This meme brought to you by a child in California that doesn’t know what real winter is. It was 20 something here last night and this dipshit thinks a sweater is gonna keep you alive though that.
To be fair, you could wear winter gear 24/7. I lived like that for a bit. The real reasons we need heating are structural decay and pets. Pipes burst below 55 and pets don’t do well below 65.
There are real reasons to heat your house besides just wanting to be warm.
I’m in the UK and have managed to get this far this year using just jumpers and the heat generated from folding at home on a couple PCs.
Nearly caved last week when temps dropped to around 0 but then i found my slippers
Not all of us carry that much fat around ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Must be nice living somewhere where you don’t even know that pipes can freeze.
Okay, you can heat your house but only to 50 degrees.
Pipes can’t freeze if they’re halfway to boiling, I like your thinking
Everyone in the metric world:
I usually only go for 20 degrees, but I guess a sauna would be fun
Hey I didn’t consent to my picture being released! :)-
If I’m spending 10 minutes walking between buildings and then an hour sitting in them I’d rather be comfortable for the longer amount of time.
:(
This instance ain’t big enough
Gets ya from point A to point B.
Something that really should be used more is using those rubber hot water bottles. it won’t heat your whole room, but it’s great when paired with a blanket.
And risk burning yourself when the rubber wears out in 3 years and bursts?
Nah, get yourself one of those oat-filled microwavable teddies. Does the same job but with less risk of severe burns and doesn’t need replaced every few years.
I live in a relatively warm part of Canada and let me tell you a sweater alone is not enough 😭
There are plenty of places in the USA Midwest and Europe that get colder.I live in Northern mn where it goes like -40f I don’t wear more then two sweatshirts all of winter I don’t do outside activities in the cold tho
In -40f, if you don’t have artificial heating in your house, your pipes will freeze.
Your pipes can freeze well before that.
Yeah, good luck with only a sweater in Newport VT.
Guys if you keep heating your houses to 15°C or more you’re the cause for climate change and the corporations can’t blow petawatts on their AI data centers c’mon don’t be so selfish
My flat grows mold if I leave it under 18C for too long and my landlord doesn’t care 🥴
Mmmm, mold.
I’m right with you on that though. Small basement apartment with a concrete floor that was built in the 1930s. Yep. Mold.
Yeah how else will ChatGPT tell you how to distribute (a^2 +b2)(c2+d^2)? /s
True, but also let’s not just let ourself dash toward suicide. Society is not meant to sustain nudism in the middle of winter 24/7.
Just wear a sweater bro
come to florida! hehe
I’m sorry, me heaters are set to 16°C 😢
In my defence they don’t go any lower than that for some reasonThat’s basically the minimum requirement to avoid structural decay. You should not be letting your place get any colder than that.
Some reason being that if you don’t maintain a certain temperature in your house you’ll get mildew problems.
Both uses are a problem, one is just more unnecessary than the other.
Being comfortable is unnecessary. If you’re not suffering as much as this guy, you’re the problem with society.
Is there a limit to comfort?
For me it’s about two hands. That’s where I max out.
People can get injured if it’s too cold. They can lose sleep, which is a problem over time. With our level of technology, life doesn’t ever need to hurt.
Exactly. The usual context of “comfort” contains an unsaid word: “sufficient”.
Yep. With the understanding that sufficient is different for everyone.
Not that different
> *buys new iPhone*
> *uses Google as primary search engine*
> *doesn’t use adblocker*
> *pays for youtube*
> *pays for spotify*
> *pays for netflix*
> *buys brand clothes*
> *doesn’t give a shit about monopolies, worker conditions, product origins, nothing*
> Guys, it’s the corporation’s fault for making all these products for me to buy!
there is no ethical consumption under capitalism
I find that quite the platitude.
When is consumption ever “ethical”? Is hunting animals to survive ethical? Is killing plants to survive ethical? Is modification of the environment for survival ethical? Life itself is destructive because in order to survive, something else must die. In order to make life more enjoyable, even more must die and suffer. This is not limited to capitalism but any form of survival.
If we were 4 billion people on the planet without global trade, markets, businesses, advanced technology, and so on, we would still kill everything around us, go to war, enslave, rape, subjugate, and consume.
that phrase doesn’t really attempt to tackle the general idea of consumption, just the one under capitalism.
It’s a response to the phenomenon where seemingly no matter what you buy, no matter where you buy it, somewhere along the supply chain someone got hurt or got taken advantage of, and the environment was most likely hurt as well.
