The Decline Of Craftsmanship?

Ælfric of Eyesham (A.D. 955-1010) was a late 10th century/ early 11th century monk and author in Anglo-Saxon England.  A Benedictine monk (and later abbot) he had a passion for writing and for teaching; many Old English works or translations from Latin we have are thanks to him (he is considered by some to be the most prolific author in Old English, at least one who is historical and not anonymous).  

As part of an instruction manual to teach Latin, he created a work called "A Colloquy on the Occupations".  An interlocuter asks about various occupations in late 10th century/early 11th century England.  The concept was that this was a "song and response" exercise:  the students would memorize all the responses and provide them and by so doing, learn all major grammatical parts of Latin.  Later, the work was translated into Old English.

The interlocuter asks the various occupations:

"Hwlecne cræft canst þu? Hwat dest þu?  Hwæm fremþ þine cræft?"  "Which craft can you do?  What do you do?  What benefit is your craft?"  

Each craft - monk, ploughman, shepherd, oxherd, hunter, merchant,  fisherman, fowler, shoemaker, salter, baker, cook - gives a description of what their craft does and how it benefits the community.  At the end, they ask an older, wiser monk "Which craft is most important?"  Perhaps unsurprisingly, the first answer given is "monk", drawn from the verse "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and all these things may be added unto you".  The second is "ploughman" (Eorthtilþ), because without the farmer, no-one else eats and therefore practices their craft.

Interestingly, at the end of this work the wise man gives the following statement:

"And ic gelære eallam wyrhtum þisne ræd: þæt anra gewelc his cræft geornlice bega.  For þæm his cræft forlætt, se biþ fram  þam cræft forlæten.....And beo þæt þæt þu eart!  For þæm hit is micel demm and micel scand gif man nyle beon þæt þæt he is and he þæt þæt beon sceal."

("And I give all this advice by way of example: let every one practice his craft eagerly.  For he that forsakes his craft will be from his craft forsaken...And be that which you are!  For there is great misfortune and great disgrace if a man will not be what he is and what he shall be.")

(Note:  All translations are my own.)

---

In re-reading this text, I was struck by the fact that one of the things presumed by this statement, and one of the things that we seem to be losing in the modern world, is the idea of craftsmanship.

I know - it is a long way from an 11 Century monk talking to salters and oxherds (and a longer prologue) to a decline of craftsmanship in the modern world.  But his instruction at the end leapt out to me.

Once upon time - prior to the Industrial Revolution - most people did what their parents did.  This was likely just as much about security as it was about "imprisoned" in a job category:  in a world where a single bad season or single business failure can signal starvation, "risk" is carefully weighed and often avoided.  But with the advent of the Industrial Revolution, individuals could do other things than what their parents did (maybe not more interesting things, but different things)  And that, in turn, held - almost up to the current era, where suddenly the concepts of "job hopping" and "skills-based employment" came into vogue.  Suddenly, one not spend one's entire career at one job or even in one field.  The work world was a vast meadow of flowers, all to be sampled by some.

What we lost in all of this is years in the field.  Years that one could develop experience.  Years that one could develop craftsmanship.

---

Craftsmen and Craftswomen come in all forms.  Some are the sorts we might think of immediately, individuals working in seemingly archaic industries as a cooper or blacksmith or wheelwright.  Others are in the trades or blue collar jobs, running pipes or electric wire or industrial production.  Others are white collar workers (we do not think of them as often), individuals in knowledge based industries where that knowledge is deep and often applied.  And others are amateurs (The root word coming from Latin, "Amator", meaning "one who loves, an enthusiastic admirer, devotee") who do all of these things have specializations in things they love:  Early Roman Republic Armor, garden railroads, weaving, black power riflery.

All of them experts in their own way.  And that expertise, that craftsmanship, comes by nothing else than years of learning and years of doing.  Two things that are denied those that are always moving from one place or thing to another.

---

One can successfully argue that industrialization and the technology revolution has rendered much of craftsmanship obsolete, or at least an expensive option.  And at some level, I suspect that is true:  once any technological genie is out of the bottle, all we can do is navigate it - it is not going away.  But even in that navigation, there does not need to be a wholesale abandonment or the need to constantly find something else.

On the one hand, many deplore the "cost" of a craftsman or craftswomen when we can just it get more cheaply at Big Box Mart or Generic Service Provider.  But inevitably, the differences stand out in ways that are as noticeable as they are not spoken of.

When you pay for craftsmanship, you pay for the years of experience and knowledge.

---

Does this continue to decline or even reverse?  It is ridiculous to claim "all is lost"; there are millions of people out there who do care and are becoming exponents of craftsmanship in their own right.  In one of the few uses of social media I completely endorse, there are thousands of them showing off their crafts.

Ultimately, I wonder if they are not the ones at risk.

The ones most at risk are those who do not have that level of expertise in a single thing, certainly a single thing that provides something of value.  The journey to craftsmanship always involves the development of a mindset and learning that makes one useful no matter where one is.  The journey of the job hopper always leads to "What is the next, newest thing"?

I have come to greatly admire those that work to develop and grow in the craft - after all, Ælfric would counsel us not just to be what we are, but be what we will become.

(Author's note:  Matthew Crawford is a deep thinker on these matters and has influenced my own thinking.  I cannot recommend his books Shopcraft as Soulcraft and The World Beyond Your Head enough.)

On Interns And The Future

 This past week I was asked to speak to the Summer Interns.

I was a bit of a last minute substitution:  the original speaker (a member of the Site Leadership Team, or LT) had something come up at the last minute and they needed a substitute.  One of my coworkers with whom I am friends (and manages the program) asked if I would be willing to speak.

Of course I said yes.  After all, I like my friend. Also, there was free lunch.

---

The format was similar to "Meet the X" in years past when I was a student:  I sat in front of around 30 interns at a U shaped table, uncomfortably the focus of their attention.  Each of them went around and introduced themselves:  Name, major, college, year in school ("X" year student is now the norm, not "junior", "senior", etc.).  Then of course it was my turn:  name, rank, brief job history.

And then, open question time.

The questions were likely the sorts of ones you would expect to hear in these sorts of things:

- "What was one of your greatest challenges in your job?"

- "How did you get into the industry"

- "What do you recommend to help you succeed?" (No surprise here:  I recommended "Be nice" and "Be kind".)

- "What do you look for in a resume?"

- "Do you have any books you would recommend?" (Again, likely no surprises to readers here:  The Enchiridion (The Handbook) by the Stoic philosopher Epitctetus and Go Rin No Sho (A Book of Five Rings) by Miyamoto Musashi. I think at least one of the interns wrote the titles down.)

We also had a fascinating discussion about Iaijutsu.  I do not think I am actually supposed to use the term "Blood Throw" (Chibori) in a professional setting, but there you go.

I will say they were all very polite, well-mannered, and seemed to pay attention (very minimal phone checking that I could see).  

---

Later in the week, they did their poster displays (to show what they had been working on in their time there).  Typically I do not go to these, but felt obligated as I had spoken to them.

Every one of the posters was great. There are a lot of smart young people out there ready to take on the world.  Lots of great and applicable projects to the work we are doing at our site (as an interesting side note, lots of use of Artificial Intelligence).  

The biggest thing that surprised a number of them that they did not expect to learn during these projects?  How important communication was and how many different stakeholders there were.

---

I left both happy and sad.

I left happy because - contrary to what one may see on social media (I say that; I largely avoid the news now), not all young people are hating on the world and society.  Some really are trying to do good and useful things - and they seem like are ready to take on the world (as we all were, once upon a time).

I left sad because of the same future.

