Has our culture's obsession with innovation led us to neglect the fact that things also need to be taken care of?
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
If you'd like to listen to free economic radio without ads the place to do that? Is sticker premium five dollars a month and you can get free month trial by going to stick your premium dot com and use a promo code freak. You also get access to all our bonus. Episodes and you'll be supporting our show to that sticker premium: dot, com, promo code, freak thanks, hey they're, packets listeners. We ve been hard at work, producing all kinds of new episodes and special series, which will be hearing in the coming weeks, sometimes so labour intensive that we need to take the week off
a new episode and put out something from the archive. That's what we're doing this week, we always try to find something that we really think you'd want to hear again or if you aren't a fanatical every episode listener, something we think is really worth hearing for the first time. Today's episode fits that description. It's called in praise of maintenance hope you enjoy a while back. I got obsessed with the notion of maintenance. Really notion of how much time maintenance takes. You go to the gym to maintain your body, so it can do which needed to do maybe go to a doctor and a dentist in a therapist to you spend a third, your life's leaping your brain can do it. It needs to do and think about all the time and resources that go
into maintaining your work, life leading them memos productivity, apps course. There's also your personal life. To maintain. I get so obsessed with the burden of all this maintenance that I decided to precisely track how many minutes funding of each day and different forms of maintenance verses. All the other things I was trying to accomplish after just a couple days. I quit this ridiculous exercise because it had become just another maintenance task that kept me from doing the stuff. I really want to be doing. I decided that maintenance was simply a curse had become outdated, that unless I thought about it, the happier I'd be, and then I read something they changed. My mind completely are thesis. Basically, is that culture is obsession with innovation and high has led us to neglect maintenance and maintain ers. Today, on for economics, radio in praise of maintenance
because it is not only a need for a certain nobility in taking care of what you already created. And maybe we shouldn't look at maintenance as the enemy of. I think, a great nation to walk into gum at the same time, for ten we I'm happy from W and Y see studios. This is for economic, radio, the podcast that explores the hidden side of everything. Here's your house, Stevens Abner. There is a digital met
being called a on a e o n that publishes essays about ideas in culture. Just as I was having my personal crisis about the burden of maintenance, I came across a fascinating peace. In an called hail, the maintain hers, the subtitle capitalism excels at innovation, but is failing at maintenance and from lives is maintenance that matters more ok, I'm leavin saw- and my name is Andy Russell. They are the co authors of the an essay Vincent teaches at Virginia Tech, I'm trained as a historian, and most of my work looks at the relationship between government policy and science and technology. Russell is also a historian with a focus on technology and governance. He's dean of the College of arts and Sciences at Suny Poly.
Nick Institute. He invincible had already come to believe that the american embrace of innovation had led to hear a quote them: a mountain of dubious scholarship and magical thinking, and then Walter Isaacson published a book called the innovators how a group of hackers geniuses in geeks created the digital revolution. Basically, Andy wrote me in a friend a kind of joke email saying we should answer with a book called the maintainer is how bureaucrats Standards, engineers and introvert create technologies that kind of work most of the time, and then we just decided delay it out really clearly in, and I say so examining where innovation rhetoric came from, what we call innovation speak and then laying out a or grounded vision of human life with technology alaskan impossibly broad question sort with how
much are we, I guess, hurting ourselves or missing out on society wise globally. It gets more impossible answered by the moment by failing to appreciate the value of maintenance at the expense of innovation. good question its abroad question one thing that we insist that important isn't: that we need to do only maintenance and get rid of innovation. We both appreciate innovation and creativity and new stuff. So there's no argument there. I think in paying. more attention to maintenance and maintains its really signalling fifteen values, away from glittery new things, consumer culture in those sorts of things and toward work towards labour towards maybe even sacrifice in the form of of taxes or effort to sustain society and to pay a little bit more respect to the people. Whose jobs do that you know they're, not superstars? There does grinding in our day to day, but I guess one of my counters
that argument, and maybe I've just been brainwashed by the innovation crowd is that well, one of the promises of technology is that it would eliminate the need for much her. In some cases, all of that kind of hand made maintenance. So if you're talkin about something literally like a cleaning person, a janitor someone who comes along to a public restroom in an airport, you know eight slash twelve fifteen times a day to clean it up I think wool. Don't I want the much vaunted self cleaning bathroom that was still he be here by now, wouldn't that technology, if it worked well, be better because it would I do a good job and be not require people to do that kind stuff work. So why are you making the argument that kind of work is so important? Is it really a moral argument? It is a moral argument, that's true, but I think we also need to just take stock of where we're at
