(AI90)按格式重发，help, issue90

90. “People often complain that products are not made to last. They feel that making products that wear out fairly quickly wastes both natural and human resources. What they fail to see, however, is that such manufacturing practices keep costs down for the consumer and stimulate demand.”

如何理解范文中quality-cutting product results in a net benefit to consumers and overall economy?

从市场角度而言，是否任何产品都不应该生产耐用品呢？？

因本人非经济专业出身，这个基本问题十分困扰我，以至于难以理解这个题目，请求诸位赐教！！拜谢！

范文中的提纲：1，这种方式对消费者和对整个经济都有利

                          2， 并没有浪费劳动资源

                           3，并没有浪费自然资源

关于后两个段落，诸位可否有恰当例子分享？？

这个issue的意思是产品做的烂些破些没关系，反而能够降低成本而且消耗的快还能够促进需求。

我也不是学经济的，不过从逻辑判断，应该不是。造飞机的总不能指望着天天从天上掉飞机来促进飞机的销售吧。反过来说，如果飞个10年就够了，是不是要造出能飞100年的呢?

issue的题目一般都有争议性，采取哪个立场都可以，只要论证合理就可以。不需要有经济的背景，common sense就够了. 例子的话，可以到google上找找。

issue topic expects you to have a standpoint.  Generally speaking, you agree, disagree or discuss case by case.

From what you have quoted, it seems that the author of the modle article agrees with the statement.

I think his position is reasonable in some aspects. For example, many consumer goods need not to be lasting.  such as fashionable clothes, after you have worn them for one or two years, they may be out of the fashion. so there is no need for lasting material in this case.

Of course, in other fields, things are different.

So as long as you can make sense, either position will be ok.

by the way, you need not to post it again, you can edit your original message,  press the button of edit at the lower right part of your message.