In Spring 2025, it is estimated that 1,028, 185 students graduated with a B.A. or B.S. Of those, STEM programs (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) as well as business are among the top majors.  And while STEM jobs are growing in need (and apparently we are woefully behind in graduating them), we are also dealing in world where multiple countries are graduating STEM graduates (China, for 2025, produced 3.57 million STEM Graduates).  Add to that the burgeoning use of Artificial Intelligence which will automate a great many things, and I think it is going to be a tough job market in the future.

---

I am grateful I had the opportunity to speak to them and see the work that they are doing.  It did fill me with a bit more confidence about the future and about the younger generation.  

Hopefully they, in turn, walked away with a little more appreciation that there is a world outside of a career and the things you have to take to get a degree.  

After all, no-one dies wishing they had just one more day at their job.

On An Unexpected Price Increase

I have been a fan of the website Thriftbooks.com for at least three years (according to my order history, anyway).  I had used some other used book websites in the past - alibris.com, abebooks, even Amazon - but Thriftbooks drew me in for at least two reasons:  A purchase of $15 came with free shipping and after a certain number of purchases, one began to acquire a $5 to $7 credit to get a free book.

Given that I like to buy books, this made for a pretty convenient arrangement.

I had not really paid much attention when I ordered, other than checking to see that I met the threshold, until I went to make an order recently.  The shipping cost had gone up - not surprising, given the state of the world, and hardly anything to worry about (they ship book rate, so I presume it reflects the going cost).  What did surprise me was that the free shipping threshold had leapt up from $15 to $20 per purchase.  And, somehow, my relatively low amount to keep my "get your $7 credit status through 2027" had mysteriously leapt up from $1 to $71.

An bit of an increase in shipping is manageable.  A 33% increase in the amount it takes to get free shipping seems a bit less manageable.  And while it is fair to say that there is every reason to believe I could spend $71 on books between now and the end of the year, increasing it that much on what feels a like an unexplained whim is actually a little embittering - all the more so because I know the price they buy books back at (the mark up is pretty spectacular).

It has certainly given me pause (although to be fair, my book buying in general seems to be trailing off somewhat simply because I am running out of space).  

I had not anticipated the general economic situation to impact my used book habit. But it seems that nothing is immune from a world of rising costs.

Device Hoarding

 In an attempt to stay at least mildly "hip", I follow one or two Tube Of You "podcasters" (given the origin of the term podcast, it seems a little odd to me that a video is a podcast, but here we are) that deal in the sorts of Nerd Culture that I enjoy keeping a pulse on, even if I do not really participate:  Role Playing Games (now apparently "Tabletop Gaming"), video games, entertainment, the occasional tech discussion.  While it is mostly a reflection of current events in the space, it is often an interesting view of the social beliefs and systems that underlying those developments.  

It was during one of these discussions that I heard the term "Device Hoarder".

A Device Hoarder, it was mentioned, is someone that simply fails to upgrade their devices on a regular basis.  In the particular context of the discussion, it was with the recent price increases of game consoles to $1,000 or more and the not surprising fact that many gamers are choosing to either keep their old systems or are actively seeking out old systems.

I assumed it was a rather specific term in the industry but decided to do a bit of reading.  Turns out Device Hoarding is considered a real thing.

---

There are two versions of Device Hoarders.  The first is the Device Hoarding where individuals just keep purchasing new electronics but never get rid of (or "recycle", however that works) their old devices.  Per at least one article, 88% of Americans as of 2024 had devices worth up to $67.8 Billion stashed away (No note in the article if that was calculated on original value or current estimated value).

The second version is Device Hoarding where individuals and businesses do not upgrade their electronic devices on a frequent - say annual - basis.  There are those that have associated a loss of productivity with this failure to upgrade to take advantage of upgrades in technology, about 0.3% per annum. 

Thus, apparently, Device Hoarders have accomplished that most rare of events, creating multiple issues simply by not upgrading and not turning over those items that they upgraded.

---

Cleverly of course, this sort of "waste" is presented as having multiple impacts.:

- New technologies - Internet speed, better software - are held back, resulting in productivity losses.

- Unrecycled electronics are not returned to the market, where they can either be recycled or resold (to be noted, likely below the original purchase price or for free).

- Unrecycled electronics are not recycled, thus creating waste.

- Electronics manufacturers are denied the regular income of profits that comes from regular updates of electronics (e.g., Consumers are not consuming quickly enough).

---

Am I a Device Hoarder?  Yes, yes I am.

My computer is 12 years old at this point with a now-unavailable operating system (Windows 10) and a a plugged in keyboard as the computer keyboard has a row that does not work.  My cell phone (Computer In My Pocket) is two years (a miracle for me, although the camera is arguably a great benefit).  Our other in-home electronics - television, Roku device, CD/VCR player - are of various ages, but none of which are younger than 6 years.

I am, indeed, apparently part of the problem.

And yet...

And yet, my lack of new technology has not hindered me.  My computer is really only used for the InterWeb and for personal work, mainly word processing and spreadsheets (and the very occasional game).  My phone gets more use as a camera or communication device via text than it ever does as a phone.  Our television/DVD and VCR/Roku player gets a handful of hours of use a week.  The "loss" of productivity is unnoticeable to me - if I can no longer use a function or get a thing, I simply move on with an alternate.

Plus, of course, given the prices of everything, the idea of regularly repurchasing electronics (or really, anything) just because it is "out of date" is ridiculous.  For example, even figuring low on the computer side, I save between $600 and $1,000 every year I do not upgrade.  

I have enough.  I do not need more.

---

Interestingly, the articles I read never suggested any of the benefits of Device Hoarding.  The cynical side of me finds this to be a terribly one-sided view of the affair.

But perhaps understandable.  Often times if there is not a crisis, it is quite acceptable to create one.

My Annual Commercialism Adventure And Demographics

 As in recent years past, I ventured on out Black Friday.

This is usually not driven directly by any need that I have but rather by a desire to spend time with my family.  As they like to go "hit the bargains" (as the kids say), so I too have learned to (slightly) embrace the day.

To be fair, if one is looking for something that one has already determined that one needs, it is not a bad time to go:  for example, likely I could have gotten two years worth of shoes at a 30% discount (had I needed them).  And I suspect that deals on commonly needed things like socks and underwear could be found at similarly amazing prices.

For the most part, there were no "crowds".  Occasional lines, but nothing like the mass insanity that one used to see at Big Box stores for things like electronics (or maybe such mass hysteria still exists; I have no idea).  People behaved well.

The most crowded place we went was one of the two malls in the greater New Home 2.0 area, one of what is likely my semi-annual visit to them.  Much more crowded of course, although it seemed to me somewhat less full than last year.  

The thing that surprises me as I go to such places, is how similar the sorts of stores are.  We went shoe and clothes shopping - but there are just as many or more shoe and clothes shops in the mall that seem to market slightly different versions of the same thing.  Non-specific clothing and fashion adjacent shops seem, to my eye, fewer and fewer.

This probably says something about us as a culture.  

---

On Saturday, with Na Clann safely returned to New Home, we ventured out into one of the "local neighborhoods" that our nearby urban metropolis has.  This part of the neighborhood had a number of stores in it as well - very high end stores, judging from the cost of the chocolates and leather.  It was a decent mix of clothing, fashion adjacent, non-fashion adjacent, and unusual stores (including a crystal store with a rather amazing collection of taxidermy).  

I say "high end" because most of the places we stopped and looked had no prices on the actual items themselves.  At least one of the chocolate bars The Ravishing Mrs. TB picked up was $45. A Cave Bear Jaw Bone, if you were curious, will run you about $5,000.

It was a very interesting slice of walking and looking, clearly not designed for someone like myself.

---

Yesterday morning in church, the preaching pastor mentioned a survey a local church group had undertaken of the greater New Home 2.0 Urban Area.  It was inclusive of a 25 mile radius around the main urban metropolis, and interviewed businesses, individuals, churches, etc. (or so I was told; I do not have the study on hand).

