> throwing away a cartridge "produces more waste" than throwing away a razor blade alone, which may be true, but the difference between them seems like a trivial amount
Trying to do approximate math for this is difficult and the difference seems small but greater than trivial. The larger point raised by the author is that the more packaging, dyes, adverts, etc. that a product has associated with it, the more likely a consumer is to buy it(??), and each step of the marketing-to-consumer pipeline costs more environmentally and energetically.
This is not a condemnation of advertising or marketing. In order to sell an environmentally-conscious product, you still need to sell the product.
It might seem impossible but there probably are long-term solutions to much of consumer waste. We aren't even really trying that hard overall to cut down on this and amazon et al are world leaders in packaging and return waste. There might not be easy answers but even partially solving the consumer packaging problem would cut down on landfill/recycling use.
It's a good thought exercise to imagine how you would sell razor blades without any packaging.