We live in a moment where lots of people a writing and talking about robots and artificial intelligence and all these machines. And technologies, they're gonna come along in replace drudgery right. We're not gonna happen worry about that stuff anymore. But United show you movies, put out by general motors from nineteen fifty five that show the kitchen of the future. That's not gonna involve any labour for women right and that didn't come true and we have to be sober and say yes, these things might come and that wouldn't be bad ADI great. But we can't pretend that we can just forget it. but all the labour. That's going right now and is probably gonna. Can you going on for the foreseeable future I always think about. What's new people always
about what can be name. That is the Harvard economist, Larry Summers who served as the President of Harvard as the? U S: Treasury, Secretary chief economist of the World Bank and its President Obama top economic adviser, people always think more about, how new ground can be broken, then they think about. How existing institutions can be sustained or existing for Ilities can be maintained. It Lee it's too constant tribe, where. We under invest in old things than old things, disappoint us. Then we feel the need for new things than to satisfy that for new things. We under invest more in old things, the cycle goes on you see it in the fact that we pay forty cents, the equivalent of forty cents a day
olenin gasoline taxes for extra repairs do the fact that we're not mean in our highways right. see it in air traffic control system in the United States that still uses obsolete technologies and doesn't use gps and, as a consequence, we all and more time with their true delays, we burn huge that's more energy. We take greater safety then we need to You see it in developing countries where there are always Building new facilities, but then years later, this facility said a sense of DIS, repair. I think the fetters of novelty and the like. glamour of me. Caning in sustaining things. You, a besetting problem.
One very important area where you see this in the area of philanthropy wherever they always wants to start a new institution to do something new and then being analysed and then have others fonder institution. will not everybody can be the one who levers other money. Some have to delivered. So I think it as lead to a fragmentation it does led to returns, are lower than they need to be it in cases. the? U S public sector it can lead to tragic under investment. Ok, so let's do a brief history of maintenance will talk about our cities. Our homes, our infrastructure, even how modern investors think about maintenance, verses, innovation. Let's start way back here,
certainly Rome understood engineering and infrastructure was a huge part of making its city function and it not only invested, that in Rome but exported it elsewhere, but Ed Glaser, another harboured economist, so sewerage starts with it. A maximum in the sixth century, before the common era and that's associated with the last of the dark when kings, the Etruscans, the cloak Maxima, was one of the world's first sue systems it was maintained. There were people like Cato the elder, who is a particular fame for uttering that Carthage must be destroyed. Belinda Carthage GO asked at the end, every speech. He was also heavily involved in water and sewage. They this a single minded passion for the for the good of the republic. Translated to caring about infrastructure and made it one of his his pet themes? It was also an Augustine theme is well run
I just wanted to be remembered for taking a city of brick and leaving a city of marble, but he was also attended. To the water and sewerage maintenance side of things. Of course, Rome. Also interesting and that they had they weren't rich by modern standards may be perks. The income in modern dollars around fifteen hundred, but they had remarkable government capacity. Glaser, we should say, is an expert on cities and also thinks that cities are when the best things that humans have ever come up with. Is the author of a book called triumph of the city? How our greatest invention makes us richer, smarter, greener, healthier and happier if, at all of these old imperial cities, had remarkable government passed That's all you got to be an imperial setting out of a government that was able to subdue all your neighbors, so Julius Caesar was actually able to help the roads function by stopping wheeled traffic from entering the city for the first ten hours of every day, which helps in the making side as well. That's not a substitute for four repaving that roads suits
is are inherently dense, which means that a problem, whether its trash or crime or bad streets or sidewalks can affect a lot of people in a hurry to talking about the importance of maintenance, especially physical infrastructure maintenance, especially in a city. Oh, absolutely with both the fact that any problem can be magnified and the fact that just proximity itself creates downsides ride. Proximity means that some aspects Syria are more likely to affect you. Proximity means We're all sharing the same matter. Road space and consequently trained gobble up the same real estate and and facing the downside of congestion and, of course, density also makes it easier for one person to to steal from one another. and on top of course, creating congestion or those drivers and city streets where down the infrastructure, which is why we so often think of city streets is being places that are full of potholes. Are full of other problems, so cities need interested sure of a variety of different forms and that in