The shocking thing, both to the initiators and to myself:  a full 50% of the people interviewed anticipated moving away in the next five years.  At a local population of that area of almost 3,000,000, that is not an inconsiderable number.

Of course, not everyone that intends to move actually moves. But the reasons that people might move are apparent.  Local big employers are closing up shop here, and the backfill is not going to be enough to replace those jobs.  The urban metropolis of New Home 2.0 has all of the problems of almost any major urban center at this point, and even from our brief sojourn here, it is clear that nothing effective is being done.  Add to that the cost of doing business here in terms of taxes both business and personal, and relocation begins to make some level of sense.

Sure, people will likely move in as well.  But people moving in need to have jobs to come to, and those jobs - the so-called "good high paying ones" are moving to other locales. 

---

The trajectory of this is, of course, predictable.  The people that are most likely to relocate are those who can relocate, whose job skills are such that they can find a job elsewhere or (like us) are still relatively unattached in terms of roots here.  These are likely - but not always - the jobs that are the highest paying and thus, the ones that many of the businesses that we visited over the course of the weekend most dependent on.

With those paying consumers gone, the remaining consumers will likely not be shopping at the higher end stores (they never do).  Tax receipts will fall, which then will need to be replenished (because no government body seems capable of cutting spending these days) by increasing taxes and fees.  The urban issues, not solved now in days of relative affluency, will surely not be solved under those circumstances.

It does make me wonder what The Weekend After Thanksgiving Commercialism excursions will look like in the future.

A Video On The Economy by Paul Wheaton And Thoughts

Over the years I have been a passive follower of Paul Wheaton and his Permies forum.  Paul's focus is on humble living, permaculture, and sustainable technology.  It is an interesting place if you have never been (membership is free and to my knowledge it is largely apolitical and deals with all things agricultural, permaculture, sustainable technology, food preparation, etc.; Friend of This Blog (FOTB) Leigh has been known to be there from time to time).

This week a short video he did crossed my inbox entitled "Prepare Now for Upcoming Changes".  This is a subject that has been on my mind of late, so I watched the video.  A transcript is below:  copyright obviously belongs to Paul Wheaton and any errors remain my own:

"I'm sitting at a table with three strangers. Our host shares that she's thinking of going back to college to finish her degree in software engineering. She explains that she wants a job that pays better than her current job.

I say, "Don't do it." The other two people agree with me.

“Then what should I study so I can get a higher paying job?” I suspect that for any field of study, there will be a lot of layoffs. The most productive people will stay on, and you'll find that you'll be looking for work with your freshly minted degree, competing against people with degrees and experience.

Again, the other two agree with me. “What do I do?” I think if you live more humbly, save what you can, and prepare for a long-term unemployment, you'll be in better shape than most other people. And then you can solve work stuff from a perspective of strategy instead of desperation.

I then suggested buying some sun chokes and sticking them in her yard with no further effort. In two years, there'll be enough food to feed several people through the Winter. The other two said nothing. I guess I became too weird.

Most people go to college and take on debt. The idea used to be that you would then get a higher paying job and pay back that debt. With heaps of cash flow, you can have lots of fancy. In time, you can boost your income further to get even bigger fancy.

Three strangers agree that this is about to change. Three strangers agree. Do not take on debt. Cut your expenses. Save your money.

My wacky advice is to retire in two years, maybe sooner. Fill your head with homesteading, gardening, and permaculture strategies. Practice fiscal humility. I think that a humble home and a large garden will solve all sorts of personal problems. It is the road to gratitude. To get land, I want to propose the SKIP program. Joining our permaculture boot camp and my attempts to get hundreds of thousands of homesteads to do what I call gardening gardeners for big garden. Please see my content about an automatic backyard food pump. 30 minutes of gardening will feed you all winter. A humble home and a large garden solves almost everything."

I have to confess I find myself strangely ambivalent about the video. On the one hand, I have been haunted by the last few weeks of a sense that something is changing in the economy, something that I cannot see directly by looking at it but only by looking out of the corner of my eye. It is that nagging feeling that one gets when there is an object about to hit you but you cannot see it.

It is clear, even in my own world, that many college degrees are not worth the paper they are printed on for helping to find a job in the field of study.  There are some of course; it is foolish to completely write college off as having no value.  And the idea of "fiscal humility" is one that resonates with me and that I have never heard expressed in that light.

And yet, I question the large term application of Paul's philosophy.

Cost of living and Land costs are probably the biggest reactions I initially have.  Yes, we can live more fiscally humble than we do, but if you are anywhere in an urban area (that many are because of their jobs), there is a level of fiscal humility beneath which you cannot drop without not eating or having a place to live.  The second, of course, is land on which to have a garden (see above comments on cost of living in urban areas where career field may be concentrated).  Home prices have dropped a bit over the last year but starting out 30 years younger, I cannot imagine trying to buy in any of the areas I have lived in for my jobs.

This whole thing disconcerts me a bit because I really like the message Paul presents.  I am just not sure how it can be practically and largely applied.

Video: (Run time 3:10)

Of Delivery Drivers And Artificial Intelligence

Every morning around 0600 as I take my morning walk, I pass the morning round of delivery vehicles.

They come in two types.  The first is the large, blocky van associated with the world's biggest online retailer, complete with beeping noise when parked and the high beam incandescents indicating an electric vehicle, their drivers in the blue and grey uniform. The other are the personal transports - cars, trucks - with the driver that may or may not wear a safety vest clearly delineating themselves as a delivery person, single package grasped in hand.

The same two groups will appear in the evenings as I make dinner:   added to these two groups are a third group, personal cars whose drivers are not safety vest clothed but are carrying boxes and bags of what are clearly food to doorways.

Even 5 years ago this was not a thing.  Now, it is as regular an occurrence as street lights going on and off.

---

My work, along with likely hundreds (or even thousands) of other companies, is heavily pushing Artificial Intelligence (or AI).  When I say "heavily pushing", I mean a multi-week mandatory training regime to be done by the entire company. Progress is tracked.  Levels of in-person engagement are expected.  

The point of all of this is to bring Artificial Intelligence into our daily work.  The anticipated outcome is that we will all begin to use Artificial Intelligence to automate simple (or not so simple tasks) and create tools that allow us to focus our time on higher level activities (what these "higher level activities" are never clearly defined except in generic sorts of examples).  I am assuming that, for next year's goals, some level of Artificial Intelligence will be included: demonstrating using it in practical terms, creating a tool, automating tasks.

It was only in one of the later trainings that it was noted that those who learn to "adapt" will be the most successful in the new work place.

---

The point of this discourse is not to argue the benefits or lack thereof for Artificial Intelligence; people far more educated and thoughtful are commenting on it.  My particular point is dwelling on what I see as two opposite points:  On one, an intensely manual process that has virtually no barriers to entry except the ability to drive and follow instructions on a phone; on the other, a process where automation is being heavily pushed as a way to make work more efficient.

That industries and companies will oversell the benefits of Artificial Intelligence goes without question in my mind:  if history has demonstrated anything, it is that companies will triple down on anything that promises to save money regardless of the long term ability of said thing to save money or even work effectively.  They will the initial results that they think they will get; the long term impacts - such as, for example, Artificial Intelligence not being the panacea for ever task - will manifest itself only after the people have been fired and the systems changed to accommodate Artificial Intelligence.

More importantly, what happens to the people who did those jobs?

---

I cannot guess at the reasons people take delivery jobs.  For some, it is likely the job they can get.  For others, it is one of many they can use to piece together an income. But in either case, these jobs are predicated on an underlying principle:  people have money to spend that allows them to buy things that include the overhead for delivery.

In an economy which is in distress - be it from a collapse in markets or a mass series of layoffs - the first thing to go for many is non-essential spending.  Spending will concentrate down further and further into the basics - housing, food, the basics of living.  And with that spending drop, goes all sorts of other jobs.  

