I shared this video on YouTube this morning. In it, I ask what I think is an important question. Do we really need more iPhones? Or do we actually need more health and social care, education, and so much else that generates remarkably little carbon? Sometime soon, we are going to have to decide.
The transcript is:
How many iPhones does the world need?
Now that might sound like an odd opening to a video, but it's a really important question because well, I bet that if you have an iPhone or a Samsung or whatever else it might be - I don't really care which brand we're talking about here - you don't use all the facilities that that phone can provide to you.
For example, the vast majority of people do not use the cameras on their phones to the limit of their ability. Most, in fact, only use the forward-facing camera and not the backward one, which is the really good one. And I could go on and on and on about the ridiculous quality of these phones in comparison to what use we make of them.
And in that there's a particularly important point. We massively over consume material items that we don't really need that then go to waste in our current economy.
Why do we do that? Because we're incentivised to do so by advertising. Advertising that tells us that if we do not have this latest phone or car or garment or whatever else it might be, then we will be an inadequate person. And, therefore we must go out of our way, and quite possibly go into debt, to secure whatever it is that is being advertised towards us.
And the point is, if we don't need those things but are spending money on it, there is a very high possibility that something that we do need, but are not spending on, is not provided instead.
And what am I talking about? Well, look, we all know we're not getting adequate health care at present.
We all know that young people are not being educated properly in the UK at present.
We all know that we have not got proper police forces, nor do we have a proper judicial system if ever they catch a criminal.
We all know that there are inadequate prisons.
We all know that we're not spending enough on the environment.
We all know so many other services that are failing - social care, the NHS, you name it - they're all going wrong.
Why are they going wrong? Because politicians have decided, in the interest of big business, that there is a limit to the size of the state. However much we need the things that the state can supply, and which no one else can deliver to us in a cost-effective way, they're saying, “No, we need iPhones, or Samsungs, or whatever else, or giant cars”, and my point here is, we've got to make a choice at some time.
We have to decide.
Are we going to consume forever more at cost to the planet because we know we cannot eat up resources in the way we are already?
Or are we going to have more of those things which actually take remarkably little carbon to deliver like more teachers in classrooms, or more social care, where somebody sits in front of somebody else and makes sure they're okay in their own home, or whatever else.
Are we going to make the choice for the things we really need?
Or are we going to continue to overconsume what we don't really want?
It's the biggest decision that we as a bunch of people, a population, a human race, have to take because depending upon the outcome, we'll either get the services we need and survive, or we're all frankly going to be going to live in a planet that is going to heat beyond our imaginations and we're going to sort of burn in hell.
I don't like that idea.
I don't suspect you do.
So there's only one really tenable outcome here.
Do we want more iPhones or would we like more from the NHS?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
My partner and I both have an iPhone 6s. Years out of date (released in 2015, in fact), bought second-hand, and completely adequate for our needs. Modern consumerism is sickening,
I only have updates because of the cameras – which I do use
@Kim SJ,
I have the same iPhone 6s purchased at an AT&T close-out sale in 2020.
It more than meets my needs.
Another iPhone 6s user here. The only thing that will ‘force’ an upgrade is when the iOS software makes this phone render itself useless, as the same thing happened with my iPhone 4 (when everyone else was an 8 or 9).
This is the biggest decision of our time.
Most of us will answer “more health and education, less ‘stuff'”. But the truth is that most of us don’t walk the walk…. including me (I am a sucker for boat kit).
Until the purchase of a new toy is something to keep secret rather than parade to our friends we won’t solve the problem.
Ask not what the iphone can do for you – but what you can do for (untaxed in the UK) Apple profits by owning one.
I agree with all of what is said. But things will get worse. The raison d’etre of I.T. companies is more pointless kit.
And most of the companies are US-based, and most of these companies don’t pay UK taxes @ meaningful rates, and most of the US companies in the UK “enjoy” the benefits of the UK state (law n order). and………the list is long………..& the conclusion is that such companies are parasitical on the UK state & its citizens. Wonder why gov’ services are shit? well if you are reading this on an iphone – you are looking at the embodiment of the reason.