a structure needs to be maintained and making sure that you have the institutions in place that can provide at least a modicum of maintenance is really crucial to making city life's work. Glaser recently spent time in the Philippines, How Manila deals with sewage short answer, not nearly as well as ancient Rome, these are sent tanks that flow right through pipes right into a sort of mean corridors the course through the city and often end up in the bay and the septic tanks are typically in the house beneath the kitchen. apps outside maybe on the on the driveway and the big project that the water companies which took care of the sewerage than the septic tanks were involved in doing is trying to get people to clean out their septic tanks and the people. Wasn't that the
water companies want willing to, provided the people often didn't want it right to they'd. Let me go thirty or forty years without any form of cleaning up the septic tanks without any dislodging, and the people were pushing against having a cleaned up because to get to it, you need to tear up someone's kitchen and they didn't see the upside of of moving it. It really and consequently, that a whole public health issue related threat that more filth spewing out These pipes into the common areas, so that problem of maintenance is really huge in this area. So in a case like that, what's a solution other than building infrastructure like aseptic, in a way originally that it doesn't require. He no disrupting your life later on certainly designing infrastructure from the beginning, so that it is maintenance friendly, is surely the right way to go as the lower. The costs can possibly be.
Before the large scale entity that has demanded, but also for the individual, the has to put up with the inconvenience that clearly important but of that when you're looking at maintenance, that's required to keep a city healthy, I'm a big fan of some form of regulation and fine in place. Look I mean I'm up. As you know, I'm Chicago PETE, DE. I think lots of areas of our lives are overregulated. I think entrepreneurship is over regulated, but there are areas like maintaining public health, where I think Just find of regulations and small finds that are put in place. A people if they dont do basic task like dislodging that are required for the public, good I asked Glaser to name a modern city that gets maintenance right. The meritocracy that has Singapore quite impressive, on maintenance site. You
This is no longer a new city, and yet it still feels clean still feels well taken care of, and I think part of it is just they have enough smart people in government for whom this is their job and that they continue to focus on this I think it's an open question ass to whether not all the shiny things that are being built in China will, where all that well or will be protected and still have to have to say on that. So when it happens well, whether in modern Singapore or ancient Rome is more a function of design. That was able to be maintained relatively easily or cost effectively, or is it a kind of conscious devotion to maintenance? that many individuals or nations just fail to factory in or budget well. I think in both the sample Enron case, their leaders whom make it their job. And some in the case of Cato presently thought that there was popularity be gained by sticking up for the older.
Women from maintaining roman virtues, including decent infrastructure in most of the roman infrastructure, looks pretty simple for a modern perspective in concert. It would have been easier to maintain them than a more complicated infrastructure, but that that raises sort of larger technological change issue it, which is that the as the world becomes more complicated infrastructure, becomes complicated there more ways that can potentially go wrong and maintenance of anything becomes even more important. So in a simpler world, maintenance was easier to get add that it is in the more common world of today, I think we should be talking about what The value of engineering leave Insel again from Virginia Tech, the value of engineering is much more than just innovation and new things focusing on taking care of the world other than just creating the new nifty thing. That's going to solve all our problems. If you look at what
engineers do in the world like seventy to eighty percent of them spend most of their time just keeping things going right, and so this comes down to engineer, education to when were forcing entrepreneurship and innovation, as the message is that were just kind of skewing reality for young people and not giving them a real picture when also not valuing the work that they're, probably gonna, do in their life. That seems to me just to be kind of bad idea. So all you guys need to do is make maintenance sexy for the american public and for politicians and policymakers. Do you have any plans? Are you gonna pull that, Yeah we're gonna come up with some slogans. Like means ovation have, but we're gonna have professional wrestlers dance in front of bridges in there off every four years
american society of civil engineers puts out report card on physical infrastructure in the United States on the most recent report card. Our overall grade was a deep plus of the sixteen categories that got a letter grade. Only our rail system scored higher than a sea. It gotta, be transit, got a d, minus roads, Adee drinking water, Adee bridges, see plus. I went back to Ed Glaser about this lousy report card. This is the United States of America, economic superpower. So what the? What? How has this hat?
