I wrote a book.

Repost of a rant because rehosting doesn't show in the tag feeds.

I have a mantra in my writing and for my life: The Smallest Details Have The Greatest Effect.

Also called The Splinter Effect, by me and now you, because a simple splinter can cause more problems than say a swallow cut despite the cut doing more damage and drawing more blood. A cut just needs a rag on it for five minutes and you're good 9 times out of 10, but a splinter will drive you crazy with the constant pain and cause a deadly infestation if you don't remove it AZAP. Of course, they both get outranked by like.. an actual stabbing, but that's another metaphor.

Bi-weekly pay started in an age before The Super Information Revolution. Back when the beans were counted by hand, and computers were just the new cool-ass spreadsheets. Errors needed a bit of time to fix and did double checking. A company switching over from weekly pay to bi-weekly as the company grew made some sense. There were downsides. Dozens, but they were metaphorical paper cuts compared to the metaphorical stabbings that could happen without the extra time to review the records.

But things have changed. Now we have robot bean counters who even sort black from white from red and even pinto. Faster than any human and with no pay. The errors are also easier to fix. There are no reasons for keeping bi-weekly pay and a lot of reasons to get rid of it.

First, it keeps your money out of your pocket for longer, so you go longer without your compensation. Which is bad for your sense of work-reward feedback.

Second, it breaks your weekly schedule cycle sync with society. Friday no longer becomes bar night with da boyz, but rather every other Friday you talk to see who's available because nobody has a set schedule anymore because no one can get a solid routine anymore.

Lastly, it fucks your sense of budgeting. You no longer think about what to pay each week and instead just get your check and think "I can afford this and that" and before you know it, you're broke again and you just need a few more days before your next check. I've actually heard people say they prefer bi-weekly because they "get a bigger check for my budget" and it's just like... I don't know. I don't have a metaphor for this. That picture with the beakers? Maybe?

So yeah. Fuck bi-weekly. Remember: The Smallest Details Have The Greatest Effect.
Call Congress to ban bi-weekly pay.

"planned obsolescence" is an awfully bad term for what it's talking about.

it makes it seem like there is a shadow conspiration bent on making consumer goods worse and not last as long, but there isn't. consumer goods are worse and don't last as long, but it's not because of an evil plot by companies, it's a systemic problem where things have to be cheaper to produce both because the parts and the labor have gotten more expensive so you have to compensate for that somehow, and also because consumers want cheaper Things because salaries have not gone up at the same rate as prices, and so to make things cheaper you cut costs and quality. things are made faster by people who are less qualified and have less time to work on them, from worse materials, and thus breaks more quickly and gives you a worse experience. or it's much more expensive. or both!

anyway yeah. systemic obsolescence sounds like a better name

planned obsolescence does happen (people blocking right to repair under copyright and not "everyone wants waterproof phones which makes it very hard to repair them" as the most blatant) but it's usually only planned obsolescence in retrospect. sometimes it's not even intentional, and instead a case of marketing being completely ignorant to how the field is advancing, and that driving not just production, but what story you the buyer are sold to frame things ("hype")

there's a lot of interplay and grey area that's mostly companies doing what economists claim is impossible, and exploiting their favourable information imbalance compared to the customer. is it strictly planned obsolescence? usually just happy accidents.

your computer/phone needs to be replaced every n years because the internet and or your machine gets loaded with so much stuff that it bogs down. would replacing components be better? deleting the right things? probably, but most people don't know that's an option, or don't know where to look

medicaid-tier medical tech is often absolute garbage because insurance is paying for it and insurance doesn't use it. but insurance never logs complaints about quality from patients. so your pump breaks and insurance replaces it and the medtech company pockets the difference. they also mark it up by at least 2x. this is the most clearcut ones

your car center console, a proprietary design because they were the first to use tablets for it, stops getting software updates a year after buying it. a few thousand down the drain, especially in terms of resale value. the company was dumping stock, and marketing sold it as if it was still relevant. paying the extra 200$ for the new version would have given you five more years. you punch the horn in agonized grief, drowning out your sobs

Planned obsolescence is also real in the sense that companies can literally make the things you buy say "No." and there's no legal action you can do.

This is something that goes hand in hand with "Subscription-based services" and "Digital Products" where the company has total control and there's nothing you can do. If you buy a game on Steam, GOG, or even Itchio they can legally send an update that prevents the games from playing and even delete it off your system.

American Capitalism is literally a system built on nothing but the idea of "Buy Low, Sell High". Every high school teacher told us so. You either raise prices(Get more money) or cut costs (Give less money) if you want to make a profit.