I’ve been thinking a bunch lately about technological increases in productive efficiency, and about some of the different ways that the capitalist pigs scheme to retain control over newfound profits through their manipulation of the means of production.

For example, I remember reading years ago that because of the increase in productivity associated with the modernization of washing machines, modern laundry detergent products are actually way more effective than they need to be (and that their marketing implies). When the bottle tells you to fill up the cap to the marked line, that’s actually way more detergent than you need to use for a regular ass load of laundry. Like you literally need somewhere like a third or half of the “recommended” amount of detergent that it says on the bottle lol.

This is because the detergent producers’ profits are tailored to the status quo of their production; if consumption was suddenly halved, the company would have a crisis of overproduction that would eat into their profit margin. obviously this didn’t simply happen all at once - but the small increases in efficiency created by the technological boom was not met with an appropriate rise in wages.

I want to start trying to investigate more examples of these situations and products that have been bent to the bourgeoisies’ benefit rather than the proles’. I think that trying to become aware of these things is the first step to agitating around concrete ways that people can reclaim value created by these ‘hidden efficiencies,’ as I’ve currently taken to calling them. I’m also very open to suggestions for names that are more clear lol.

What are some hidden efficiencies you’ve noticed in your area of study, profession, or interest?

  • penguin_von_doom [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Probably in agriculture where tons of food are destroyed to keep prices up. Actually that happens in other commodities too. Look up the amount of stuff that Amazon destroyed on daily basis. We do have the technology to meet everyone’s material needs and still reduce productive capacity to stave off climate change at least somewhat.