domenica 11 dicembre 2016
The taste of bitterness for poor quality remains for far longer after the sweet taste of "lower price" has vanished
Can you imagine progress without success?
Can you imagine success without failure?
Can you imagine failure without stupidity?
That might happen, but how much of failure is due to daring attempts and how much to stupidity? Reality shows us that 99% of failure is not due to daring attempts, for who does travel that way makes a million calculations to avoid failure, and if it still occurs it is for lack of information to put into the equation. Remains the other option.
So how can stupidity help to fail?
The question above is rhetoric, naturally, but it serves the purpose.
Stupidity aims for success too, but without paying the price: in working hours, in accurate planing, in quality of workmanship and materials, and above all, in money. Yes, the stupids are cheap.
Yet they want quality, but without paying for it. The smarter ones know that is impossible thus are somehow accepting cheaper versions that kind-off do the job, somehow look pretty close to the real thing, so other stupid people would think this is the real thing and the output is reliable (ain't, trust me).
The most stupids, the majority, would not even accept it can be less than the real thing in output and looks, but are not smart enough to make the difference anyway, so they are really happy they have got the real deal for a fraction... and here is where the crooks make their money, but to make some cash out of crap, you need to buy it even cheaper, so you can imagine the quality the end cheap user buys...
Fact is, if everybody would know what they are doing, I mean... for good, not just yelling around they know but when asked questions they vanish for as much as answers... they know zip, than quality works would sell double quantity than today, rubbish would sell almost zero, (today it amounts at over 60 times more than their quality counterpart) but since well done things last a few lifetimes, there would not be a need for replacement as with the cheap crappy products that in a lifetime are going to be replaced 10 times, thus in the life span of a quality product their cheap version gets replaced 40 to 60 times.
Is true that to build quality it takes lots more work, lots more time and far better materials, but this would keep people employed and away from producing rubbish, thus all balanced from an occupational point of view.
But think of this, to build quality one needs skills, I mean real skills, from theoretical knowledge to hands on experience, needs to invest time, passion and love in himself (herself too, so to please the nowadays politicians on-line), and in it's skills and craftsmanship, and that is no longer in line with the get rich quick lifestyle they are proposing us in the past 30 years. And everybody would be skilled at something and care less about crises since their skills can be traded against skills or utilities more than against money, therefore the need of banking would be considerably lowered to where it was 100 years ago, and that is where it is supposed to be.
But to go there we need to re educate ourselves into the good old thinking "I am too poor to buy cheap, I can't afford that"