It strikes me that I am looking at an economic system that is eating itself from both ends, both the highly paid and technical side and the low end minimum wage side.  What emerges from that I can scarcely imagine - except I cannot imagine it will be good.

On New Homes, Purchasers, And Quality

 New Home 3.0 is a fascinating microstudy in changing a city's nature, building, and the future of home developments.

Located in a greater metropolitan area but somewhat separated from it, it had the good fortune to start out as its own city (instead of an incorporated suburb) and so has an identity all its own.  One can find a small original downtown (which is well preserved and cared for), the inevitable next wave of growth of strip malls and big box stores, and the final expansion along the state highway which connects us to the larger urban area and is itself another zone for big box stores and major chains.

And yet, we are within 10 minutes of wide tracts of actively used agricultural land and small old agricultural towns that have not fully "made the transition" to a thriving city and so live with lesser well preserved downtowns and suburbs surrounding the historic town.

Add to this, then, the phenomena of large acreages being sold and housing developments being put in place.

To those that may not have seen them lately, housing developments are becoming less and less attractive.  Even 20 years ago, within a development there was some element of difference between the homes; one had 3-5 models to choose from and these were alternated on the lots.  Those days have passed:  the new housing developments are packed in (the so called "Zero-lot line", where there is minimal or no room between one's self and one's neighbor), minimal yards front and back, and the houses all appear precisely the same with only a difference in home colour to show a difference.  There are no trees in the back as you drive by, only yards and yards of fences with backs of houses staring at you as you drive by.

The building continues apace.  And yet, I wonder how long and what worth these will have.

While the economy may be booming in some areas, it is arguably not booming in New Home 3.0.  Some of the major employers have announced significant layoffs and given the state of what they make and the world, I scarcely think these are the last layoffs they will have.  These are precisely the jobs that are required to purchase a home here where $500,000 is the current low level for a home for sale - e.g., the market seems primed to be dropping off and in a big way.

The other thing that makes me wonder is the long term value.  Having at one time owned a house that was done by a commercial builder, I know quite well the quality of their construction, which can be "iffy' at best.  After all, when is building houses like an assembly line, "quality" may not be the biggest concern.  Speed in finishing them is.

Certainly it is not a problem now. But 20 years from now?  There are going to be hundreds of homes that will have the same range of issues.  Add to that a market which is seems to be changing, and I see the potential for whole areas of aging homes in states of disrepair and a limited buyers market as the "good" jobs disappear.

Is there a solution?  It is easy enough to say "Build less homes" (and I, as someone who sees the value in land not built on would completely agree with), but that does negate the right of the individual to do what they will with what they own.  Could cities also target their building towards already "built out" parts of town that need renewal?  Yes, but then one runs the complaints of "gentrification".  And all of this assumes an ever increasing populations with an income to afford them.

Likely this problem will not manifest directly for us; with some level of planning we will have a house in the not too distant future which will more or less be the one we keep until circumstances intervene.  But it does make me wonder, as I drive by clone after clone behind newly raised fencing, what it will look like in 20 years.

On Small Businesses

One of things one gets when on InstaPic is postings of things that The Almighty Algo believes you would like to see.  One of these - I cannot remember if it was in a rabbit post or just showed up - was an artist that drew rabbits (I know -you are shocked that this attracted my attention).  The drawings was simple and told a story.  And then there was another one.  And another one.  It turns out he produced some picture every day.  His name is Will Quinn (website here).

He became an artist I subscribed to.  Every day he posts a rabbit; every day now I get up looking for it.  At one point - in October of this year - he posted that he was selling calendars of his drawings.  They are cute and something that I thought would appeal to Nighean Gheal, so I ordered one.  In the order I noted that I was hopeful that I could receive it soon, as I was going to see her in a few weeks (for the Master Sergeant's funeral, as it turned out).  I waited, the Master Sergeant's funeral passed - no calendar.  I was not terribly upset - after all, it was short notice.

The calendar arrived this week.  In it was a note from Mr. Quinn, apologizing that he could not get the calendar to me sooner and by way of apology, providing a couple of additional small pictures - so now I have three to provide to each of my children.

The note and offering touched me - not just because of the gift, but that he had taken the time out of his day to care enough to "make good" on something that was merely a request from someone he had never met.

Looking at his note, it made me consider the fact that, on the whole, I find myself dealing with small businesses more and more.

Another one I now purchase coffee from is Binky Bun Coffee.  They were originally a find from my local independent rabbit supply shop (yes, such a thing exists).  Sure, I can get a great deal more coffee for the price at Costco, but I do not get 15% of my purchase donated to a rabbit rescue. And I do not get personal handwritten notes thanking me for my purchase (and an occasional sticker)  Is it less coffee?  Sure.  But it means that it is something I savor and drink less of overall now (apparently the fancy pod coffee thing that came out with me includes a unit that you can pre-load with your own grind), which - given my blood pressure - is probably not a bad thing.

I compare this with the plethora of packages that have magically appeared at my door over the last two weeks (I have become the receiving destination for gifts):  random packages, dumped on my doorstep (sometimes literally in the dead of night) with no notes, no extras.  There is no sense of connection; it remains a transaction, nothing more.

Do both options provide jobs?  They do, and undoubtedly the people that drop off my packages at some level are not bad people either.  But one experience makes me good after shopping; the other just gives me the thing without any joy.

Can I do this for everything that I buy?  Likely not of course:  we just simply are not longer there as a society.  But everything I can do, every small business I shop at, pushes back that sense of soulless commercialism just a bit.

How odd that - once again -something that we used to take for granted has become a novelty

The Cost Of A Meal: Extensions

(Editor's note:  Prayer ask, please.  I received a call from my cousin today.  My aunt (my mother's brother's life) went to the hospital yesterday for jaundice.  They diagnosed her today with Pancreatic cancer, stage unknown at this point.  Prayers and good thoughts for Pat would be deeply appreciated.)

 As I continued to sit and think about the cost of how much I spent to feed myself, it ran in some interesting questions.  In fact, in made me realize how little I tend to buy at all at this point.

For example, clothing.  I likely have enough clothes to last me the rest of my life - for almost every situation.  Other than those things that tend to wear - socks, underwear, even jeans - the only sorts of clothes I would buy are those sorts of things that tickle my fancy (vests and vintage Japanese kimonos fall into this category).

Books? I am always up for another book, but in point of fact I am always up for another book.  Can I make a solid case for needing another?  Errr.....

The rest of the things I might purchase fall into the category of occasional needs:  the unfun things of life like household cleaners or an oil change or new tires or pet food (and a surprising amount of pet snacks) - at some level things I must have to accomplish a task.

A reduced income helps with all of this prioritization of course, both in determining what can truly be afforded as well as making a sincere effort to extend whatever one has to the maximum extent possible.

For myself of course, there is little "concern":  I am perfectly happy living this relatively simple version of reality.  But what, I wondered, are the economic impacts of such a lifestyle.  What would the impact of hundreds of thousands or even millions living this sort of lifestyle be on the economy?

The best figure I could find at the time of this was that 80.2% of the US Labor force is in Services and 18% are in Manufacturing (Thanks, Wikipedia).  I am not quite sure what that actually breaks down to in real life, but the old saw of  70% of the American public working in retail or services may not be too far off the mark.  So what happens if the American public seized up on their spending?

We have seen an example of this in the past, of course:  The Plague and its results.  I do not have a lot hard data on the total loss of jobs and industries (it seems a bit hard to locate on a quick search, oddly), but colloquially we all know of people who lost their jobs or even their businesses.  In that case it was because of government mandates; what would it look like if it was a voluntary action?

