4 ms·

Especially when it comes to products, consumer convenience often seems to be at odds with consumer well-being. Take everything from McDonalds's fast food, to F

Especially when it comes to products, consumer convenience often seems to be at odds with consumer well-being. Take everything from McDonalds's fast food, to Facebook's engagement optimization, to overprescribing of antibiotics and painkillers. The products that sell the most, are the ones that cripple the users ability to independently operate, and keep them coming back for more.

jnordwick 9y ago
> The products that sell the most, are the ones that cripple the users ability to independently operate, and keep them coming back for more. Sounds like you are talking about government services like welfare. (Meta: easily my fastest comment to -4 ever. It took less than 6 minutes.) Ps, stop complaining about my perceived complaining. I don't care. Its almost a badge of honor to me - even straight out spam doesn't get buried so fast.
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  "(Meta: easily my fastest comment to -4 ever. It took less than 6 minutes.) " Congratulations!
  - jnordwick 9y ago
    Although there is a non snarky way to say what i was implying, i don't think it would have made much of a difference. I do feel there is an apt comparison in there if you try to apply the same critique to government services. No reason to single out private services.
    - maxxxxx 9y ago
      To me you came across as one of the types who blames government for everything reflexively. I also think your comparison is not accurate. Going on welfare is not convenient in the sense of the article.
    - mirashii 9y ago
      Maybe it would've made a difference. Your comment was downvoted because it put words into the author's mouth that were obviously not his own, about a topic that's going to be known to be controversial, and followed it up with absolutely zero substance. Many folks would happily debate the merit or lack thereof of welfare programs if they had some substantive opinion, statistics, or really content to debate about. Your comment was nothing but snark, and to dismiss the downvotes as downvoting the subject matter and not the snark is a second piece of disengaging snark that is also not contributing meaningfully to the discussion.
- croshan 9y ago
  Haha no. But there's something to be said about the bimodal situation that the non-granular tiered system of benefits put people in. Having a sharp drop in benefits once you go from nothing to a moderate income really takes the coal out of the furnace.
  - essayist 9y ago
    Yes. What the article and the GP miss is the importance of design. Tailing off benefits gradually makes the most sense from the perspective of providing an incentive to work and earn more, but (a) government seldom looks at how the incentives actually work across the whole set of support programs (tuition assistance, CHIP, Medicaid, housing assistance, etc.) and (b) when you tail things off gradually, you will have people doing fairly well on their own still getting some subsidies, albeit small ones, and that's politically challenging to explain.
- hasbroslasher 9y ago
  For the record, if you've ever tried to go on welfare/unemployment (in USA) you'd know that it's anything but convenient. I had to fill out paperwork, meet deadlines, show up for in-person meetings that took an hour longer than they ought to have, remember to re-apply each week... definitely not as easy as checking Facebook for the millionth time this morning. It's also a bit disingenuous to say that these services cripple your ability to independently operate - when I was on the dole I was having a blast going hiking and biking, drinking wine, writing music, and playing Nintendo Switch. That's about as independent a life as I could ask for, frankly.
gascan 9y ago
consumer convenience often seems to be at odds with consumer well-being I've begun to think that's intrinsic, not anything nefarious. We long for convenience, laziness, sugar, etc. We're meant to want them, but never get much of them. As far as we can tell, our minds & bodies run best on a diet of exertion, activity, and whole foods, which are the very opposites of the things we crave. I keep thinking about TDR's Strenuous Life.

jnordwick 9y ago

> The products that sell the most, are the ones that cripple the users ability to independently operate, and keep them coming back for more. Sounds like you are talking about government services like welfare. (Meta: easily my fastest comment to -4 ever. It took less than 6 minutes.) Ps, stop complaining about my perceived complaining. I don't care. Its almost a badge of honor to me - even straight out spam doesn't get buried so fast.

maxxxxx 9y ago
"(Meta: easily my fastest comment to -4 ever. It took less than 6 minutes.) " Congratulations!
- jnordwick 9y ago
  Although there is a non snarky way to say what i was implying, i don't think it would have made much of a difference. I do feel there is an apt comparison in there if you try to apply the same critique to government services. No reason to single out private services.
  - maxxxxx 9y ago
    To me you came across as one of the types who blames government for everything reflexively. I also think your comparison is not accurate. Going on welfare is not convenient in the sense of the article.
  - mirashii 9y ago
    Maybe it would've made a difference. Your comment was downvoted because it put words into the author's mouth that were obviously not his own, about a topic that's going to be known to be controversial, and followed it up with absolutely zero substance. Many folks would happily debate the merit or lack thereof of welfare programs if they had some substantive opinion, statistics, or really content to debate about. Your comment was nothing but snark, and to dismiss the downvotes as downvoting the subject matter and not the snark is a second piece of disengaging snark that is also not contributing meaningfully to the discussion.
croshan 9y ago
Haha no. But there's something to be said about the bimodal situation that the non-granular tiered system of benefits put people in. Having a sharp drop in benefits once you go from nothing to a moderate income really takes the coal out of the furnace.
- essayist 9y ago
  Yes. What the article and the GP miss is the importance of design. Tailing off benefits gradually makes the most sense from the perspective of providing an incentive to work and earn more, but (a) government seldom looks at how the incentives actually work across the whole set of support programs (tuition assistance, CHIP, Medicaid, housing assistance, etc.) and (b) when you tail things off gradually, you will have people doing fairly well on their own still getting some subsidies, albeit small ones, and that's politically challenging to explain.
hasbroslasher 9y ago
For the record, if you've ever tried to go on welfare/unemployment (in USA) you'd know that it's anything but convenient. I had to fill out paperwork, meet deadlines, show up for in-person meetings that took an hour longer than they ought to have, remember to re-apply each week... definitely not as easy as checking Facebook for the millionth time this morning. It's also a bit disingenuous to say that these services cripple your ability to independently operate - when I was on the dole I was having a blast going hiking and biking, drinking wine, writing music, and playing Nintendo Switch. That's about as independent a life as I could ask for, frankly.

gascan 9y ago

consumer convenience often seems to be at odds with consumer well-being I've begun to think that's intrinsic, not anything nefarious. We long for convenience, laziness, sugar, etc. We're meant to want them, but never get much of them. As far as we can tell, our minds & bodies run best on a diet of exertion, activity, and whole foods, which are the very opposites of the things we crave. I keep thinking about TDR's Strenuous Life.