and where I think the first thing we should do is we should be a little bit wary about infrastructure groups that issue report cards that up with whose ultimate bottom line is that trillions must be spent in their industry. But that being said, there are obviously real issues around America infrastructure, and what I worry about is that the answer to this will be just big checks caught in Washington, and I cannot imagine the thats the right solution. I can certainly point to a bridge that crosses the trolls river near me, which has been going on was initiated in part because the promise of a federal dollars that is awfully hard seed, a value that we got from four years, option for allegedly maintaining this bridge and improving its a remarkable and not a very happy tail. Let's Larry Summers again, the Andersson Bridge connects Harvard Square with the city of Boston. It connects different parts of the Harvard Campus it Sir seventy five yards from my office. The bridge is too
thirty two feet long. It has been under repair now for four and a half years to put that in some kind of perspective, Julius Caesar Builder. Bridge over a span of the Rhine that wasn't two hundred and thirty two feet over a thousand feet And he did it is nine days, and that was what the technologies that were available before Christ today We surely should be able to do much better. In fact, two hundred years ago, the bridge we're Repair and have been preparing for four and a half years was built in less than one year from nothing with much earlier technologies. So what For this delay, the delay was a combination of environmental requirements. Historical can requirements and just plain incompetence, we're permitting issues, multiple redesigned and, in addition,
time overran. There were big cost overruns, which Larry Summers points out, doesn't even factor in all the costs you do calculations the add up all the thousands of cars that go across it. You value the time that people suffer in delay, because the bridges in disrepair, because the process of preparing it takes forever. You think rat with people's x worth you know, even if you value it at fifteen dollars an hour, and I certainly pay much more than fifteen dollars an hour to avoid being stuck in traffic jams, often and ends up that big infrastructure estimates will pay for themselves right out. Just in terms of avoiding the delays that people suffer the Andersson Bridge repair. Finally, was completed, there are meanwhile thousands of other bridge in the. U s that need repair. Summers argues that forestalling such maintenance has allowed.
Dragged on the economy than you might think. I think infrastructures, the right in the short run for the United States, because it puts people to work in a substantial scale, the right thing in the medium term, because it expands the capacity of our economy and it's the right thing in the long run, because it takes a burn north of our children We will eventually, as a country, fix Kennedy, airport it'll just be much more expensive if we delay and the cost of fixing Kennedy Airport will compound that a far greater rate than the one and a half per cent in bonds, we print ourselves that represents the yield today. On long term, U S, government was the New York. Airports are often used as being the textbook examples of declining imagined infrastructure. It's a glaser again. Everyone has an awful experience at one of them: the thicken. With count of that that chaos that J of cake
Be these airports are complicated. They sit on city land, their run by the Port Authority of New York, New Jersey, which answers to two different governors and is responsible for a lot of other things. It is a very big and sprawling agency. has structural problems that almost surely need reform. Probably the airports actually should be split up and made into separate completely separate agencies. None of that reform will occur if the authorities simply gets more ash infusions from Washington. That is a recipe for non reform, not for reform, and there is absolutely no reason, Whitey. Well, hailed. Travellers who go in and out of J F K Airport can't pay for that infrastructure themselves. There is absolutely no reason why that infrastructure needs to be subsidized by ordinary taxpayers in any way,
so now I'm a hundred per cent on board the need for a massive infrastructure. Overhung, the? U S! I think, though, that if we go down the route of saying that that just means big items in the budget, we go completely the wrong direction. We need to take a hard look at institutional reform, we need to figure out how federal, nudges and federal money can be used in a way. That's productive, raw than simply a recipe for maintaining the status quo. Talk about that but the more you wrote a piece for Bloomberg view a few years ago. Called spending won't fix what ails you s infrastructure. You argue that american infrastructure needs quote intelligent reform, not floods of extra financing or quicksand, dreams of New moon adventures or high speed railways to nowhere. So what is intelligent reform in your view and feel free to be both general and specific, so my favorite way of paying for infrastructure other than user fees,
