply toss it.

Correlation Between Smaller Homes and Amount of Trash

Today is big garbage day in our area of Oakville; four Tuesday's ago as well. That means last night was what I'll call "garbage night". During our walks around our area of Oakville, M and I have noticed that home size is negatively correlated with the amount of trash put out on garbage day. In other words, smaller homes put out more trash. We've noticed that this correlation also extends to regular bagged garbage throughout the year, but it's especially evident on big garbage days.

I hesitate to say "poorer homes" because nobody in our area of Oakville can be truly poor given the housing prices here. However, there is definitely a relationship evident. The characters that drive the streets in pickup trucks looking for treasures on garbage night generally seem to know this as well and usually stick to the streets with row homes.

Why is this?

We've puzzled this over and came up with three hypotheses:

1. Smaller homes simply have less space in which to store stuff, so whereas a family in a larger home would move unneeded stuff to their basement, a family in a smaller home is forced to throw it away.

2. Smaller homes are correlated negatively with intelligent owners. In other words, dumb people can only afford smaller homes, buy more stuff, then realize they don't need it or don't have space for it and throw it away. Or they simply don't think of or are not motivated enough to donate or sell their unneeded items.

3. Low-quality stuff that doesn't last is correlated positively with dumb owners. In other words, dumb people who own smaller homes (assuming 2 is correct) also buy cheap crap without care that it won't last as long and is quickly filling our landfills.

Agree? Disagree? Any other ideas??

I should specify that A LOT of what is being thrown out is not "garbage", it's in perfectly good shape. I'm referring to furniture, carpets, CDs, tapes, records, pots, fish tanks, kids toys, computer monitors, televisions, etc, all in perfectly working order. They were simply replaced by something newer (I'm assuming).

In the meantime, yesterday we picked up a gorgeous pot by Paul Vorstermans, a Creemore, Ontario stoneware artist. It's not a copy - it's signed - and would have been crushed by a garbage truck about 10 hours later had we not picked it up. That would have been a shame.

Garage Sale and Utility Usage

This weekend, there was a street-wide garage sale on our street. M and I organized this over the last two weeks by dropping a small paper in every mailbox on the street (80 houses), putting up a few posters, and advertising online.

The weather was beautiful and participation was good. I would estimate we had 12 - 15 houses involved, which isn't bad considering most people's apathy.

We also got to meet a number of neighbors we'd never had a chance to speak to before. One of the many Glen Abbey trails runs along our backyard so many people have a chance to look into our yard on a daily basis. As such, we seem to have become somewhat of a conversation piece. We got questions about our new laundry line (just recently legalized in Ontario). We were also told we always seem to be doing green things. One lady was telling us about her research into sunrooms so we told her we'd already gotten an outlandish quote for one. We've also switched to Bullfrog Power (100% green electricity) and got questions about that. Finally, I was asked if our house is haunted.

These questions got me thinking again about Oakville Hydro's feature where you can compare your usage to that of others in your area. Below are two charts showing ours compared to, supposedly, other similar houses in Glen Abbey.

First, our total electricity and water usage. Our usage cost for the last 60 days was $126.05, so really we should be in the category below, but got bumped up. As you can see, 97% of people used more power and water than us. Now, I know we have no kids, but still. Even with kids, the house still needs to be heated to the same degree, cooking should not use significantly more power, etc. How can the average user use nearly three times as much power and water as us? If people are really strapped for cash as everyone always seems to complain, perhaps they could make a few simple changes to reduce their bills (and reduce their impact on the planet at the same time).

Our electricity usage was more obviously near the bottom. Our total was $58.91, so I think they have to check their charting software a bit more carefully. We should be one category lower ($31 - $60). That puts us below 99% of users. Again, how are people using so much power!?

Comments?