by Michael Smith
I do not think that there is any winter that is going by here where I do not see an orphan mitten or glove lying in the snow or mud, or otherwise lost, in the parks or countryside. And, as I hate anything going to waste I tend to collect those.
I also have rather a collection of orphaned socks of different sizes and many woolly hats. What people lose is amazing at times and how anyone can lose a hat on a cold day beats me every time. But, eh, I am not complaining.
But back to the gloves in hand, so to speak...
There have been times when the gloves that have been found have been a pair even and those were of the Thinsulate brand as well... nice one, thanks. But most mittens and gloves are orphans, missing their mate.
In some instances I have made up a pair, especially for the rough outdoors stuff, from those single orphans but it does not always work and especially not with mittens that are child or even baby sized ones.
Here are some suggestions for mitten reuse. Some of these suggestions here will only work with mittens that are your size while others, such as the drawstring bag idea work also with child and baby mitts.
Drawstring Mitten Bag
You can create a drawstring bag from a mitten and use it to store marbles or drawstrings. Thread a piece of nylon cord through the mitten's cuff. If the mitten is lined, you should be able to use the lining as a drawstring channel. Otherwise you may have to build a channel. Such a drawstring mitten is also great as a money bag or purse, primarily for coins.
N.B. For more information check out a tutorial somewhere online or in books on making a drawstring bags.
You don't, necessarily, have to put a drawstring into the mitten. I have made a purse from a small child's mitten by using an elastic cord of the kind that is found in windcheater fleeces nowadays and a locking toggle. Works great.
Ice Scraper Mitten
Get a drill, a punch or an awl and a nylon cord. Drill a hole in the bottom of your ice scraper. Thread the cord through. Attach the cord to the mitten. The scraper is now attached to the mitten. You will never find yourself without a mitten when you need one.
Mitten Duster
Use that mitten as a duster. It's reusable and washable and it fits conveniently on your hand. It's not so hard to clean corners any more.
iPod Pouch
Especially the child mittens lend themselves, much like small socks that also can be found in abundance in local parks, to the use for and making of iPod pouches.
USB Sock
Well, small mittens work for that as well as small socks and their use is a lot cheaper than buying a so-called USB sock. Mind you, most USB drives nowadays are so small that they might get a little lost in such a bag, but whatever... they are kept clean and well this way.
As far as I am concerned orphaned mittens like orphaned socks can have many uses and I am sure there will be many more uses turning up in the end and many a reader will have his or her own ideas and – hopefully – suggestions which they, so I hope, will share with us.
© M Smith (Veshengro), 2009
<>
Showing posts with label reuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reuse. Show all posts
Is reuse good for the economy?
by Michael Smith
The Financial Times has started using the word "austerity" in many of its headlines – and charity shops, the face of the second hand market in Britain, are experiencing a buying boom.
On the other hand a fair – though not so fair in other terms – of retailers, the purveyors of brand new things, have gone bankrupt, in liquidation or receivership, such as Woolworth, MFI and some other well known names.
Does this mean we are saturated with stuff?
The answer to this could be a probably maybe. But the truth, more than likely, is that people, that is all of us, are feeling the squeeze as with the recession and the prices for fuel and everything going up and up.
Do we still need to keep on spending on new things to keep the economy moving?
While the economic whizkids, who got us into this mess in the first place or who simply were so blind that they could not see it coming, and especially the powers that be, tell us to go and shop till we drop, basically, to help those ailing capitalist economies of ours, the truth is that we cannot do so. First off the environment must be considered for if we don't it does not matter what we do; we may no longer have a habitable planet. Secondly there is no money there and no credit to be had – not that one should work on the credit thing anyway – so how do the powers that be think that people can go out and spend, spend, spend.
Is designed obsolescence soon to be obsolete? Or should we keep on refreshing our material possessions to keep the economy moving?
In other words, the question is, "Is reuse good for the economy?"
I know that the government of this country – and, so it wold appear, also of other countries – is trying to create stimulus for us to keep on spending, and spending and spending; spending our way out of the recession, so they say. Personally I do not think that that will work.