he's with local property taxes or with property development, even so Hong Kong's mass transit system funds itself by developing skyscrapers on top of new subway lines It is to keep the fees low because it can do well enough by extracting the value that commuters are willing to pay to be right there. So linking up, I think, in the space of public transit linking up the payments, the developers are willing to pay, let's say to build very high rise buildings near subway, doubts with funding for the infrastructure, and I don't actually want the Americas trends business rebuilding skyscrapers on their own, but I'm happy for them to get some flow of tax revenues in exchange for the ability to build higher buildings. Next subway stops. That would seem like a desirable thing in the case of roads. I think the key is embracing.
like congestion pricing, whenever its at all feasible anytime, you build a new highway. You really want to slap a fee on it from the beginning, because this is the sort of political endowment effect that seems to be very strong, which is that, if, if I take a road that free and then slap a charge on it, flapper a toll on it, you know you have rights, straight. People are incredibly angry. It's a political nightmare! If you introduce a new road that has a toll from the beginning people, not they made up pleased about it entirely, but they think that that's they never saw that road. Before that road comes with a told. They can accept that. So what role does Glaser seeing this for the federal government? I think actually, the best role for the federal government in infrastructure is actually being the business of inspecting rating local infrastructure projects to check whether not the maintenance is good to publicize when the the bridges are unsafe and then perhaps to have federal
neither its targeted not to new projects but specifically to maintenance, prep structured as a matching funds for local monies. So it's a structure in which we think actually having it more local buying a little at the beginning is probably helpful, but you inevitably come up against a fundamental budgeting question: how to balance the cost of maintenance with the cost of making new things cost of innovating, unlawful maintenance or more for infrastructure, but I don't think they should be framed as the enemy of innovation. Mary summers, again, I think we want to be able to produce a new ways. We want new products, want this is to organise themselves In new ways we want me place in the world that has the most cutting edge science? We want, when new uses of software new uses of artificial intelligence or developed. We want them to happen here, so I, Do you believe, in a very strong case for infrastructure investment, but I'm gonna be careful about
saying that I'm so how against innovation. I think nation can walk and into gum at the same time, coming up on economics. Radio. how innovation and maintenance compete for our money. Large public companies in mature markets ten to invest primarily on maintenance, and often they don't have the additional capital. You need to do large innovation, how innovate and maintenance compete for our time. I started out with the assumption ticklish, change, had reduced women's labour so much that they could enter the workforce and took me back three years did
discover that I was wrong and I finally get serious about some personal maintenance. It's all about privatisation, one step at a time, Ruth Schwartz poem is an historian of science. Technology and medicine retired faculty, The University of Pennsylvania, like leaving so and Andy Russell Cowan, thinks we put too much emphasis on innovation. They are basically very few there are a huge number of maintains and waste paying attention to it. You begin to understand how essential it is my life has been used to say, and I used to think it was a job, but I think now that he is absolutely right. around the world
and we made kind of reason dependence on them. In fact, that may be the larger part of Why we don't pay attention because we really would like to think of ourselves as independent of all of that, but we're not. We are very depend on a lot of people. don't have Phds were very depend on a lot of people don't have, I still diplomas calendar a lot of research on one particular form of maintenance housework. The name of my as more work for mother the iron is of household technology, from the open hearth to the microwave. That's right. She found the home inventions that we're supposed to free up. Women from labour often lead to Morley I started out with the assumption that technological, in the house are mainly the electrification of household reduce women's labour so much that they could enter the workforce, married women's labour and entered the workforce and took me back three years to discover.
