Sean Conner sean at conman.org
Fri Oct 7 14:44:48 PDT 2011

It was thus said that the Great Ken Ganshirt @ Yahoo once stated:
> --- On Fri, 10/7/11, mdw at martinwills.com <mdw at martinwills.com> wrote:
> .
> > 
> > I have no argument with this assertion, I even agree with
> > it. The problemyou refuse to consider is: "How do we do this to employ
> > persons who can then turn around and buy these products?"  It's great
> > to create something, but if no one can buy it, what is the point?  
> >
> Even back in the Jurassic period of manufacturing Henry Ford had that
> figured out. Another lesson lost.

  Nope.  He wasn't *that* altrusitic.  He was originally paying a low wage,
but experiencing high employee churn, and thus training costs were eating
into his profit.  By raising the salary of his assembly line employees, his
training costs dropped as the employee churn rate dropped, as his bottom
line improved.  It was just be happenstance that his employees could now
afford his products, but I doubt he was upset at the outcome.

  He also gave us the 8 hour/day 40 hour/week work week.  Again, studies he
did showed that productivity was highest with that arrangement and it had
nothing to do with keeping his employees happy (again, another happy


More information about the FoRK mailing list