Interesting article on Ford that just popped into my mailbox this morning:
http://priceonomics.com/henry-fords-...a-great-again/
Interesting article on Ford that just popped into my mailbox this morning:
http://priceonomics.com/henry-fords-...a-great-again/
It is an interesting question. As technology advances, and it becomes increasingly cheaper to substitute capital for labor, what do we do with the people whose labor isn't valuable enough to support them?
Some form of a dole?
Government-funded make-work?
Mandating a certain level of inefficiency into the economy to force firms to use labor where technology would be cheaper?
Soylent Green?
It will be interesting, if somewhat heart-breaking, to see how we solve the problem.
WS: tool and dye makers used to make the big bucks in Wi. My ex made great $ and got lots of overtime. It supported the 5 of us and allowed me to get 3 college degrees all paid for in cash. We lived frugally but owned a decent home/cars, etc. He always worked for the big companies and when he was laid off he would go work at a smaller place that didn't pay as well and wait to get called back to the bigger place. He was never out of a job more then a week. I suspect you guys are living in a small town which might be why his pay is low. There is a shortage of real tool and dye makers that have been through the 4 year apprenticeship program. Manufacturing jobs allowed people that did not go to college to have middle class life styles and yes Ford understood his workers couldn't buy his cars if not paid enough. You don't have to be greedy to be rich.
I grew up in a blue collar manufacturing town and people made decent $ at their jobs. Often the wife didn't work and men made enough to support a decent lifestyle. Not a grand lifestyle but decent.
Welfare capitalism - Endicott-Johnson shoe company and IBM (once upon a time) followed this model (my father was employed by IBM in the 60's). It worked for a time - eventually it just could not compete with businesses who could cut their labor costs to the bone by relocating overseas.
The folks at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, otherwise known as MIT have studied what it costs people in different parts of the country to live. They have defined a living wage for full time workers and then classified the hourly rate in three categories....living wage, poverty wage and current minimum wage. I live in one of the cheapest counties in the nation except for gasoline which is the highest due to our crumbling infrastructure of bridges on highways.
So in my county one person should earn $9.40/ hr for a living wage...$5 / HR for poverty and the current minimum wage is $7.25. Contrast with San Fransisco.....$14.37/ hr for a living wage ....$5 poverty and current is $9. They even have it broken down in expense categories to justify their numbers.
Now that is just one person. Say they have to support one child. California becomes $29.37/ hr for living wage, $7 for poverty and $9 is the current.
My county, $20.14 living, poverty $7 and current is $7.25.
Im no genius but the folks at MIT usually know what they are doing with numbers.
My way of thinking, if you can't pay somebody enou to live decently then you shouldn't be claiming to be a decent businessman. Admit it, your business model sucks.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)