"Once a power chair and controller design are ready for production, they are de-tuned into a series of lesser tiered clones which correspond to the class system of healthcare benefits. This makes it so that the poor get the worst performing equipment, while the well do with full benefit coverage get the best performing equipment. This effectively reproduces the economic class system through an artificial distinction between equipment `quality' categories. It really does not cost significantly more to produce a good performing chair, over a crapy chair---since the crappy version is just a de-tuned version of the top end. Nevertheless, the equipment categories reflect not the manufacturing cost, but the likely socio-economic class of the recipient."
This is fascinating because I assumed that class distinctions simply reflect economic realities: better chairs cost more money, therefore only the rich can afford them. But you're saying the cost differential is insignificant and that there is a conscious(?) effort to architect products to reflect class priviledge independently of any profit motive....
I can think of parallel examples in education -- is Standford ten times better than UC Berkeley? No, ...but then you get the social connections.
But, I'm just curious, do folks on this list have any other examples of this profitless drive to reinforce class distinctions?
Joanna