Alternatively, maybe, just maybe, the economy is so far up the creek that we should consider building an alternative one and slowly migrate over to it.
There is no way, in my opinion, but then again I am no economist, that we can administer CPR to this troubled economy by spending as much as possible. It will not work and, well, do we have the money to do so, and, do we really need more stuff (only to throw other stuff into the garbage then).
Paul Smith of the Furniture Reuse Network (FRN) certainly advocates that reuse is a good thing but you might argue his focus is short-term and on real people rather than on the long-term health of the more abstract economy?
To some degree, methinks, the reason that the economy is in the dire straights that it is in because people and the planet were taken out of the equation by the the bankers and financiers and the big capitalists and especially the multi-nationals. As soon as you do that, that is to say to remove the people and the planet out of the equation as far as economy, and not just the economy, is concerned you head for severe trouble and so we did. Greed was all that fueled the banks and all that seems to have fueled industry and now we reap the whirlwind. But it is the little man an d the environment that suffers and not the fat cats. While we, the taxpayers, have to bail out the banks and certain sectors of industry, those who got everyone into that mess still award themselves fat multi-million pound bonuses and such payments. But I digressed somewhat.
Given that the governments of the world are doing everything they can to get spending going again it would seem that the powers that be certainly do not want reuse as a general practice, despite their “reduce, reuse, recycle” message about waste management, to take place. They want new cars, new houses, new washing machines, plasma screen TVs, MS Vista 09 and every other material (and immaterial thing) that generates jobs to start moving again. I mean, how many more sofas, TVs, etc. do we need. No, your old PC is not obsolete as yet, regardless of what the folks in Redmond try telling you. All you need is an operating system that works with less resources, e.g. lower processor speed, such as Linux.
There is no doubt in my mind that the economy is shrinking – and for everything that is reused that is one less thing that is made from scratch – environment 1 - economy nil. The same applies for re-purposing. But, as said, the powers that be do not seem to want this to happen, in all honesty, despite their pratter.
Artificially encouraging spending with the policy and print runs at the mint is only going to produce artificial demand – which in turn, produces artificial economy. It is the same as the alcoholic having a drink to get rid of the jitters - the junkie shooting up to avoid the come down. The example of Zimbabwe should also be obvious enough.
Grow your own, repair before replace, live lightly. Using and producing less is a global objective, or at least so it should be.
While it might be painful, painful for all of us, I do think that we have to go through this and kick the habit of waste and spend, spend, spend. I say reuse, don't refuse!
To some this may appear to be a stark choice between two paths, but is it really. We all know, at least those of us with some common sense, that business as usual will not be solving the problems we face. On the other hand, massive economic shifts in short periods of time seem to cause significant unrest and violence, do they not?
Then again, the choices here may not be as stark as some may think. Re-use often needs testing,such as in the case of electrical goods, and sometimes repair. These are key skills that allow re-use organizations to train and employ people. There is also a danger that the economic interest are short term. We live on a finite piece of rock with finite resources the longer we can keep items and resources in circulation the longer we will be able to have an economy at all. It is not a choice between the environment and the economy but a choice between short and long term thinking and, most importantly, survival.
Thus, in a reuse economy there are actually just as many jobs and transactions – just different skills and tills. An important thing wold be if we could but remember en mass some of the skills we have lost and then, maybe, get around to relearning some of those – all important, in my view anyway – skills and trades.
I would also like to add that I think that it would take us quite a while to use up what there is to reuse at the present time. It would be healthy to reuse as long as possible until we have thought up a way to a durable economy. It would also give the overexploited countries a chance to recenter themselves on their own needs and their own resources without having to hope that they can carry on pampering our so-called 'needs'. It is our own responsibility to live on what we have around us. We also have plenty of great skills and can learn some more too.
Being, as I said before, from a rather large Gypsy family, the reuse issue has always been part of us and that not just because we were a large family. In fact the Gypsy people recycled before the word was even invented. We made things from virtually nothing to sell at fairs, markets and door-to-door, and we reworked “trash” into goods people wanted to buy. Another kind of economy.
