EU proposes outlawing "overconsumption" of clothing

originally posted by: gortex

Hopefully this proposal falls by the wayside and the go for some kind of recycling initiative.

Or start a new "green" trend if everyone is on board. Have the fashion designers lead the way. Seems EU and the left here in the States like draconian measures as their initiatives.

Have modest needs, but I do wear out multiple pairs of work boots per year.

Should be fun to see those under quota by govt environmental regs, while still being required by govt safety regs...

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse
Not that I applaud the EU demanding,yet again,that we modify our behaviour through law.

But they do have a point about the toxic nature of man made fibres such as polyester.


The problem is,the same people who are now saying this is awful for the environment are the same people who have forced us into globalisation,the engine of which is the exploitation of workers in poorer countries who work in slave like conditions to provide the "developed" world with cheap,trashy,badly made junk clothing(and other products) so that our economies continue to grow.

Morally,the EU or any government don't have an arguement here-They forced us into this BS,even as most of us KNEW it was a scam from the start.

But, polyster is recycle product how is it bad?



It might be because China banned collecting plastic trash from the West. Same goes with other asian countries following suit.

No, no, not edible women knickers. They all taste of fish. Sorry I'll go away now.

I guess everyone in the EU needs to protest by going nude.

a reply to: ketsuko
Don't be silly!!! It's bloody freezing here.

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: ketsuko
Don't be silly!!! It's bloody freezing here.

No time like the present to start getting acclimated.

a reply to: The2Billies

They say too much "fast fashion" is made with polyester, which is made from oil. They say much of the clothing made is manufactured in ways that harm the environment

You know what a better solution would be, stop allowing China to export mass amounts of low quality polyester clothing and start making more clothes from cotton and wool like we used to.

So it is all the fashion industry's fault that the planet is in trouble, obviously can't be anythinging to do with the production and consumption/deployment of munitions and other aspects of military operations, or the over production of cell phones that were working fine til the new version is released and an updated kills your current phone to make you upgrade, or the over production of fertilisers / weed killers etc, nope we just need less clothes.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

"Allowing"? They export because other countries import.

If there's a demand there will be someone supplying.

originally posted by: The2Billies
I'm not sure where to put this but here goes. Mods feel free to move to the appropriate forum.
www.euractiv.com...

Europe is now considering outlawing "over-consumption" of clothes.

They say too much "fast fashion" is made with polyester, which is made from oil. They say much of the clothing made is manufactured in ways that harm the environment.

The fashion industry is responsible for a fifth of waste water globally, consumes more energy than shipping and aviation combined and, by 2050, is expected to account for 25% of the world’s remaining carbon budget. Cheap synthetic materials, which have increased nine-fold in the last 50 years, form the “backbone” of throwaway fashion and use around 350 million barrels of oil every year, according to the report by the Changing Markets Foundation on the dependency of fast fashion on fossil fuels.

Their solution? Passing laws to stop people from buying more clothes than the socialist governments of Europe think they really need. The major solution, outlaw "overproduction" of clothing and making clothes much more expensive so people buy less.

For the EU to reach its net zero carbon emissions and zero pollution goals, it will need to tackle the industry with concrete legislation. As part of its circular economy action plan, the EU is attempting to cut down on waste produced from the textiles industry and boost reuse. “Policymakers in the EU and beyond can play a key role in helping the fashion industry shift from this wasteful and polluting approach to a circular economy by promoting and incentivising the development of business models that keep clothes in use, and stimulating the design of high-quality, durable and recyclable clothing through ambitious minimum product criteria [i.e. making clothes VERY expensive],” said Balmond.

Since the Democratic Party has long said that US policy and law needs to be more like Europe especially environmental law, well .... The Democratic Party is fully in charge of the government and beholden to environmental groups for their votes. So I anticipate that this type of legislation is headed for the USA as soon as the first laws against over consuming clothes are passed in Europe.

I lived in Europe for 6 years and have had exchange students from Europe up until the pandemic. Every European I know says having a wardrobe we could fit in a large suitcase is average for Europeans. The students were shocked that US students didn't wear the same outfit several days in a row, as they said that was normal in Europe. I lived there and it is the norm. So by US standards the average European has very few clothes.

Who will decide how many shirts you are allowed to own and how long you must keep them before getting a new one? OR will they just put price controls on clothing with minimum price allowed for each item of clothing, high enough it is nearly unaffordable for people in the middle class or lower (that seems to be the European model)?

Is this what is coming to the USA now that liberals (rabid environmentalists) are in charge of the entire government?

Will Democrats insist that clothing manufacturers raise prices so high that the average citizen can not afford to buy more than a few items of clothing per year? (But liberals rest assured this does not affect the political elite/nor the Tech giant CEO's/nor Hollywood types/nor the rich, as is normal for liberal legislation; like the rabidly environmentalist and elite politician Kerry can still use his private jet to go wherever he wants whenever he wants because he is a liberal environmentalist.)

Lol isn’t the EU great? Trying to tell you little people don’t over-consume your clothing while the rich consume whatever the hell they want? Can they hate you more for existing? Probably let’s wait and find out how!

originally posted by: Rob808
Lol isn’t the EU great? Trying to tell you little people don’t over-consume your clothing while the rich consume whatever the hell they want? Can they hate you more for existing? Probably let’s wait and find out how!

I see you believed this thread's misleading title.

The EU isn't doing anything like that, what we can really read on the original report is that the Changing Markets Foundation made a report in which they have some "recommendations" for the EU:

4.2. Specific recommendations for the EU textile strategy

The EU is currently consulting on how to frame its comprehensive EU textile strategy to boost the market for sustainable and circular textiles.