I have no idea, of course - but I can imagine.  Businesses would close - those that were totally discretionary in nature first (restaurants and entertainment venues come to mind here), with escalations from there based on need: most need a haircut at some point and places that supply basic parts or materials like auto parts stores, grocery stores, or farm supply will likely be higher up on the list than designer clothes stores (or malls in general). And likely the government at some point would get involved as well - after all, those tax dollars do not generate themselves.  I can see our political critters as well as "key influencers" out there telling us that spending money is the patriotic thing to do.

Is it?  I am not sure.  I suppose it depends on the definition of that sort of "patriotism"; to me more and more, it seems much closer to home.

The Cost Of A Meal

 Last month I decide to make mercimek köftesi, those delightful little lentil and bulgur appetizers from Turkey.  The pictures below is how the actually appeared.

The picture below is how mine turned out.

While the flavor was not, so far as I remember, like what we had in Turkey (Mine had bit too much onion I think) it was none the less more or less on the mark.

I ended up making 28 of them.  4 of them is enough for a meal.  On a bit a of a lark, I wondered how much the meal cost me.  I added up the cost of the ingredients - lentils, bulgur, tomato paste, onion, green onion, a few spices - a total of $4.67.  Divide by 7 (the numbers of meals I got out it) and that was $0.67 per meal.

What an interesting thought exercise, I thought to myself.  I wonder how much I spend on meals. overall.

My diet has changed somewhat since I start fully living here in New Home 2.0, partially because of the fact that I am an inherently lazy cook that opts for the least amount of time and energy cooking and partly because of the fact that by accident or design (or both), I am trying to lose some weight for health reasons - and, of course, with money being a bit tight, being sensible about my meal planning is helpful.  As a result, I tend to now eat a lot of dairy (I always did, of course) and more vegetables and fruits - and less meat.  In fact, outside of some salmon last Friday, I do not think I have had meat in almost a month. 

Breakfasts remain the same for me five of seven days a week:  oatmeal, yogurt, coffee, protein powder, and vitamins. The other two days are dairy free so no yogurt or whey with more oatmeal.  Cost of these meals is $3.05 a serving ($1.75 on dairy free days).  The protein powder is my big extravagance (almost half the cost of breakfast), but worth the amount of protein it has for the calories.

Lunch is almost always the same now as well:  spinach, homemade bread, homemade cheese, apple, fruit (currently mandarins as they are on sale), carrots, and almonds.  Cost is $1.69 with dairy and $1.43 without dairy.

Dinner always has romaine lettuce, croutons (one serving, or five croutons) and a tablespoon of red wine vinegar. The main dish varies: it can be mercimek köftesi as above or eggs (2-3) or lentils and rice or pan fried tofu.  The cost runs anywhere from $1.18 (mercimek köftesi) to $2.02 for eggs.  Were I to "level up" with chicken breasts, the cost is $1.38.   

Bottom line?  I can eat between $5.92 and $6.76 a day (interestingly to me, eggs are the most expensive dinner).  Average cost a day for 3 meals and two snacks is $6.26 a day, or $43.87 a week.  A meal like that is easily 1700-1800 calories per day without trying hard at all - and most days, I now find myself filled up after dinner.

The cost, mind you, is not linear:  I can get oatmeal at Costco for $7.99 per 113 half cup servings and 48 eggs for $5.69.  Milk is $3.64 a gallon - but from that I can easy get two weeks worth of yogurt or two weeks worth of cheese, plus a week's worth of whey to drink. Things like spinach and romaine lettuce have to be purchased a bit more regularly, or course.  And I am not truly accounting for things like homemade bread and coffee, other than in a very generalized cost given the volume I have to buy the raw materials to make them.

A couple of points to keep in mind:

1) I live 100% in an urban area and do not grow anything, therefore I have to purchase everything.  That said, I can take some raw materials like milk or flour and forward process them.

2)  I am not a very original cook and I am not trying very hard.

For comparison (if you have not been out of late), a "reasonable" meal for two perhaps including a non-water beverage and entrée will run you at least $40 or more, before the tip. For that amount, I can basically feed myself for a week.

Do I consider myself particularly meritorious for doing this?  Not really, no - although it has been a great exercise in minimalist eating, has allowed me to shed some pounds, and saved me some money. But it has taught me at least one thing:  I can cut costs with the best of them.

On Industry Closures

 Although I have not really discussed it here since securing a job in February of this year, I have continued to follow the developments of layoffs and company closures in my industry.  Part of that is purely a professional interest:  directly or indirectly I am impacted by the health of the industry. Part of that is the same reason people troll the obituaries - to see if anyone they know has died.

As you might imagine given the rest of economy, things are not great.

The kicker for me was last week when at least one company a day from Monday to Thursday (two on Tuesday and Wednesday of that week) announced layoffs and or closures.  For the close as of yesterday, that was 128 companies to date.  That does not include the unannounced layoffs that many companies have which are either too minor or not required to be reported.

The week's layoffs were a mix of reasons as they often are:  FDA refusal to approve with a request for more data the company cannot financially afford to fund.  Failed clinical trials that result in not moving forward with late stage drugs thus pushing the company back to the beginning of the process.  In one case, being thrown out of their headquarters because they failed to make a loan payment.

It is not unusual for this to happen to small companies:  start up biopharmaceutical is very much a high risk-high reward business.  But it was not just smaller companies.  Larger companies with what seemed like sufficient funds or even very large companies with products on the market are making cuts now.  

Why? That math does not seem very hard to follow.  They see the future, perhaps far more clearly than our economic experts or policy pundits do.  They see straightened and diminished cash flows and are taking pre-emptive action now.

My opinion?  This will get worse.  As we continue to the end of the year more of the smaller companies that are on the edge will close up shop in a financial market where funds are not forthcoming.  And larger companies will continue to respond in advance to the market they see coming - not the markets the economists or politicians say exists, but the real one that does exist.

The problem with believing your own press releases is eventually you get caught in them.

A Trip To Costco

During her most recent visit, The Ravishing Mrs. TB raised the question of our Costco account - a fair question given the last 12 months we have had.

Costco, as most may know, is a warehouse style membership shopping chain.  Its claim to fame is that for a fee, one gets a discount on many sorts of common items, anything from food and paper goods to electronics to household goods to tires and medicines and glasses and fuel.  There are three catches:

1)  It is a membership service and thus there is an annual fee;

2)  The items are typically sold "in bulk" or in larger packages;

3)  They do not always have the best prices.

The question came up due to a fourth factor, that of location.

Costco suffers from two other potential detriments.  The first is that the farther away one is, the less convenient it is.  The second is that their parking lots are all seemingly ill designed: getting in is a struggle, getting out is a struggle, and it is never ever not busy.

For the last few years we have suffered from the latter issues:  we are not terribly close and it is never convenient.  Add to that the fact that with Nighean Bhan and Nighean Dhonn still employed at Produce (A)Isle and getting both a regular 10% discount and a periodic 25% discount on store brands, we have scarcely had a reason to go.

With the move to New Home 2.0 that has changed.  We are now close enough that it could function as our regular fueling station (and with prices about $0.50 cheaper on gas than anywhere else close it is worth our while).  And so to evaluate the current "value" of our membership, I stopped by.

I am well aware - perhaps as aware as any - about the increase in prices over the past two years.  What I did not expect was the percentage of that increase.  

Almost everything was up from things we used to buy there.  It has been too long for me to remember percentages, but I would easily estimate 20%.  Certainly my stalking horse protein powder was up that much (20% right on the nose) -  enough of an increase that the days of it as a regular supplement are now long in the past.

I had already been making changes to my diet, based on a combination of following Orthodox fasting practices (no meat or dairy on Wednesdays and Fridays) and ease of preparation.  A third factor is now present:  the simple cost of food.

If this is a good economy, my hands are too small to grasp it.

Of Things Desired And Things Needed And Things Eliminated

 

One of the great challenges of the relocation to New Home 2.0 is The Downsizing.