© M Smith (Veshengro) February 2009
<>
The Financial Times has started using the word "austerity" in many of its headlines – and charity shops, the face of the second hand market in Britain, are experiencing a buying boom.
On the other hand a fair – though not so fair in other terms – of retailers, the purveyors of brand new things, have gone bankrupt, in liquidation or receivership, such as Woolworth, MFI and some other well known names.
Does this mean we are saturated with stuff?
The answer to this could be a probably maybe. But the truth, more than likely, is that people, that is all of us, are feeling the squeeze as with the recession and the prices for fuel and everything going up and up.
Do we still need to keep on spending on new things to keep the economy moving?
While the economic whizkids, who got us into this mess in the first place or who simply were so blind that they could not see it coming, and especially the powers that be, tell us to go and shop till we drop, basically, to help those ailing capitalist economies of ours, the truth is that we cannot do so. First off the environment must be considered for if we don't it does not matter what we do; we may no longer have a habitable planet. Secondly there is no money there and no credit to be had – not that one should work on the credit thing anyway – so how do the powers that be think that people can go out and spend, spend, spend.
Is designed obsolescence soon to be obsolete? Or should we keep on refreshing our material possessions to keep the economy moving?
In other words, the question is, "Is reuse good for the economy?"
I know that the government of this country – and, so it wold appear, also of other countries – is trying to create stimulus for us to keep on spending, and spending and spending; spending our way out of the recession, so they say. Personally I do not think that that will work.
Alternatively, maybe, just maybe, the economy is so far up the creek that we should consider building an alternative one and slowly migrate over to it.
There is no way, in my opinion, but then again I am no economist, that we can administer CPR to this troubled economy by spending as much as possible. It will not work and, well, do we have the money to do so, and, do we really need more stuff (only to throw other stuff into the garbage then).
Paul Smith of the Furniture Reuse Network (FRN) certainly advocates that reuse is a good thing but you might argue his focus is short-term and on real people rather than on the long-term health of the more abstract economy?
To some degree, methinks, the reason that the economy is in the dire straights that it is in because people and the planet were taken out of the equation by the the bankers and financiers and the big capitalists and especially the multi-nationals. As soon as you do that, that is to say to remove the people and the planet out of the equation as far as economy, and not just the economy, is concerned you head for severe trouble and so we did. Greed was all that fueled the banks and all that seems to have fueled industry and now we reap the whirlwind. But it is the little man an d the environment that suffers and not the fat cats. While we, the taxpayers, have to bail out the banks and certain sectors of industry, those who got everyone into that mess still award themselves fat multi-million pound bonuses and such payments. But I digressed somewhat.
Given that the governments of the world are doing everything they can to get spending going again it would seem that the powers that be certainly do not want reuse as a general practice, despite their “reduce, reuse, recycle” message about waste management, to take place. They want new cars, new houses, new washing machines, plasma screen TVs, MS Vista 09 and every other material (and immaterial thing) that generates jobs to start moving again. I mean, how many more sofas, TVs, etc. do we need. No, your old PC is not obsolete as yet, regardless of what the folks in Redmond try telling you. All you need is an operating system that works with less resources, e.g. lower processor speed, such as Linux.
There is no doubt in my mind that the economy is shrinking – and for everything that is reused that is one less thing that is made from scratch – environment 1 - economy nil. The same applies for re-purposing. But, as said, the powers that be do not seem to want this to happen, in all honesty, despite their pratter.
Artificially encouraging spending with the policy and print runs at the mint is only going to produce artificial demand – which in turn, produces artificial economy. It is the same as the alcoholic having a drink to get rid of the jitters - the junkie shooting up to avoid the come down. The example of Zimbabwe should also be obvious enough.
Grow your own, repair before replace, live lightly. Using and producing less is a global objective, or at least so it should be.
While it might be painful, painful for all of us, I do think that we have to go through this and kick the habit of waste and spend, spend, spend. I say reuse, don't refuse!
