Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Lefty Economics and Paper Towels
The government, always keen to save some of your tax dollars, has done something intriguing at my workplace. Recently, the janitorial contractors have been busy replacing the old paper towel dispensers in bathrooms with new fancy dispensers that magically spit out dead trees at the wave of a hand. Unlike the old dispensers – where people would just grab a wad of towels, dry their hands, and throw away many unused pieces – the new ones provide only what is needed. Or so it would seem.
These technological marvels of dispensation can be set to produce a specific amount of paper per wave of hand. In one building where I work, the janitor did the smart thing and set the length to an adequate level, about 12 inches. This was all fine and dandy until some manager came along and determined that the machine functioned too efficiently, so he limited the distribution by a couple of inches. Now the paper dispensed is inadequate to perform the job, so everyone waves their hand a second time in front of the sensor for a second towel. In the hope of saving two inches of paper per use, this ignoramus managed to raise the average use to 20 inches.
This is, to me, a perfect example of the left’s view of economics: intentions matter, results be damned.
Published in General
I don’t know if she did a TED talk, but didn’t Sheryl Crow settle that matter by admonishing us all to make do (I’m laughing because I surprised mySELF with this pun) with one square?
As for the trees vs. the rest of us, I live a little north of Shelton, where asking for plastic instead of paper at the grocery store will get you escorted to the city limits.
I’ve lived in South America and spent a few months in Africa.
My immune system is strong like bull.
Another germaphobe outed.
If it didn’t violate everything we believe in, footage of some Ricochetti getting in and out of public restrooms would be a hoot! My brother claims to levitate. I believe him.
Y’all remember the hot air dryer joke, right?
DIRECTIONS
1. Push button
2. Rub hands gently under warm air
3. Dry hands on pants
You know I was kidding, right? Ever try to dry your face with a hot air hand dryer?
If that creeps you out then don’t read the remark below:
Did you know that when you are in a public restroom and you can smell someone else’s big dump, that means that molecules from that dump are entering your nose?
Relieved to hear it.
Maybe it’s more commonly seen in the ladies’ room, but I have seen people turn the nozzle upside down to dry their hair. Ew.
I’m surprised the manager didn’t respond by issuing a policy demanding only one hand wave. The government usually seems much more interested in compliance than effectiveness.
It’s actually a private contractor who does the janitorial services. Part of the contract is to provide the consumables, so I can understand the incentive for savings. What I can’t understand is the refusal to admit failure of the actions to achieve the objective, hence the question of whether or not there’s some odd moral thinking going on.
Suggested solution: each paper towel costs 5¢. People will use only as much as they need.
First they came for the quality toilet paper, and I said nothing…
Leftists invert moral issues and economic issues. The amount of paper used, or the level of wages paid, to a leftist these are moral issues. In contrast, whether or not to kill an unborn child is an economic calculation where you weigh the pros and cons and make the decision that is best for you.
Yes. I studied two years in Tibet for this reason, only to fail.
Don’t you just hate economic freedom?
Automatic dispensers are a free market innovation. They must save money or make employees/customers happy. If they do not, then why have them?
Managers are people. People are human, prideful, willful, sinful, fallible – and often responding to market forces and feedback. Auto Dispenser save about 25-30% waste when operated properly.
Auto Dispensers are adjustable. The manager is alleged to have intentionally or accidentally shortened the towels. Employees are unhappy. Employees can speak up. If they don’t, they get what they accept.
This is a lesson in something, but it is not a lesson in lefty economics, per se.
Is this is a story about an employee who cries out, but says nothing to the manager? In that case, the only feed back loop for the manager is how much paper is consumed. If the manager is informed and does not agree or cannot find popular support to increase the size, then take an old sock to dry your hands at work. People make decisions all the time to avoid the product offering at work – they bring their own coffee, drink bottled water and run their own air purifiers. I call these people responsible; some may call them victims of state tyranny.
You are not being forced to buy this short towel. Of course, you could take two, take your own, negotiate a lower price (oh, they are free – now I get it), or speak up and help save money. But that might compromise principles.
Free markets – are not all about the “free.” Caveat emptor. The customer has to participate in product feed back, lest they become part of lefty economics.
For some reason, the sheerness level of the toilet paper at my office is inversely matched by the strength of adhesive applied to that first, anchored square.
You can tell when someone’s had a particularly frustrating encounter with a fresh roll – – it looks like a herd of cats came in and had a party.
That was some first rate, incoherent babble. Please read the post and comments again.
That you present this as a case of a disgruntled employee complaining as opposed to making a broader point about institutional waste proves the following:
Sadly, we have a number of such issues at my work place and raising them only labels one as a whiner.