Ethical people (ignoring the definition of what that means as i’m not really feeling like writing an essay) usually want to avoid any products that cause someone or something to be harmed during production. But under capitalism that’d mean never buying technology again and having to quit society as having a smartphone is mandatory nowadays, though you’d probably starve first if your best friend isn’t a 100% eco friendly farmer (and even then that farmer probably uses a combine which is made out of quite a few parts, production of at least one or two definitely involved some form of abuse)
So the slogan “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” highlights the fact it’s not an individual’s fault, and the invidivual is not to blame, when they buy something that unknowingly (or knowingly but out of necessity) brought harm to the people or the environment involved in making the thing.
In the olden days you could feasibly survive by being a farmer who kills maybe a couple of his stock a year for meat. You knew exactly where your patatos came from (your field), you knew exactly where your clothes came from (your best friend is the town seamstress), you knew exactly where you furniture is from (the lumberjack who gets wood for the carpenter is your brother).
But then things got more complicated, and capitalism encourages cutting ethical corners in favour of profit
It’s a response to the phenomenon where seemingly no matter what you buy, no matter where you buy it, somewhere along the supply chain someone got hurt or got taken advantage of, and the environment was most likely hurt as well.
I call this the Doug Fawcett Principle
good name for it indeed! The Good Place is a fantastic show
that phrase doesn’t really attempt to tackle the general idea of consumption, just the one under capitalism.
Yes, exactly why I said it’s a platitude. It’s thoughtless and trite. I’m saying: consumption is not ethical, no matter which system. There is no ethical consumption.
So the slogan “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” highlights the fact it’s not an individual’s fault, and the invidivual is not to blame, when they buy something that unknowingly (or knowingly but out of necessity) brought harm to the people or the environment involved in making the thing.
That’s a cop out. It paints consumers as mere puppets or robots who are unable to make choices or decisions that could lead to a reduction of suffering.
In the olden days you could feasibly survive by being a farmer […]
The good ol’ days, how many times have I heard that one. In the good ol’ days there was often imperial rule. In the good ol’ days, slave trade was the norm. In the good older days, your little town or village could be overrun by wandering horde of Mongols or even just the next village over that had a different tribe. In the good ol’ days, if you were disabled you were fucked, if you had a different skin color you were fucked, if you were a woman you were figuratively and literally fucked, if you got sick any “incurable disease” you were not fucked, you were dead, if you couldn’t work anymore your offspring had to tend to you and if those didn’t exist or weren’t willing to you were fucked, and so on.
It’s nice to romanticise “simpler” days after watching “Gone With Wind”, but life back then was hard af. It was backbreaking. People died at much higher rates than now with little to show for it. People still live absolutely miserable lives, but the rate thereof is much lower in the countries exploiting others.
But then things got more complicated, and capitalism encourages cutting ethical corners in favour of profit
Capitalism doesn’t encourage anything. It’s one of the natural products of human greed. Any other system created by humans is flawed and infected the human disease, doomed to create suffering and torment. The only question is how much. Whether capitalism generates more than other systems is debatable, but to claim that there is “ethical consumption” in any other living system is wishful thinking. It doesn’t exist.
So just die I guess?
That’s a pretty ridiculous take.
the other person’s reply is good so i won’t repeat their points,
but i also wanted to address the “romanticisation” of the “ol’ days”. Because i did not intend to do that, what i was trying to portray was that it was simpler in the context of the supply chain of your food and belongings. You knew exactly where all your things came from, and the process of creation and aquisition of goods was mostly contained within your village and the village nearby, with the occasional traveller looking to trade
Yes, exactly why I said it’s a platitude. It’s thoughtless and trite. I’m saying: consumption is not ethical, no matter which system. There is no ethical consumption.
That’s a false dichotomy…even if we agreed with your definition of all consumption being unethical, it wouldn’t mean that there aren’t different levels of unethical practices used to produce those consumables.
All consumption being unethical does not mean that all forms of production are equally unethical. If that’s the case you wouldn’t really have a problem with sending the kids back to the mines.
It paints consumers as mere puppets or robots who are unable to make choices or decisions that could lead to a reduction of suffering.
Can you point to a time in history where a general boycott of a dangerous or harmful product was successful without the help of government intervention?
Any other system created by humans is flawed and infected the human disease, doomed to create suffering and torment.
And apparently that doesn’t happen under capitalism? Then what exactly are you bitching about plastic for?
“ethical consumption” in any other living system is wishful thinking. It doesn’t exist.
Again, your argument is based on a forced false dichotomy.
