Log in

View Full Version : Load factors



Lynx
3rd December 2007, 17:58
Technocrats like to talk about load factors and the benefits they bring. For example, on the production side, to have factories operate near their peak capacity. Or on the consumption side, to share cars instead of private ownership. (Shared cars are operated at a higher load factor than cars that spend most of each day parked, thus reducing the number of cars that need be produced)
A technate would also operate on a 24/7 basis, not 9 to 5, thereby avoiding traffic congestion, and reduce unnecessary employment in retail and financial sectors.

Do you disagree with the arguments in favor of load factors?
What difference could higher load factors make?
Are load factor considerations a part of communist (and capitalist) systems?

Dean
3rd December 2007, 21:51
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 05:57 pm
Technocrats like to talk about load factors and the benefits they bring. For example, on the production side, to have factories operate near their peak capacity. Or on the consumption side, to share cars instead of private ownership. (Shared cars are operated at a higher load factor than cars that spend most of each day parked, thus reducing the number of cars that need be produced)
A technate would also operate on a 24/7 basis, not 9 to 5, thereby avoiding traffic congestion, and reduce unnecessary employment in retail and financial sectors.

Do you disagree with the arguments in favor of load factors?
The arguments make perfect sense, and I don't think its a technocratic concept, but simply rational economic decision - making. However, this is onyl considering the machanical issues here - human interest should come into the play more often than just maximising efficiency, which is what load factors is interested in.


What difference could higher load factors make?
It depends. Using a car, or a vast array of facilities for that matter, without long periods of rest is dangerous for humans and the preservation of the object, for obvious reasons. Also, sharing cars dramatically reduces the expected longevity of a vehicle, even just considering mileage.

Also, and I think this is most important, the 24/7 concept of the Technate seems to imply that people would be forced to work at night so that less infrastructure is needed. I disagree with this premise; humans are meant to sleep at night, for one, and perhaps more importantly this takes a away the fundamental concept of a communist society, to allow as much association as possible - Most here are probably aware of the anger that can arise between different shifts of workers, i.e. janitors stealing, damaging or otherwise causign problems, or conversely the office workers considering their workplace "self - cleaning" because it appears to magic itself to cleanliness at night, no human seen to do the job. I'm not saying that this specific problem won't be considered, but that the seperation of time in such a manner is bad. Even classes have problems in this way.


Are load factor considerations a part of communist (and capitalist) systems?
Of course. Again, it's sound economic theory. MY problem is that certain propsitions seem to ignore the human element, and I think that humans should be the most important consideration here.

Comrade Rage
4th December 2007, 21:31
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 11:57 am
Technocrats like to talk about load factors and the benefits they bring. For example, on the production side, to have factories operate near their peak capacity. Or on the consumption side, to share cars instead of private ownership. (Shared cars are operated at a higher load factor than cars that spend most of each day parked, thus reducing the number of cars that need be produced)
A technate would also operate on a 24/7 basis, not 9 to 5, thereby avoiding traffic congestion, and reduce unnecessary employment in retail and financial sectors.

Do you disagree with the arguments in favor of load factors?
What difference could higher load factors make?
Are load factor considerations a part of communist (and capitalist) systems?
From what I see about this theory I think it's OK, but I want a little more info.

I've gotta research this a little more. :unsure:

Lynx
5th December 2007, 01:05
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 05:50 pm
Also, and I think this is most important, the 24/7 concept of the Technate seems to imply that people would be forced to work at night so that less infrastructure is needed. I disagree with this premise; humans are meant to sleep at night, for one, and perhaps more importantly this takes a away the fundamental concept of a communist society, to allow as much association as possible -
This was described in the technocracy calendar, where workers are divided into 7 groups, with a 4 day work week (4 days on, 3 days off) and 6 shifts of 4 hours per day (once major reconstruction effort was over).
I used to work the night shift, it does have its advantages when running errands or enjoying time off.

The Technocracy study course was written in the 1930's. Has our economy changed so that production load factors are now higher than they were in the 1930's? Do we still have large manufacturing capacity that remains underutilized or idle?