And I was wrong wrong- how their two components of worker one is time, but the other is what we might call metabolic labour and most the new technologies saved me Pollack labor. It was much harder to wash clothing when you were doing it by scrubbing the clothing, honest scrubbing board and knowing the water from the stove too. A vessel you were using too laundered. Then it was- Do it when you had a washing machine and running water. There's no question about that, but with more and more machines to help with chores housewives can to spend more time doing their chores a whirl America, the standard routine for underwear was that you slept in it a new changed it, maybe a couple of times a year, so
in the modern, let's say: Post World war, two standard household Firstly, more wash gets done than in any way this time in history and even for the model woman or man who does work outside the home there. Women who are and men to in some cases who doing what sociologists have come to call a double day there doing almost as much maintenance work, as their grandmothers might have. Donald grandfathers might have done if their grandfathers were living on farms they're doing almost as much unpaid made its work as they are paid work by hours. That's an interesting, perhaps humbling lesson from the past that innovation doesn't necessarily decrease the time we spend on maintenance, which brings us back to how we're supposed to.
I don't mean dollars, but in time for the maintenance we need to do and if we don't want to do it, I think that there can be a false dichotomy when it comes to maintenance, witches Maintenance is required clearly, but in order to effectively do maintenance. I think you need to innovate. That's Martine Casado he's a general partner with the venture capital firm, Andriessen, Horwitz Was it a venture capitalists, your looking for opportunities to invest in that you believe, will be large opportunities. I wanted to hear from someone like Casado, because it struck me that if some start up goes to venture capitalists with some terrible but innovative idea would probably still generate a lot more interest than a start up with an excellent idea. The deal with just maintenance, so with crumbling bridges and outdated airports in all the rest and federal government. That often
Get out of its own way? Are the private equity markets really is skewed toward innovation? As I imagined I think, as a super interesting question. In fact, I think that public markets have done a really good job of fact. In maintenance into its expectations on values of companies. In other words, this one pool of money, including the stock markets, that values maintenance, whether it's for physical infrastructure or increasingly digital the structure and there's another pool of money, including that from venture capital firms the seeks out innovation, large public companies in mature markets tend to invest primarily on maintenance, and often they don't have the additional capital. You need to do large innovation, so, for example, between say two thousand and eleven and two thousand and fifteen growth companies. Companies that are like fast growing areas spent too
times more than legacy companies on research and development. So as companies mature, the majority their investment in the spend is in and of maintaining existing technologies and so forth. This is largely because of the pressure from the public markets, and so then the way there. These kind of legacy enterprises, innovate is through inorganic crawl through they buy often start ups written. So if you look at the same group over the same period using ok you they say we have a legacy enterprise and the kind of annual growth enterprise over the last year, between say, two thousand and eleven and two thousand fifteen legacy, enter ices spent something like tat times more about nine times more than the growth enterprises to acquire innovation. So visa part what's happening here. What's happening. Is the public market sailors and if you are in a mature company, we know that that will keep the lights out. We know that that's what you need to do to get predictable returns and public markets like predictable, turns correct
however: there can be another pool of money and, other ecosystem that can take the risks right, and these are start. Ups like venture capital, so we make these very risky investments on these companies that me be widely successful or not, and it is up to the growth enterprises on whether they want to buy them after this is now or not- and I think the public market has created this bifurcation nicely in an economic fashion where they're saying yes, we don't want you to innovate. In fact, we're gonna keep your margins fix, you can't innovate, and so they do invest in what they currently doing versus the more private startup side. Casado also points out that, behind all those sexy high tech firms that attract billions of investment dollars, there's a lot of unsexed infrastructure that makes it all possible. Think about like the brick and mortar of computing near the core. I t infrastructure, which