To some this may appear to be a stark choice between two paths, but is it really. We all know, at least those of us with some common sense, that business as usual will not be solving the problems we face. On the other hand, massive economic shifts in short periods of time seem to cause significant unrest and violence, do they not?
Then again, the choices here may not be as stark as some may think. Re-use often needs testing,such as in the case of electrical goods, and sometimes repair. These are key skills that allow re-use organizations to train and employ people. There is also a danger that the economic interest are short term. We live on a finite piece of rock with finite resources the longer we can keep items and resources in circulation the longer we will be able to have an economy at all. It is not a choice between the environment and the economy but a choice between short and long term thinking and, most importantly, survival.
Thus, in a reuse economy there are actually just as many jobs and transactions – just different skills and tills. An important thing wold be if we could but remember en mass some of the skills we have lost and then, maybe, get around to relearning some of those – all important, in my view anyway – skills and trades.
I would also like to add that I think that it would take us quite a while to use up what there is to reuse at the present time. It would be healthy to reuse as long as possible until we have thought up a way to a durable economy. It would also give the overexploited countries a chance to recenter themselves on their own needs and their own resources without having to hope that they can carry on pampering our so-called 'needs'. It is our own responsibility to live on what we have around us. We also have plenty of great skills and can learn some more too.
Being, as I said before, from a rather large Gypsy family, the reuse issue has always been part of us and that not just because we were a large family. In fact the Gypsy people recycled before the word was even invented. We made things from virtually nothing to sell at fairs, markets and door-to-door, and we reworked “trash” into goods people wanted to buy. Another kind of economy.
© M Smith (Veshengro) February 2009
<>
Buying from Thrift Store and Charity Shop
Too many people think that they HAVE TO HAVE this or that new.
Why?
Charity Shops, for instance, does not always mean that the things are post-consumer, that is to say that they have been used before. Many items that I have bought there for very little money were brand-new with their tags still in place. It is also now, it would seem, once again, becoming fashionable to buy at the likes of Oxfam and other Charity Shops, very much like it was in the late 70's, when it was also fashionable to wear military surplus and buy used – advertise as such – at the American store “Flip Clothing” in London.
However, I'd rather go to a store that is run for a good cause (yes, some of the money ends up in overheads, and I know that the goods are donated to the stores) than to go to the likes of “Flip” (don't even know whether they still exist). At least some of my money that I pay for the good that I buy goes to a good cause, unlike at the commercial secondhand stores.
I must say that I spend a lot of time and also money – but then it does go to a good cause – in such Charity Shops, especially as I do not have a TV and in order to relax I read. This is where Charity Shops come into their own with their books section and I have even found some books there being signed first editions and others that I had wanted to obtain for review for one or the other magazine I edit, such as one particular one about the Gypsies in the South of France. I paid less for it – well, near enough – then probably the postage would have been to send a letter to the publisher to ask for a copy for review. I must admit I am awful with books, I buy them by the ton, but then again this way the go to a good home – mine – where they will be read and often used further as reference, instead of ending up in a landfill site. Because, let's face it, not enough people even think of passing their read book on to another outlet so they can be read again (and again) by someone.
As far as clothes are concerned the only thing I do not purchase are Charity Shops is underwear and socks. I even buy footwear there most of the time but then ensuring that it is little or not worn, and often real bargains can be had.
Only the other day I bought a pair of lovely “Transport-brand” boots for £5 the pair and they are nearly new. If they have been worn then by a security officer, the are a patrol-kind boot, indoors.
The Simple Living Review would like to encourage people instead of buying new all the time to actually buy their clothes (and other items) used, often they are even new or as new, at Charity Shops, such as Oxfam, Save the Children, Cancer Research, for, while you are getting a bargain you are supporting a good cause. Our advice here goes even further then that is to use, ideally, more so even those Charity Shops that support local causes, such as in the North-East Surrey area where we are based, the St Raphael's Hospice Shops and those of the Children's Trust. Think local!
While there certainly are worthy causes in the Charity Shop realm – all of them in the main – it would be much better if we would support our local charities and their shops before we would the big national and even international ones. Think local!
© Michael Smith (Veshengro), January 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