Not to mention that it seems like you are really just a libertarian angry at consumers for participating in the “free market”.
You can’t simultaneously believe that the free market is the best way to regulate the economy, but upset at the people for their consumption habits in a free market.
I like how you put paying as the bad thing instead of just using
Using monopolist services and good is bad, but sometimes forced. Paying is most often voluntary and worse as it gives them even more power than just use.
It’s gonna get down to -30°C this week, I’ll turn the heat off and just throw on the good ol’ toque and a sweater and report back, assuming I still have fingers.
Same here.
But there is middle-ground here. My wife came from a very temperate country. She wants the thermostat set at like, 26.
I’d be happy to have it at 17 and wear sleeves indoors. 9 degrees thermostat difference makes a hell of a dent in the utility bill.
I keep my place at 15.5c in winter because it’s super drafty. (I’m getting the siding redone soon, I really hope that helps, but ultimately we have the same climate as Siberia so there’s only so much to be done) even at 15.5, it’s still about $200 USD/mth to heat, but at 18c it more than doubles in cost.
I’m like your wife; made for warmer climates. My ideal temp is around 30c, and I’m cold at 23, but I have heated mattress pads on my bed and couch (much much much cheaper to run than furnace) so it’s not too bad overall. They are a bit pricy up front, but definitely worth the spend.
Perhaps that sort of thing would be a good compromise for you two; a couple heated chair covers or couch cover or something to bring her temp up while keeping the overall temp lower.
26?! Hell, I can’t even sleep if it’s above like 20C in my room. My bedroom right now is 10C (vents blocked to keep it extra cold) and that’s about the perfect sleeping temp. I’d go that cold in the rest of the house too but my pet snake probably wouldn’t appreciate it.
snake tax snake tax snake tax!!
I don’t seem to have any actually good pictures of them in my phone atm and they’re in the middle of a shed right now. So the best I’ve got is a pic from the time they decided slither into my couch frame and made me partially dismantle my couch to get them out. They’re lucky that they’re cute.
Don’t you get nightmares, sleeping in the cold like that?
Nope I sleep like a baby. If it’s too hot them my dreams might get weird though.
I grew up in cold but have spent almost two decades in humid subtropical. If it’s 20ish outside, I usually won’t turn on the heat, but 23 if it gets any colder (though that’s in part because old japanese house loses heat like crazy. 21 is good for me)
Agreed. Funnily I’m from a more temperature country and she’s from where I’m at now, but she’s the one that is always cold and wants to keep it at ~22. I ain’t gonna argue considering she pays the electricity bill, though.
Team 23.5 represent! My toesies are cold but the rest of me is alright!
Don’t be lazy. You can type with your toes.
Who said I’d still have toes?
Alright, well, you should at least have a functional nub or two
I have to turn on the heater for my cats or else I’ll suffer the consequences.
Never mind things like water, pets, children…
Some people think water tastes better crunchy
Yeah, nah, I’m on the side of the government paying for utilities. Human right to electricity. Figure out a system to prevent overuse, but everyone deserves to have heating and cooling when needed.
That said, definitely wear a sweater in the winter if you can. Acclimate to the season and you’ll hate going outside a lot less, and need less heating in the winter. I typically don’t heat most of my home in the winter (I don’t have central heating). I just use a space heater in whatever room I’m in, and move it to the next room with me, and wear warm clothes. I’m in Tennessee, which routinely gets well below freezing in the winter. Not ideal, but it works
Figure out a system to prevent overuse
If we’re going down the “government should pay for it” route, then a good solution would be subsidizing thermal insulation. It’s a big investment upfront, but will save a lot of money for both homeowners and the government in the future. Not to mention the obvious ecological benefits.
I feel like it already is. Just not always from the government. I put three pallets worth of insulation into my attic(~$1500) and between the rebates from the gas and power company it ended up costing me like $350. I did have to front that cost though and the paperwork was kind of a pain. Had to draw a scaled picture of my house with the part of the living area covered with insulation on graph paper. They don’t pay for over the garage.
Just looked at what I bought again and insulation has gone way up in price. It’s close to $2500 now. No idea if the rebates also went up but I kind of doubt it.
Absolutely. We should be subsidizing anything and everything that helps decrease energy usage, especially in ways that mean we don’t have to make big changes to lifestyle. Though that’s a whole other discussion. :/ But utilities in general, electricity, water, Internet, gas (though if possible move that shit to electric) should be public and no cost at the point of use, imho
That would require them to think long term and logically , Also i assume lots of companies would not like that they won’t be able to get as much profit.