your idea infrastructure as a four trillion dollar market, its massive. Every time you go to Amazon, you are connecting to this massive building. Things like, like football stadium, size massive building, an inside that building you ve got tons of storage. Raise that store the data you ve got tons of computing power. You ve got tons of networking equipment that connects it altogether. You ve got a whole bunch of software that just provides kind of the underpinnings for the application itself. You ve got databases, you ve got security equipment. I mean all of that is infrastructure
not often, but once in a while. I take the time to marvel at the fact that so many people do so much work behind the scenes to keep the world humming, whether it's the internet, the roads, electricity grid, you name it course. It's easy to point out the failures, their visible, whereas the bulk of maintenance is practically invisible, but in praise of maintenance. Let me just say this: its necessary work. It's hard work and for people like me, were always in a hurry to make the next new thing can be really unappealing work, which means it sometimes need help. So I went out and got some help I like to think and I'm a fairly orderly person, but my office has become increasingly crowded with a small mountain of files,
note books and photos and audiotape and other byproduct from years of writing, making music and so on, and they want to throw it out, but I also didn't want it to become increasingly index possible ever larger mountain. So I sought professional help. We'll tell us more about that. Chris, the cynic runs a company in Brooklyn called AV, preserve. They help all sorts of institutions manage. Their archives. They worked with Yale University Museum of modern art. nations and the New York Public Library? Well, first, a big inventoried inventoried, their audio video, unfair holdings. Would we, however, how big thousand items how many operate thousand items, I'm not quite the same league as in Europe, public library, but my desire is similar to maintain a history to make it more organised, more accessible, hopefully more useful, what is the ideal outcome of this project that you envision? They want
we think that I've ever Document your created, I kind of want it preserved with differing degrees of accessibility. You know memory is just so narrow and incomplete and bad that when I think about it, I've done or written about or reported on in the past and not written about. I remembered them so incompletely so poorly, that I think it would be really nice to have that preserved. For who knows whatever reasons I want all of that easily and instantly accessible, but I want that point of accessibility to be so easy that everything going forward from today. I can put in the appropriate basket without acquiring mountains, whether for go or virtual, that have to be sorted later, Second, the ultimate vision be able to find everything easily inaccessible. But if we think about that as the ultimate outcome-
Why is that? There is a lot of steps in between there, and here we look at this project. phase one rights than the first steps. Do you have any thoughts on what outcome of this phase, but it what's what's what the fuck As for you and gonna, we finish this meeting like twenty minutes and you say I'll be back tomorrow. I'll take everything and then make next Monday you'll have a hard drive where everything is there? That's that's I mean you asked category b realistic. Now I know that's not what you asked. What's my, what I want to re read me: ok, so Christless cynic persuade me it was. and be so easy, but he started helping me draw up a plan and rights for this is about me. That's it you're losing the two hundred pounds and then stay that way, and he said it wasn't a scary, as I thought I'm sure, fills though it has not twenty it's about privatisation, one step at a time, and so we ve begun with cynic, and
colleagues are doing most of the hard work enumerating and measuring the amount of different media than categorizing by media paper, audio tape, digital audio, etcetera event. Eventually, I sit down with them file box by file box figure out whether and how to preserve a particular thing and how to make it live in a place where I can visit it. Whenever I want the key for me is one thing, then said it's about privatisation, one step at a time, one step at a time, increment, increment in so inspired by this we keep the conversation going on the next episode of economics. Radio, it is called in praise of incrementally we'll talk about. Small steps are necessary to make big changes from the evolution of renaissance part even varies
each innovation in each painting on each step along the way, the piecemeal process to the civil rights movement, followed an incremental pattern. More clean than any other social movement, because the candle belay C p control and can incremental ism help. You win France, probably not It can contribute its next time on finance radio thanks, you listening Economics radio is produced, w my C studios and w productions? This episode was produced by urban Gunjay. Our staff includes Alison Hockenberry Merit Jacob Reg results, be Stephanie, Tam max Miller We Huggins N, N Mildenheim, or you can subscribe to this protest and apple pie. Sticker or wherever you get your bypassed and please come visit for economics. Dot com
Well, you'll find our entire podcast archive, along with the complete transcript of every episode with ever made, which includes music credits and much more.
Transcript generated on 2021-01-21.