3 ms·
That's an argument for needing fewer people, not more - since it happens in situations where it's less labour-intensive to repair shoes than to make them from s
by dmurray 5y ago
That's an argument for needing fewer people, not more - since it happens in situations where it's less labour-intensive to repair shoes than to make them from scratch.
- Someone 5y agoNot necessarily. If the materials are expensive, paying somebody to repair a shoe can be the cheaper option. I think people still repaired socks after knitting them was automated for that reason. The first automated knitting machine was from 1589. Queen Elizabeth I denied its inventor a patent “because of her concern for the employment security of the kingdom's many hand knitters whose livelihood might be threatened by such mechanization” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lee_(inventor) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lee_(inventor)) Edit: maybe not. https://www.historylink.org/File/5721 https://www.historylink.org/File/5721 learned me that gear for us soldiers in World War One was knitted manually. Maybe, those machines weren’t used (much) yet by then?
- TheCoelacanth 5y agoIsn't the main reason that making from scratch is less labour-intensive than repairing because of mass production? With medieval production methods, I would bet that making from scratch is significantly more labour-intensive than repairing.