We have, of course, explained the math to the janitor (the only person from the contractor with whom we interface) and received the response that he is powerless. If he ran the concern up to the manager who made the decision he would be labeled as the whiner and face consequences.
Sorry KP…. I just read your last comment. If the manager is not or will not listen, then we are talking central planning. That is wrong.
But, if he will listen or you can feedback anonymously . . . . then my point was.
Is that a an example of a free market or a command market or a dysfunctional market? My point is simple, until the consumers provide feedback or the provider asks, then there can be no market adjustments.
This is not central planning, state planning, or lefty economics. Customers (users), need to provide feedback. If a product is free, how is the provider to know people are unhappy? Will he decide that because usage is low, people don’t choose to use the product? Will the manager decide because people pull out two towells (20 inches of towel instead of 10) they like it? I don’t know. Right now, the manager is in the dark.
Getting and giving feedback is useful. Even yours when you tell me that the point of “bargain and consideration” is not fully a part of the concept some people apply in any system of exchange. I see it everyday. We try to teach students that markets are not one sided. Free markets are not free – they carry with them accountability and responsibility on both sides. It requires some effort on the part of the consumer.
Consumers in our society shirk their responsibility to use due care and when they do, they run to the government to protect them. Lefty economics would set up a Hand Wiper Protection Commission to prevent this from ever happening again. They would become captive of the industry and pronounce all hand towels are to be no more than 10 inches. That is lefty economics.
Speak up, don’t use them, or refuse to pay for them – oh, again. I forgot they are free.
In the meantime, the consumer can speak up. Just a thought.
Again, you present this as an individual’s grievance, as opposed to an example of how waste occurs.
It struck me as analogous, sort of a living metaphor in miniature of lefty economics.
In this instance the feedback loop has a knot in it. The customer is really the tax payer, ultimately, but good luck engendering enough support to get one tiny contractor servicing the toilets of only one of the many military bases in the nation to save a few rolls of paper towels a year when the money spigot it turned to full blast.
I’m actually friends with the lowest level supervisor, who completely gets the asininity of the manager’s demand, but she also cannot make him see reason.
KP,
I may have missed this earlier in the chain, but the knot is definitely a sign of a dysfunctional market or, if the supplier doesn’t care at all as you report a few posts above, then we are talking no market.
Waste is hard to pin down. If markets are functioning, then they take care of waste. Example, at one time the cost of wood and land fill fees were small. We used to package with wood and then tossed the wood packaging in a dumpster for the land fill. When the cost of wood and land fill fees went up, we converted to recyclable packaging (which I loved because it was safer). In the old days using all that wood seemed bad, but it was in fact cheaper. My point is: sometimes waste is cheaper.
Ironically, when they first developed Auto Dispensers I used one in O’Hara and was surveyed by a paper towel company. That was maybe 25 years ago. I thought this was a pretty good idea and might save paper, avoid chunks of towels being grabbed, unused and tossed (a point you alluded to).
So use two towels until the Kommissariat figures it out! It is probably still less waste than before, but they will never know because there is no market mechanism to tell them.
Thanks!
No, they blow ;-)
The point as I see it is that the user doesn’t care if he takes one 12 inch towel or 2 10 inch towels; they are both free to him. Complaining to the manager has a cost in both time and looking like a complainer over a very small matter.
If we are talking about a retail establishment or, say, the doctors office then I would be 100% positive no customer will register a complaint.
Where I work, we have a paper towel dispenser right next to hot air blowers. We are free to choose which we want to use. I can’t speak for the ladies, but in 14 years I have never heard the hot air blowers turn on in the Men’s room. Really, not once. So, there is little doubt which is preferred by men.
Is saving trees, which is a renewable resource, a good reason to create a law requiring people to use something they consider less desirable? Not in my world.
Push the button on top of the dispenser and open it. There is a simple setting inside that controls the length. Set it to the length you like. It will probably stay there for a long time.
Also there is a setting which makes it either wait until someone puts their hand in front to dispense, or to automatically dispense when the previous one is torn off. Set it to the later. It will jamb much less, since people will not be pulling on the paper while it is moving.
And touch something just hanging around for God knows how long in that nasty air collecting germs?
Since you don’t approve of my first demand for a new law to require that people do the right thing for the environment, than I’m going to suggest a law prohibiting the installation of any and all drying materials and a mandate that everyone must dry hir hands on hir pants or dress as the case may be (gender neutral pronouns were used so as not to offend anyone who doesn’t know which restroom ze is supposed to go into).