Yes, we have the luxury few have of not having to relocate everything as we are keeping the house.  Yes, it is likely that New Home 2.0 at best represents a short rest stop on our way to other locales.  And yes, one does need less things as one gets older.

But no matter how you slice it, we need to get rid of some things. 

The Ravishing Mrs. TB is on this on the macro scale, viewing and reviewing things like furniture, décor, kitchen items, etc. as well as her own personal items - although she will likely spend far more time in New Home for up to a year than here in New Home 2.0.  Leaving me to focus own on my own things.

I have referenced before that now having seen the place, I have to trim back my "what to bring" by what seems to me to be a considerable amount.  The challenge is that, even in this need to bring things back, I still find that I want things.

Books, of course.  Not surprising to anyone that follows me here.  I have made efforts to corral this by putting together a list and if I want a book, it has to go on the list - no more off the cuff purchases.  Which works, of course, except if you go into a used book store.  Simple solution?  Avoid used bookstores.  And used book websites.  And really, any websites that offer books at all.

It is not going as well as I might have hoped.

And although I have managed to cut my typical purchase of books to a trickle (at least for me, anyway) it does leave the fact that I see other things - and want them.  

Coffee for Turkish Coffee?  Background materials for old Role Playing Games that might help me write The Collapse?  Some nifty clothing item?  These are things that have rolled past my eyes in the last two weeks.

It is at moments like this that I need to take Epicurus' advice to heart.

It is true:  at one time, I had none of this.  They were all things that for the most part I wanted (or did not know I wanted until I got them).  And now having them,  I am somehow not satisfied with them.  I "need" more.

But do I?  In a life where I am transitioning from a house to an apartment, where everything I now bring in will have to move out at some point, do I really "need" it?  Or is it fueling a desire that always wants more, or a vanity that that wants me to get it because "I am an adult and I can"?

Learning to say "no" to myself is always the hardest thing.  So naturally, it is a lesson I have to constantly relearn.

But all of this has a larger component as well.

We live in a world - at least here in the West - where we are defined by what we want.  We have a name for it:  Consumer Culture.  We have an entire industry, advertising, dedicated ultimately to getting people to desire and buy that which they do not truly need.  We have built entire supply chains and businesses - food, goods of all kinds - on the premise that people will buy what they could do themselves if only they are shown the convenience of and pleasure in doing so.  

There is nothing wrong with that, of course - people should be free to spend their money as they choose.  But when one effectively bets the house - in this case, the economy - on people always having to desire and purchase that which they do not have nor need but desire, it eventually goes badly.  Because when comes down to it, when the money is down, people focus (again) on what they really need and what they can really do for themselves.

So in a way, we have managed to not only completely ignore Epicurus' advice, we have managed to base our economic future on it.  Let us hope that we can stair step our way down instead of falling off the ladder.

A Lack Of Layoff Safety

 This weekend my friend The Dog Whisperer finally begins a semi-cross country trek to her new job, something that ended up taking here almost 4 months to find.  Her stuff has gone on; she and H The Wonder Dog depart from New Home this weekend to make the journey.

As I was scouring the InterWeb for layoffs (as I always do), I noticed that a work location similar to what I remembered hers being announced they were having layoffs.  I checked in with her:  yes, that was her location and no, no-one had contacted her about any impact.  And although they were saying it was a minor layoff in the face of their total employee count, it was not the sort of not one wants to start one's job one.

It is true of me as well:  during one of the few times I checked the news while I was in Turkey, I found that my own company announced a series of layoffs - not at my site, but certainly at my division.  Again, limited numbers - but there was no internal mention of the event at all.

The Dog Whisperer's response to my inquiry was "At this point, no industry is safe from layoffs".

Her comment sank deep within me.

It is probably not fair to say without hesitation that "this is the new normal".  And yet, there is something within me that makes me feel that this sort of instability is the new normal, or at least the new normal within my own lifetime.

It is probably true that I am more sensitive to this than most, given the fact that with my own recent history I am almost at the point of jumping at my own shadow.  And yet, the shedding just seems to keep on coming.

There has to be a point where all of this reaches critical mass, when there are so many people not working and paying their bills (and directly dependent on government to do so) that it finally upends the economic apple cart.  Those that do not earn do not spend on the sorts of things that a service and consumer economy relies on for revenue.

It is a burden enough for those of us in our latter earning years; I cannot imagine the level of instability this will contribute to younger workers.  Sometimes it feels that at the rate we are going, more layoffs and longer periods between employment will become more and more of a thing.  

Managing through this, effectively at the end of my career, is difficult enough. I cannot imagine how a generation that has had not had the experience we had will do so.

On Raising Wages And Departing Employees

 In what is going to be a real life test of an Ayn Randian principle, California has recently decided to up the minimum wage of fast food workers.

For the purposes of this exercise, I am setting aside the arguments about what a minimum wage is and why it is and who gets it.  That is not the crux of the issue - but there is an underlying issue I think bears careful watching.

The issue is simply the breaking point of the average consumer.

One of the things that remains relevant even in my own industry is the idea of COGS, or Cost of Goods Sold - that is, the sum total that one sells a good for.  In theory, COGS is supposed to include all the things which go into the manufacture of that good, including materials and labor (but excluding things like overhead, which falls into administrative expenses).  Nor does this include some level of profit for the company manufacturing the product (Useful description here.)

When labor goes up - just like materials go up - the COGS goes up.  But COGS is not necessarily the same as "price sold at".  This becomes a balancing act of all of the things - COGS, Administrative expense, profit.

When California raised the minimum wage to $20 an hour, it increased the COGS.  Unfortunately for fast food (and all of us), the cost of goods in general (in this case, food) has also gone up.  Which leaves the business owner three choices:  lower profits, raise prices, or cut costs.

From the view of the government, I am reasonably sure that the most desirable outcome is "lower profits".  Profits are, after all, generally evil except above some small socially acceptable norm which is never quite defined but everyone knows what it is (ignoring, of course, the fact that lowered profits equal lower tax receipts.  But more on that shortly.).

From the business owner's point of view, the most desired outcome is "cut costs".  Cutting costs reduced (or at least mediates) COGS.  And, sadly for everyone else, labor is usually the greatest cost any business has.

The option that is overall least desirable is "Raise prices".  From the government's point of view, although likely it generates more sales tax it also hikes overall prices.  From the business owner's point of view, the more prices rise the more likely it is that you will begin to price out certain portions of your market and thus lower overall revenue.

And so - even before this started - business owners started cutting staff.

In at least one example, it started with pizza delivery drivers.  There is a certain cold logic to it - in an age of apps that handle delivery of food, why would one keep a staff to deliver food?  Yes, it means that you do not have direct control over that part of the supply chain, but you are also not paying people who may or may not have deliveries.  And now that overhead and administrative expense falls on someone else, not you, reducing your cost. 

From the government's point of view, this is a bit of a catastrophe.  Less payroll taxes, less income taxes, likely more drain on the social welfare systems as these people look for work.  By "increasing" income, they have decreased their own revenues and increased their own spending.

The other element, of course, is simply the price hike.

As prices increase due to inflation and material costs, people start making choices.  People start realizing what is important and what is not.  And in times of tightened budgets, fast food and restaurants in general are likely some of the first things to go.  

The problem for Our Political And Social Betters (OPASB) is that although they can control owners indirectly, they cannot control consumers.  And consumers will respond to the market in a realistic fashion based on their experience, not on what good intentions would mandate.

By (in theory) trying to do the "right" thing in increasing people's salaries, they have likely ensured that more people will not have jobs.  Which seems like a bit of a reverse outcome. 

Contrast this mandate with at least one restaurant here in New Home 2.0, where they notify you up front (literally up front as you enter the restaurant) that they charge a 3% "living wage" fee as part of the check.  If you do not care to pay it, you can have it removed.  This, to me, makes more sense:  I am informed, I have the ability to opt out, and the company is able to do something to mitigate costs (likely most people do not refuse the additional amount).

