Why DIY? In Praise of Inefficient Production

I applaud the growing trend to return to a do-it-yourself (DIY) mentality in the US and across much of the developed world (the undeveloped world never lost this ethic so no return has been necessary).  More and more people are baking bread, cooking their own meals, sewing their own clothes, decorating their own homes, taking their own family portraits, fixing their own plumbing, making their own cheese, mowing their own lawns, making their own cleaning products, raising your own chickens and eggs etc.

This trend toward making things yourself is not limited to the old-timers who grew up that way.  The economic downturn of the last 5 years combined with the power of the internet to spark ideas and provide ready instructions has motivated nearly every demographic group to try their hand at producing a good or service that they previously just purchased.  We are just emerging from decades of such ubiquitous commercialism that there have been generations who have essentially lived their whole lives outsourcing virtually everything in their lives.

Free-Market Capitalism - Great Idea

I am, deep down, a free-market capitalist because it is the system that most fully respects individual's
freedom to choose.  I have also seen first hand the limitations of centrally planned economies.  The collective effect of millions of individuals making free economic choices in their own interest is always smarter (i.e. more efficient at setting prices and creating collective wealth) than any government intervention--no king, committee, or congress is smart enough to be better than a free market at setting prices or creating wealth. Forced redistribution of resources has never made a nation or a people wealthier or stronger.  If we can agree that the best economic system is the one that maximizes wealth for the greatest number of people then we have a yardstick with which to judge Communism, Socialism, and Capitalism.  History shows us that the economies with the greatest freedom for individuals and organizations to make economic choices (e.g. Hong Kong, Singapore, Chile, the USA etc.) have the greatest per capita income and the ones with the least freedom to make economic choices (e.g. Cuba, North Korea etc.) have the least per capita income.  Even income distribution promoted by those who demand "social justice" is better the greater the economic freedom.  Singapore has a thriving middle class and a nice bell-shaped distribution of wealth while a graph showing North Korea's distribution of wealth looks more like a hockey stick (everyone is poor except the elite).

Commercialism - Not So Much

So if I'm such a deep believer in free-market capitalism why am I a contrarian relative to commercialism?  The central idea of commercialism is quite compelling.  It is that commercially created products and services are more efficient to produce and of higher quality than homemade ones (i.e. factory-made provides "higher quality at a lower cost").  The industrial revolution brought about marvelous changes in efficiency, automation, and uniformity (one way people define quality).  The concept known as "economies of scale" meant that since the late 1800s railroads replaced horse wagons for freight delivery, large commercial farming operations replaced family farms, and big bakeries supplanted mom's oven.  So many good things came from those increases in technology.  The price of consumer goods dropped and the selection increased (e.g. the tradition of an orange in your Christmas stocking came from a time when oranges were rare and dear--now they're just a cheap way to fill the stocking), crop yields increased and hunger rates declined.  So what are the downsides of such a compelling idea?

• Commercialism redefines quality as uniformity or predictability but in the process sacrifices taste texture and imagination.  For example there is a world of difference between the taste of a store-bought tomato and one picked ripe from your own vine; or between a piece of "Wonder Bread" and a slice of steaming-hot fresh artisan sourdough; or between a fast-food burger and a sizzling masterpiece hot off your charcoal grill.
• Commercialism creates dependency on others who can then exploit the consumer.  For example now that very few people know how to make their own soap commercial operations can charge a premium for their soap.  By "giving a man a fish" (or better yet selling him one) over and over a consumer product company erases they knowledge of how that man can catch his own fish.  The consumer product company has no commercial interest to "teach a man to fish" so eventually that man and his children become dependent and therefore vulnerable.
• Commercialism creates the illusion that "pleasure = leisure".  It is in the economic interest of a consumer products company to tell you that you'll be happier if you outsource a portion of your production by buying their product or service.  The explicit message is "specialize in what you do best and make a lot of money, and we'll specialize in what we do best so you can buy it with your money and spend the time you save having fun".  There are at least two reasons that that argument is illusory--first the more you spend on "labor-saving" goods and services the more you have to work to earn money to pay for them and less "time off" you have, and second true joy comes from doing something meaningful rather than from "time off".

The Power of Specialization and Efficiency

This notion of specialization was the brainchild of Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856 – 1915) who was an American mechanical engineer who sought to improve industrial efficiency. He is regarded as the father of scientific management and was one of the first management consultants. Taylor was one of the intellectual leaders of the Efficiency Movement and his scientific management consisted of four principles:

1. Replace rule-of-thumb work methods with methods based on a scientific study of the tasks.
2. Scientifically select, train, and develop each employee rather than passively leaving them to train themselves.
3. Provide "Detailed instruction and supervision of each worker in the performance of that worker's discrete task".
4. Divide work nearly equally between managers and workers, so that the managers apply scientific management principles to planning the work and the workers actually perform the tasks.

His central idea was that work can be done much more efficiently by dividing it into discrete functions and then finding or training the ideal resource to specialize in that function.  He was the father of the modern assembly line.  He was brilliant and his influence on the wealth and well-being of individuals and nations ever since is perhaps incalculable.  Peter Drucker says of Frederick Taylor that:

"On Taylor's 'scientific management' rests, above all, the tremendous surge of affluence in the last seventy-five years which has lifted the working masses in the developed countries well above any level recorded before, even for the well-to-do."

Efficiency is wonderful, however...

With a nod of appreciation for the era of prosperity ushered in by Frederick Taylor's ideas we must, as in all things, seek balance.  In the case of commercialism that balance means being willing to live with the inefficiency of personal production in the interest of spending less, learning more, becoming self-sufficient, and getting more joy from life.   The advantages of learning to do things yourself include:

• Family Frugality - you can spend less (way less BTW) by "insourcing" many of the things you formerly purchased.  That means you'll spend more time producing than consuming--stop playing Farmville and do some actual farming!
• Lifetime Learning - along with efficiency specialization creates a rut.  When we only do what we can do well our mind begins to atrophy, we become bored, and we usually end up trying to distract ourselves from the ennui by succumbing to the siren song of hollow hedonism (part of the "pleasure = leisure" myth).  Those who continue to challenge their minds live fuller lives.  Alvin Toffler (the author of Future Shock) wrote:- "The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn."
• Individual Independence - self-sufficiency reduces risk.  When we are dependent on others we too often find ourselves victims of their self-interests (e.g. predatory pricing), or worse yet unable to meet our own needs when they turn out to be unreliable.  After natural disasters like hurricanes many people find themselves completely unable to meet their own or their family's needs.  The most important part of personal and family preparedness is know-how.
• Pleasure = Personal Production - contrary to popular believe happiness has always been greater in the act of creation than in the act of consumption.  There is more than fabulous flavor in a loaf of homemade bread...there is a sublime sense of satisfaction in creating something so beautiful yourself.  There is even greater joy when you fill its creation with love and share it with people that matter to you.  The strangest lesson of my life was that "work" can be funner than "fun".

So now what?  Well, get off the couch and make something!  Shut off the TV and learn to do something new.  Look at the things you buy and ask, "how could I do this myself?"  Your life will be richer, cheaper, more fulfilling, less risky, and happier!