Don’t get me wrong I definitely agree but there’s just so much things that would work better, be cheaper more efficient and better for the environment but that would cost money and not make much profit. Sometimes I have hope people will get fed up with this BS and change happens but mostly I’m skeptical.
What temp is freezing in F? Is it still defined by the temp water freezes at, like in C, or do you guys have a different scale for this too?
32°F is freezing. 0°F (-18C) happens, but isn’t too common in most of the US.
Pets? One of my cats found a nice solution for that: recruit some dumb human as her heating pillow. (The “dumb human” is me, by the way.) And when I’m not on the bed she sleeps inside a blanket folded in the shape of a pocket.
…although winter here rarely goes below 0°C, subtropical region and all that shit. If I was a bit souther I’d probably have some heaters in the bedrooms, and that’s it - there’s no reason to heat the whole house.
If a sweaters enough you must live in a warm ass place.
God, I recall when we lost power for a week in the middle of a freeze, it was so cold that my multiple blankets weren’t enough to keep me warm when trying to sleep. I had to break out a nasty comforter that I’ve got that doesn’t breathe at all and gets real sweaty during normal weather. Worked well to lock in the heat.
It hit -8 C last week where I am, still a pleasant 20 C inside without having turned the heat on.
I probably get a lot of free heat from my neighbours apartments though, I would guess.
As long as it’s bearable with additional layers on, I’m going to lean towards doing that, as cool bedrooms make for amazing sleep quality.
Don’t get mold buddy
Cold one or hot one?
I wish I had control of the thermostat. It would be 60° year round.
Edit: Forgot Europe exists 60°F = 15.56°C
Also does any one still call it centigrade?
Bro said Europe as if the rest of the world uses shitty ass Fahrenheit
That would be freezing to me, but we live in a place that rarely dips much below freezing and gets super hot with high humidity. Humidity + cold also sucks. We were like 23 today (70something) and have a number of days over 35 in the summer (with 90+ % humidity). I work outside in that heat so I’m much more acclimated to that
I’ve heard some people say it in England but dunno if it’s actually common there. Was only a tourist.
OK, OP… where do you live that a sweater is “enough”?
Denver, CO checking in and I’ll take my central heat, thanks.
7200’ here, I’ll keep my furnace as well. I usually only keep it at 62°, unless I want a $600 gas bill. But, that the tradeoff of having mild awesome summers.
Americans should start building their houses like Europeans. Made from brick, mortar and good insulation. Your houses are made from wood and paper.
Wood is a better insulator than brick actually. Sitting outside in the winter on a wooden bench would feel warmer than on one made of brick even if they are at the same temperature. A log cabin without insulation is better insulated than a brick building without insulation. Problem is that US homes aren’t log buildings but stick frames boarded up with cheap chipboard.
This is… Uninformed.
looks around at countless houses made from wood I guess northern Sweden, which gets below -30°c every year, lost its European status.
Nothing wrong with wood as a construction material. The key factor is the insulation.
You do realize that there’s insulation in those walls right. That’s the whole point of wood frame construction; you stuff the gaps between studs full of several inches of insulation. Besides, most of a homes heat loss isn’t through the walls anyways. It’s through any openings in those walls (windows, doors, etc) and through the roof.
More insulation, double or even triple glassed windows. My in-laws have half the insulation on the walls compared to my parents, roof wise my parents got 2.5 ft insulation
Isn’t the whole point of woodframe construction to use wood?
Europeans still have insulation in the wall cavity.
Such ignorant shit
./confidentlyincorrect
Earthquakes would say otherwise for at least part of the US. Also, without full-time mechanical ventilation, that would be misery in a lot of the US. The climate is also different to some places in Europe and varies hugely on US region
There’s earthquakes in regions of Europe aswell, and climate varies by regions in Europe aswell.
So what would be the excuse for not using paper walls?
nobody can afford that here lol
Stop with this nonsense. This is the financial illiteracy that is being pointed out how Democrats lost because of the “economy”.
Housing purchasing went up in price for a short while but stopped increasing so rapidly. More Gen Z owns their home by 30 than millennials. The rate is on par with gen x.
Most people in this country can afford a house and the upper third can afford very very nice houses.
Source?
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2024/04/16/generation-z-is-unprecedentedly-rich
You can dig the direct numbers out from opm as well.
Well good for them. I sure as fuck can’t.
Will clearly you represent everyone and nobody all at once.
It does not have to be brick and mortar. The house with the best insulation I know is made of wood and straw bales.