My prediction?  Layoffs will skyrocket. Businesses will fold.  Where businesses do not fold, automation will not just become an interesting idea or unique selling point, but critical to the businesses ability to survive.   It will not impact OPASB of course; they eat at locations where none of these things will be an issue.  But almost everyone else will see some kind of effect.

Atlas may not be shrugging, but he may be limbering up his shoulders.

On Losing Interest In Brands

Although I typically do not discuss "modern" or "pop" culture here, it is not something that I am completely unattuned to.  I follow a series of posters on The Tube of You that comment on such things - mostly movies, games and comics.  It is not that I am specifically into any of those currently, but I am familiar with the intellectual properties and having a passing interest in the direction of the industry.

Earlier this week I was listening to one such broadcast in which they were discuss the trajectory of a long running intellectual property.  Listening to the discussion, I suddenly made the discovery of how little I held any interest in "brands" anymore.

As I sat and thought about it more, the fact became more apparent to me.  I am generally not a watcher of "series", and I have not collected any sort of things - be they series of books, entertainment, or even "things" - in years.  Sure, I still hold an interest in 1st Edition Gamma World items and look (here and here), but seldom if ever do I find something I do not have.  Most of my purchases for the past years have either been of specific authors I like or just random things that catch my eye and hold my interest.  

It extends to other things as well:  I am far more likely anymore to purchase something from a small or specialty vendor or local chain than I am from a corporate brand.  Part of that is just a preference to fund the small rather than the large; part of that is sheer obstinance on my part even if it may cost me a bit more more.

Which of course, is exactly the wrong sort of opinion to have in the current economy.

Consumer based economies require people to purchase things - be they actual physical things or non-physical things such as e-books (real books being physical of course), games, movies, or other intangible items.  Best of all if you can convince people that they "need" to have all the things in order to be happy.

What happens when - if by finance, economy, or personal choice - people stop buying things, or more specifically non-specifically, things that they do not need?  Maybe even the things that industry has “convinced them they need?  What happens if that built in market dies?

The good news, I suppose, is I think we are getting to witness it in real time - if by "good news", I mean "actual verification of theoretical impacts".  

For many years, many companies have been able to assume that customers would simply be there, because "brands" and engagement and the power of marketing convincing people they need everything, including those things that they do not really need to survive. In the world we seem to be entering, Such things seem to no longer be a given.

It is one thing to assume and believe that the customer can and will buy your wares because they have always done so.  It is another to realize that that customers are not necessarily the captive, built in market you wanted or needed them to be.

On A Bank E-mail

Two Wednesdays ago I got an e-mail from my bank.

I have been using an airlines credit card  for the last 3 years or so, once going out to The Ranch and to see my parents became a thing. One earns points for money spent and gets a bolus of points on the anniversary. It was one we paid a fee for but, at that time, yielded significant benefits.

The notice that came in the e-mail had the innocuous title of "Changes to your XXXX account".  

The purpose of the e-mail was to notify card holders at starting on 26 March, a new penalty for failing to make a payment - the "Penalty APR" was being put in place. In short, in the event that a payment is missed, an interest rate of up to 29.99% (Prime plus 26.99%) will be levied against the account.  As an alternative, they are setting up a "pay over time" option for select customers and select purchases (conveniently called the "MY (Bank Name) Pay Over Time" plan.

You read that right.  29.99%

Technically, you do have the right to protest the fee - however if you do, the bank will close the account and no new purchases will be allowed to be made.  How long will the Penalty APR be in place, even if you do make the payments?  It could be up to forever, or as long as you hold the card.

They note that "As a valued customer, we encourage you to continue to make your payments by the due date to avoid penalties".

We have paid off our monthly balances for years (the points earned from credit cards have paid for any number of flights), so I had no idea what the current going rate is.  Turns out it is between 21.24% and 23.24% for purchases (that do not, apparently, miss payments).

I can only imagine the bank - I presume all the others are doing the same thing - is trying to get in front of what they see as a major failure of repayment coming in the not too distant future.  '

Which is actually pretty telling about what industry - not the people that do not have to bear the brunt of bad decisions - thinks the near future will be like.

Biopharmaceuticals And Medical Devices: A General Overview I (Drugs)

FOTB (Friend Of This Blog) Leigh from Five Acres and A Dream made the following comment in my update on Week 4 of Hammerfall 3.0:

"Being in the "retired category of folks myself, I feel really out of the loop in understanding such things, but I have to ask why your particular industry seems to be struggling so.  I mean (probably naively), it's in the medical/health care arena, and people always need these things, so it would seem that the demand for the supply should keep the industry thriving.  I'm guessing the answer is extremely complicated but it's one of those things that just doesn't make sense."

It is a fair question - after all, the Pharmaceutical/Biotechnology/Medical Device Industry impacts almost everyone at some point (if you have used an aspirin or a bandage, you have participated).  Hopefully I can shed some illumination.  

For reference how I know about this: I have over 25 years of experience in the industry in Manufacturing, Quality, and Project Management had have worked for almost every type of manufacturer (pharmaceutical, biologic, medical device) for products being developed, products in the approval process, and approved products.

I will start with Biopharmaceuticals and then move to Medical Devices.

(Note 1:  This is a very generalized description of the process.  There is a lot of underlying details and processes which, while important, would rapidly spiral of control.)

(Note 2:  For the purposes of this discussion,  I will just use "Drugs" to describe both pharmaceuticals and biologics.)

The most important thing to remember about all of this is that all Drugs in the U.S., be they small molecule (e.g., generated by chemical or "pharmaceutical") or large molecule (generated by biologic process,  or "biologics") are regulated by U.S. Law.  The history of how we got here is long, but suffice it to say in our day, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for ensuring that all drugs are safe and effective.  The origins of this authority are found in the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and have been expanded ever since.  The regulations for drug manufacture (and much of biologic manufacture) is found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 21, Parts 210 and 211 (and part 600 for certain biologics).  

Unlike International Standards like the International Standards Organization (ISO) or the International Committee on Harmonization (ICH), these regulations must be complied with (as opposed to the standards, which must be conformed to) - unless the standards have been taken into U.S. law as a consensus standard (which many have been).  Every nation has their own set of regulations that must be complied with:  for example, if you are going to sell products in the U.S. and Europe, you have two sets of regulations to comply with.  Often these are similar, but sometimes there are differences which can be significant and must be planned for.

Thus everything that has to do with drug development and drug manufacture is regulated.  The closer one gets to submission for approval, the more regulated things become.

The second most important thing to remember is that all Drugs have side effects.  Every single one.  Drugs are thus evaluated on a risk/benefit basis: does the benefit of a drug outweigh the risks and impacts?  Everyone is familiar with the impact of chemotherapy on the individual in terms of visible impacts (loss of fast growing cells like hair follicles) and not quite as visible impacts (loss of appetite, nausea, loss of ability to taste, lowered immune resistance).  In this case, the benefit (fighting cancer) outweighs the impacts and risk (all the physical impacts above and, frankly, dying of an infection due to a lowered immune system).

Drugs all start in a lab.  There is a promising compound or a significant unmet need that drives scientists to look for a solution.  After going through hundreds or even thousands of compounds (via lab screening or computer models), they discover one which (maybe) has an effect on a condition on a medical condition.  Most likely it is perceived as a novel impact, as "me-too" drugs have a higher bar to succeed in the market.  Also, multiple labs may be working on the same condition, so the development becomes a race to be first (for a novel compound) or a race to be more effective (where a drug already exists for a condition).

