My parents are using an electric hand mixer that is 45+ years old. It's still fine.
Products of the past did last longer because they weren't as cost-optimised yet.
It seems similar to the story of the vastly over-build Volvo red block engines.
Yet, we don't live in a (global) society that cares about living consciously, to build things that last. If something lasts, we don't consume. And that's our true purpose. To consume the things that are produced.
Do we need 20+ brands of peanut butter? Why do brands even exist? Why can't we just but 'peanut butter'?
The word and our society is actually so strange, if you really think about this. By the way, did I mentioned yet, I really miss David Graeber?
MY first job (in the last 70s) was working in a TV rental store doing small item repair. In particular, repairing toasters was probably my #1 activity. Essentially the failure was nearly always the same -- one of the three toasting elements failed, and so I would replace all three elements, and the customer got a working toaster back.
It was never clear to me (at least I don't recall it being clear) why the heating elements failed. It could be from someone sticking a hard tool into the toaster when trying to remove a small item (and breaking the element). It might be that a piece of bread gets stuck to a portion of the element and catches fire at that point -- maybe that weakens the element at that point. This was, of course, long before toasters got electronics in them!
The heating elements in a toaster are essentially the same as the heating elements in a lightbulb. Eventually, enough heat cycling, the metal fatigues or melts at a certain point, the circuit opens, and your toaster stops lighting up the room. Of course, trauma is always an option too.
that's strictly not true, at least for many segments. my 1960s Kitchenaid mixer has been used since..the 60s, and if you buy a new Kitchenaid today, don't expect that plastic gear to last very long if you actually take it out and use it.
I found an 1969 ad for a kitchenaid mixer. It's cost $125 in 1969 dollars. That's over $1000 in todays dollars. You're comparing a mixer that costs half as much. And, believe me, fixing the skimp issues that kitchenaid introduced to give the execs a bigger bonus can be fixed for a lot less than $500.
Furthermore, you probably can buy a mixer for $1000 that has a similar chance of surviving 60 years for $1000.
I had a 60s kitchenaid and it was super loud, possibly over 90 db. Additionally, it had square corners where stuff got stuck, couldn't handle some solids well, and to wash it you often had to remove the blade and gasket.
One interesting thing was a gimmick about heating soup with the blender using solely friction.
I eventually bought a modern plastic refurb which has been a dream. I do think it is a shame that it won't last 50 years.
A Kitchenaid K5-A mixer cost $159 in 1960. That would be $1,700 today. I'll bet you can get someone to make you a replacement metal gear for something less than $1,000.
Products of the past did last longer because they weren't as cost-optimised yet. It seems similar to the story of the vastly over-build Volvo red block engines.
Yet, we don't live in a (global) society that cares about living consciously, to build things that last. If something lasts, we don't consume. And that's our true purpose. To consume the things that are produced.
Do we need 20+ brands of peanut butter? Why do brands even exist? Why can't we just but 'peanut butter'?
The word and our society is actually so strange, if you really think about this. By the way, did I mentioned yet, I really miss David Graeber?