We believe that this strategy should be framed around the following key recommendations:

1. Encourage the use of non-toxic, circular materials and introduce eco-design measures to prevent material mixing and blends and to eliminate substances of concern, all of which hinder circularity. Ensure that any legacy toxic chemicals are eliminated to prevent recycling them into new products. Chemicals should be regulated in groups (rather than individual chemicals) to avoid regrettable substitution of one toxic chemical with another.

2. Set out strategies and measures to reduce pollution from the shedding of microfibres from synthetic fibres, as suggested by Science Advice for Policy by European Academics (SAPEA). One of such strategy should be the reduction of the use of synthetic fibres, in line with precautionary principle.

3. Introduce a tax on virgin plastic, which should also cover the use of virgin synthetic fibres in the textile industry. Do not incentivise the use of plastic packaging (such as PET bottles) as a feedstock for recycled polyester fibres in the textile industry, as such items should be collected, reused and recycled in a closed loop.

4. Set up extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes for different types of textiles (e.g. clothing, carpets and mattresses), where producers are responsible for the management and costs of the end-of-life treatment of products they place on the market. The Commission should investigate the best way to set up such schemes to ensure a market shift towards higher-quality, more durable fashion that takes into account eco-design, the elimination of substances of concern (including microfibres) and durability (via longer warranties and specific targets for recycling and reuse). It should also encourage recyclability and reuse through eco-modulated fees.

5. With regard to collection and sorting, according to the updated waste legislation, the Commission has to consider setting targets for the reuse and recycling of textiles, while member states have to put systems in place to collect textiles separately by 2025. However, given that many current textiles are low-quality blends that cannot easily be reused or recycled, much more ambitious action is needed.

6. Encourage and incentivise new business models that support product-as-service models, such as clothes rental schemes, and promote reuse and repair systems. The Commission should explore other ways to slow down the fast-fashion industry.

7. Set production standards for manufacturing that encourage better production models across fashion supply chains, for example along the lines of the EU’s Best Available Technologies (BAT) standards.

8. Ensure that EU support for the recovery of the fashion sector from the Covid-19 crisis is conditional on companies’ achievement of carbon reduction targets, and a clear plan to reduce the industry’s dependence on fossil fuels and cheap disposable materials not fit for recycling.

The Changing Markets Foundation is not related to the EU, only as being registered in an EU country and founded by people from the EU.

a reply to: The2Billies

this just says to me that only rich people will be able to afford a full wardrobe

poor people will do as they normally do and hand down their clothes from one child to the next or onto cousins etc

how about instead of putting the environmental issues onto us they tackle the real #ing problems

#s the lot of them

a reply to: The2Billies

May I ask you what country you were living in? I'm European (Dutch), living in Spain now, and all this seems pretty far fetched or agaggerated. I've seen most countries in Europe but can only think of one where this -might- have been true..

originally posted by: randomthoughts12
a reply to: The2Billies
Wouldn't there be a simple solution as to simply when you get something new you have to donate something old.

That is not the point here. The point is who are these globalist elites to tell you how much clothing you can have abs especially because they think oil is so unsustainable. Then again they didn’t want us to have cotton because slaves and it’s racist.

I knew a girl who had so many clothes, she placed a box from a washing machine outside her bedroom for disposal, and for her friends to root through. Most stuff had tags, and was never worn.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus
I was not being serious. I was making a joke. Cause there obviously 10 better ways than this nonsense.

a reply to: randomthoughts12

Which nonsense? The lie about the EU proposing outlawing "overconsumption" of clothing or the nonsense of reducing the "overconsumption" of clothing?

In the US clothes that thrift stores can not sell are baled and sold to rag buyers.

A lot of that is shipped to Africa and sold in small shops there.

That is likely also what happens in the EU.

it's called recycling.

Likely politicians in the EU are as dumb as rocks like US politicians and don't know this.

a reply to: randomthoughts12

If you look at the amount of clothing the Salvation Army and Goodwill throw away, you would see why that does not work.

I had closets full of clothes I had not worn in years, because of a lifestyle change. A little over a year ago, I decided I was going to downsize, and give away all those clothes that were just sitting in my closet. I worked in an office setting, which I have not done since 2014, so I had almost two medium sized closets of office wear. I gave them all to a local charity that helped woman become job ready. Those clothes were desired and appreciated. My everyday wear, I gave to the Salvation Army, and they directed me to an area in the back that had several mountains of clothing. It was obvious they would be bagged, tagged, and shipped, somewhere.

The truth is, few people that are really poor, shop for clothes, even in a Goodwill or Salvation Army shop. If you don't want it, it is very likely no one else wants it either. Americans have a tendency to overdo everything. Over abundance has become like disease that eats away at your core and becomes like a symbiote. A little is good, a little more is better, and a lot more means I am better, is a mind set many Americans live by, and it keeps Amazon, Walmart and the like, very happy and wealthy. I think it is time that we look at the "why" behind what looks like a war against our "rights".

We are so wrapped up in what we think we have the right to do, that we have completely ignored what is the right thing to do. We spend more time looking for the things we desire, and ignore the things we already have. We spend more time thinking about how we may have been wronged, without giving considering to those that we have wronged.

We have problems, and any solution is going to mean some kind of sacrifice. We may have a better chance at correcting some of these problems, if we stop looking at the solutions as personal attacks against us, and a battle for our rights. We can only make things better, if we do better. When you control you, you circumvent the chances you will be controlled. Even if the end result is the same, you can find a modicum of joy in knowing it did it "your" way.