The points about consumption are very valid – but – just like Tory (& LINO) MPs – they are not affected by……hungry kids (well their kids ain’t hungry) and those that consume (darling the new Merc EV SUV is a must have, darling please can we get it etc ) don’t give a stuff about what is happening in other countries ………..that are a long way away. Comes down to empathy. 40 years of Thatcher/neo-libtards have stripped out empathy (witness the public support for the 2 child limit) – which is why the politicos make no efforts to address consumerism or health (less sugar in stuff – but but but ……that affects consumer choice etc (& yes thank you big-sugar Inc for the donation). I also know, for sure, that politicos are functionally incapable to telling populations what they should hear.
The problem in all this is that the planet does not give a stuff. Bankruptsy: first it happens slowly, then fast. Well we are in the same situation. Will it take another 10, 20, 30 years? Dunno. But I know quite a few people that are taking action to secure their future, in Europe.
Ellen Macarthur and Kate Rowarth have nailed it…..
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/topics/circular-economy-introduction/overview
https://doughnuteconomics.org/about-doughnut-economics
Thanks
Well over a billion smart phones are sold worldwide every year (I had occasion to research this as part of my work). This suits the manufacturers well. The phones are designed to only last a few years and then be replaced. For instance Apple phones are sealed making it difficult to replace batteries. Other manufacturers adopt similar strategies. Then they update the software to make the phone run slower and consume more battery life. I don’t believe this is accidental. So it is planned obsolescence.
The same manufacturers have been trying to do the same thing with smart TV’s, trying to get people to replace them every year or two. There are many fewer TV’s sold, about half a billion, but they are expensive. Fortunately people don’t want to replace TV’s every couple of years – so I think the manufacturer’s strategy is failing.
And, it seems to me smart phones have run their course, there are no new killer features to add. Yes, they improve, but marginally and in non essential ways. So I think people will keep them longer. And a good thing too.
I hope so
Tim Kent,
I recently got myself a Fairphone 5. https://www.fairphone.com/ The whole ethos behind them is pretty much the exact opposite of what you describe. So take heart, it can be done.
Another reason to choose fewer smartphones is the impact of obtaining the multiple metals & minerals used to make them. Both on the people in the places the materials are found, which can include unsafe & exploitative working conditions, & child labour, & has been a driving factor in wars, especially in eastern DRC; and the environmental impact. The fewer new phones are made, the more realistic it becomes to source most of the materials for them from recycled old phones.
Keeping your current phone, or buying second-hand, are surely the best options. If you really need a new phone, the next option I’d consider would be https://www.fairphone.com/ who use a modular, anti-obsolescent design, and at least try to use more materials that are recycled or produced in improved working conditions.
Re: “We all know that there are inadequate prisons” … I appreciate this was a bit of an aside, but we do NOT need more spent on prisons, we need more spent on services which (unlike prisons) help solve social problems, and many fewer people in prison.
Last point – accepted
But for those for whom prison is needed – and there will always be some – we also need better prisons
Seems like I’m the odd one out. I’ve got a Doro, so old I can’t remember the model. It receives/makes phone calls, ditto texts, and it’s got a camera I can use if I’m involved in an accident to get details of what has happened. It’s also got a feature called ICE (In Case of Emergency) which cycles through three numbers to get assistance at the touch of just one button.
My son decided I needed an upgrade and got me a fancy smartphone (not an iphone I might add) so that I could use all the extra features that came with it.
And the only ones that I use? The phone, texts, and camera. And it doesn’t even have ICE!
Actually I’ve haven’t used the camera – it looks too complex just too take a photo of the dunt I’ve just got, and the car that did it.
Until three years ago I had an iPhone 5s which I was having increasing difficulty using due to its small screen. Then I bought an iPhone 12 Pro Max for its camera and big screenand I hardly ever use the front facing camera. In fact I rarely use the phone as a phone. I use my phone for practically everything else, especially as my camera and. rarely use a laptop or any other form of computer. My camera from before is practically redundant. I bought this phone with a view to being future proof for a good few years. I don’t intend to replace it until it breaks. I have recently had a new battery. I understand your argument, but I don’t think using a technology which doesn’t meet my needs is sensible.
