Good old days
Tuesday, October 26th, 2004It’s autumn. Cold, foggy, wet autumn getting to your bones. A good reason to go shopping for a new winter outfit, though. Imagine me, the extremely picky kind of consumer, going through stores and wrinkling my nose at almost anything, exclaiming every once in a while with a sigh, “ahh, the good old days.” Old days which were not that long ago, considering my age. But then I started to think: why do I have this feeling that the “old days” were better? Am I just older, arguably wiser, compared to the innocence and simple joys of childhood? Have I changed, or is it a different world that I live in? Hmm.
Being on the path towards becoming an economist, I had the opportunity to learn a few things. (There’s nothing better to do when you have a hungover after last night’s party, the only alternative to reading course notes being watching Argentinian soap operas on TV which simply drive me nuts! Heehee, I’m just kidding - not the drunk party animal kind of person here.) And one of those things vaguely reminded me about mass production and encouraging consumption as means of boosting economies.
Did you know that products are no longer designed to last “forever?” Manufacturers have the capacity to completely redesign a product in a matter of years, significant improvements come every few months, and in case your product breaks down it’s cheaper to completely replace it - assembly robots work day and night anyway - than pay a service technician by the hour to look into the problem and repair it, even if that meant replacing an entire module, not looking for the deffective component. Your TV set is designed to be replaced with a newer model in 3 to 5 years. Same goes for your car. Compare that to products designed 20 years ago, for example, which were so robust and simple that they still work today with very little maintenance. Of course, they didn’t have the production capacities and automation existing today, they had lots of employees which worked by hand and had a higher rate of mistakes and deffective products. BUT - those products still work, decades later.
What’s the connection between current manufacturing and market trends and my “good old days” thoughts when shopping? That’s easy: I needed shoes. Classy, black leather shoes, to bring a much needed change in my jeans-and-sneakers appearance. Guess what? There’s more plastic and synthetic compounds than leather in a shoe! You’ll be shopping for a new pair in 6 months or less. The few shoes that actually had natural leather in them (by looking closely at the material itself, not just the fake sticker) were painted black to look good on sale, but the paint came off on my fingers and trousers, and the leather got cracks after wearing them for a day.
Is it bad that I preffer quality over lower production costs, reliable products over spending a little less on a product but buying it every few months or years? Is it in our advantage as consumers and, most importantly, beneficiaries to perpetuate mass-assembled, machine-built, low-cost, below-average products, and fire the people who put dedication, skill and experience into creating unique and reliable products?
Let me express the same problem in terms of software development: is it really a good choice for a company to fire its old-time programmers and hire third-country software programmers just because they’re slightly cheaper? How can a company function when it hires a bunch of people for a specific project, then in a few months it hires others to fix the bugs in the original projects, then a few more months later a third group of new people to extend the functionality and fix more bugs, and so on? Perhaps there’s more to think about when making such a decision, things that cannot be evaluated in financial terms, such as stability, overall quality of work, the dedication and skills of the workers.
There was a movie made once, and the producers had to cast whoever was available to keep the budget to a bare minimum. This way, characters were interpreted by completely different actors in consecutive shots! Needless to say, even if the script was brilliant, nobody in the audience could understand who was who and did what. Striking resemblance to the chaotic pieces of codes written by thousands of anonymous Indian programmers trying to accomplish the same big application, isn’t it?

