data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/01310/01310401f84d3312880c19922ed357dcf6c8bb4e" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1df69/1df69f53f5559e83c288e08b403109544e78dc05" alt=""
you can also solve your examole choice by gun grabbing ans shooting the guy if he lets you take it.
Ah, but that wouldn’t be mutually beneficial, would it?
Also, this didn’t take long:
Some federal employees who accepted Trump’s buyout offer are now being notified that their buyout has been denied, and they are being terminated instead.
The ultimate answer:
They have been making these things for decades, they know how to make them better, they know how to make them more durable, they know how to making them even simpler to use and fix, they choose not to, for profit. That should be structurally discouraged.
Charge the manufacturers for the FULL, REAL environmental impact of shipping materials and end of life disposal of their products. Yes, that cost will be passed to the consumers, as it should be. It also rewards sale of more durable goods.