Once a compound is identified, it has to be tested to verify that it has the effect that scientists think it has.  This is done in several ways - in silico ("in silicon", or using computer models). in vitro (literally "in glass", or under controlled laboratory conditions with the target cells or molecules), in vivo ("in the living" or using live animals (only, at this point - live humans come later),  Generally the progression is from in silico (where available) to in vitro (cell studies) to in vivo (animal testing).  At the same time as the product is being tested, a basic manufacturing process is being designed:  what conditions, what medias and buffers, what manufacturing steps have to be in place to make "the compound".  Not only does the compound need to have an effect, it needs to be able to be manufactured.

Assuming we now have the compound, it has to be put through some level of paces to make sure it is worth moving forward with.  Typically the product will be characterized (to learn all they can about it) and placed against a set of criteria that will define if the product meets the anticipated needs of the criteria identified (sometimes called "Target Product Profile") and can be manufactured.  If it meets both criteria, it will move forward (if not, of course, it gets discontinued).   At the point (or slightly before), small scale lots (pilot lots) will be manufactured and animal testing starts.

No-one I know of in the industry is fond of animal testing (also called "Non-Clinical Laboratory" Testing), but the other option at this stage is "testing straight in people", which for some pretty strong historical reasons is a bad idea.  A species which simulates the human system or condition to be tested is selected (typically starting with mice and ending with non-human primates, but other species animals may be used based on the nature of the disease or condition being evaluated) and the product tested per a protocol.  Often, necropsy is performed and the data reviewed, looking for 1) Efficacy and 2) Impact to to the physical systems.  Pharmacokinetics (the movement of the drug through the body) and Pharmacodynamics (the biological, physiological, and molecular impact of the drug on the body) are measured.  For this testing, the controlling regulation is 21 CFR Part 58, Good Laboratory Practice for Non-Clinical Studies (also referred to as GLP).  These test can be either non-GLP (for general data generation or proof of concept) or GLP (required to move the product into clinical trials).

All of this does not come cheaply, of course.  Scientists require labs, and labs required equipment and reagents and personnel to run them.  Small manufacturing lots need a pilot plant internal to the company or an external contract manufacturing organization (CMO) to manufacture them.  And Non-Clinical laboratory studies need to be conducted:  as of last year, a small mouse study ran $250,000 at a minimum and a non-human primate study $1.3 million.  Generally there is more than one mouse study and a minimum of one major animal study (such as non-human primates).   Add to that that scheduling for these studies is anywhere from 4 months (for mice) to 9 months or more (for non-human primates).

If helpful for reference, products that I have worked on to get to this point - not including internal overhead for personnel, lab space, equipment, etc. - have cost between $2 million and $4 million.  Just to get to the point of possibly using it in an early clinical trial.

Assuming all of this data indicates 1) There is some benefit; and 2) The benefit outweighs the impact, and 3)  The compound can probably be manufactured,  the compound will likely be moved to scaled manufacture and clinical trials of the compounds in humans (which we will review tomorrow).

In The City

 On New Year's Eve, for the first time in over 25 years, The Ravishing Mrs. TB and I went to a New Year's social event out in the public.

As it turned out, it was a bit of a fluke:  my sister and her family had come to New Home to celebrate an anniversary and gave us tickets to the event as our Christmas gift (they were attending as well).  Not necessarily the sort of thing I attend (regularly or otherwise), but even I am open to a new experience once in a while.

The event, for the record, was pretty much what I expected it to be. On the bright side, it was a 1920's themed event and people definitely dressed up for it, which was pleasant.  Also rather cool to behold were couples in their 60's and 70's out dancing and obviously enjoying themselves (and in love).  The music was loud to start with and got louder.  Our tickets included all the alcohol one could drink (for the record, I had one glass of cabernet and a glass of champagne at midnight) and a rather sad trickle of snacks that was...well, at least they warned us it was "while supplies last".

I may or may not have even danced a bit.

But to go to this event, of course, we had to go downtown.

My images of "downtown" and "The City" were rather blurry growing up. My memories very early on were mostly the song from Petula Clark, "Downtown" (perhaps obviously in its post release days as part of a Reader's Digest music compilation), which included lines like "Listen to the music of the traffic in the city" and "Linger on the sidewalks where the neon lights are pretty".  Old Home was a small town (which had an actual downtown back in the day, sans neon lights and traffic), but sometimes we would go to Capital City.  

Capital City consisted (in my childhood world) mostly of the Capital grounds, where we would go and feed squirrels, and the zoo, and historical sites and very occasionally, a shopping mall.  Every year as well for a number of years growing up we would to to The Big City for a medical appointment (I had a condition where I just walked on the balls of my feet; it is better, but you can now always tell by my wear patterns on my shoes), which would include a visit to A Major Tourist Site or a very cool museum and park.  In those days I was hazy about the environment of the cities themselves; my memories are mostly of the experiences, not the surroundings.  

Except people. I remember a lot of people.

New Home is one of those "up and coming places" which is in a race to destroy itself and its uniqueness in order to be fashionable and relevant to the world around it.  Even in our time here, skyscrapers have soared into downtown, bringing apartment buildings and condos and upscale stores.  Land is actually so valuable that older buildings sell and are torn down, replaced by large squares of apartments with chic upscale restaurants and stores underneath, wedged in between older buildings that somehow manage to cling to their location out of nostalgia or sheer spite.

This started in downtown, but the "improvement" is working its way west to the upscale housing and meeting upscaling working down from the North. Only the eastern half of the city "remains" in its pre-center of the universe status and even there, pockets of "the future" are now emerging.

The Eastern half, of course, is where we stayed.

Human urine is a smell that, much like marijuana, once you know it you never forget it.  And that was the smell that greeted us as we walked from the parking lot to our hotel and then to the restaurant to dinner.

This part of the city is right on the razor's edge between new and old:  on one side - a clear, demarcating invisible line, is "the future".  On the other side are buildings - bars, tattoo parlors, low end restaurants, the occasional unique store - in buildings that for the most part are clearly from early in the previous century.  In some cases the word "crumbling" is as kind characterization.

The homeless are here, wedged in between bars and restaurants:  sleeping in doorways, sitting on corners, rolled up in blankets with carts nearby. Some speak up, asking for change, others just watch you go by.  

Patches of marijuana smell rise up like isolated rain clouds, vendors demonstrating the value of hemp in ways legal and not-so legal.  Music spills over from walls of enclosed patios or from open windows of bars.  We are still early: the roving bands of the younger set, coming for drink or amusement or to be seen will be out long after we have gone to our party.  But the street is even now blocked off and people are moving up and down lanes that saw traffic earlier in the day; luckily if they are weaving, there is far less danger.

It is not that I ever felt unsafe:  the sun was up, the lights were on, and I am aware enough and wary enough that I am at best a troublesome mark if perhaps an underweight easy one.  And certainly given the season, it is unlikely our local politicians or local law enforcement are interested in having high profile issues on New Years; The police were out and in force.

It is always a problem, of course.  Cities and counties bemoan the fact of development that wipes away their unique qualities even as they greedily stick out their hands to gain the income from increase property taxes and higher end taxes that come with increased tourism and sales.  They placate their inner guilt with development projects that in theory are civic minded but never seem to actually preserve the uniqueness of what they had; parks and community centers and monuments to their own glory are pale reflections of what used to be.

Culture, once unmade, can only rarely be recaptured.

It is not often that I go to any city or downtown, and there is a high likelihood that I will not see this downtown - at least at night - for the rest of our time here.  Not just because of the public safety, although that is a legitimate concern.  It is the reality that, hidden behind the rising towners and shining spires and self-congratulatory plaudits of the modern city lies the decay of modern life, pushed off to the sides and quietly tolerated as the cost of relevancy.

I do not remember this in the cities of my childhood; perhaps it was there and I simply missed it.  But I surely cannot see any city - at least any American city - with anything but this lens now.  The rot - but really the smell of old urine, all of the failures of urban life contained - is not something one hurries back to see.