My husband and I only bought a (shared) smartphone a couple of years ago because we are required to have one in order to verify things like our identity, payments, etc, via a ‘secure’ device. Landlines, apparently, are not ‘secure,’ even though the landline is a) registered in our name at our address, b) firmly tethered to our wall, and c) not in danger of getting lost, stolen, or dropped in the toilet.
We don’t get out much.
As with much of modern logic, that regarding phones is very bizarre
But then, landlines disappear soon
Have you considered that people might buy things because they want them, not because they need them? I didn’t need to do my Japanese language course, I wanted to do my Japanese language course.
Is there a fault with your site? My posts don’t show up.
I have considered that possibility
But yesterday you wrote some pure neoclassical drivel about revealed pretences that was based on so many false assumptions – such as the existence of rational human beings whose behaviour is wholly uninfluenced by advertising – that I deleted it to save you the embarrassment of being associated with such claims.
And do I think you did your course without someone trying to persuade you of the benefit? No, I don’t.
I wouldn’t bother replying.
We can moderate our consumption of iPhones if we buy only the cheapest SE models.
Currently the SE model is at its third generation:
https://www.apple.com/iphone-se/specs/
Review the specs and you’ll see that the basic SE model is designed to fulfill the needs of customers all over the world.
Other iPhone models are advertised to consumers of fashion items. Fashion drives much of our wasteful consumption.
Each SE version can be expected to last at least five years. The 2016 version, for example, still works well in 2024.
SE satisfies user needs so well it is rarely advertised.
Richard –
Lots of things to agree with in your post and in the comments section.
I am so glad and truly grateful that you write/post about this and many other subjects/topics all of which hardly get the attention they truly deserve.
Whenever I bring this up with my other half its as if I am totally mad/bonkers and living on another planet – to which I reply if only that was possible. I fear for the future of my 6 yr old son and 2 yr old daughter. However, with voices like yours there is an inkling of hope and I cling onto the fact that surely we are reaching the point of no return and that it is only a matter of time until we accept and change our lives/ways and start to reverse the damage already done.
Do you agree that it is those that are invariably struggling with finances and mental/physical health, on low incomes, live in poor housing, have little scope/resources and wider economic opportunities etc etc that are mostly affected by over consumption of material items that we don’t really need that then go to waste in our current economy?
For example, poor diet, obesity and consumption of ultra processed food has reached epidemic levels in the world and especially in poorer societies. Advertising/marketing by the large corporations has played a massive role in getting consumers at the lower income end of the spectrum to buy food that is unhealthy, harmful and dangerous to our bodies and minds. On the other hand the wealthy/rich are able to (and invariably do) consume a lot more whole foods, freshly prepared/organic meals and enjoy higher degree of diverse nutrition, foods, flavours etc.
As an aside I would highly recommend Ultra-Processed People: Why Do We All Eat Stuff That Isn’t Food … and Why Can’t We Stop? by Chris van Tulleken. ‘Most UPF is not food, Chris. It’s an industrially produced edible substance’
In his book and in podcasts/talks, Chris mentions the disastrous impact of advertising, why he believes advertising should be heavily regulated especially for food that is for young children and that large corporations should not be allowed to represent the food industry and lobby politicians/government. He says that he spends more time now with economists rather than nutritionists/scientists/researchers/experts in the food industry in identifying issues and and developing solutions to the problems caused by UPF/obesity etc.
I am also intrigued as to the reaction/response of the younger generation/Gen Z/Millennials to this blog post. Are you able to track/gauge the level of engagement and their stance on this blog? Do you think that to a large extent your message/comments falls on deaf ears when it comes to this demographic.
I think you could also easily expand/develop your arguments on phones further into the other associated dangers/disastrous impacts of phones/features/functions/apps. I think we are all paying an enormous social, political, environmental, economic price and the list of disasters arising primarily due to the ‘misuse’ of phones is not talked about enough.
To name a few; social media which is all predominantly accessed/used through the smartphone, these apps are in effect advertising things directly and/or influencing on a scale that is unprecedented in human history, resulting in hugely profitable companies/behemoths like Shein (which I know you have posted on with regards to its listing on the LSE) and many others that exploit the human race. Others disastrous consequences are financial and other crimes, political instability.