3 ms·
> Ford saw the automobile as being revolutionary only if the person who makes the automobile is able to make the automobile What is this supposed to mean? I'm
by chollida1 3y ago
> Ford saw the automobile as being revolutionary only if the person who makes the automobile is able to make the automobile
What is this supposed to mean? I'm not sure if I'm being obtuse or its too profound for me to understand.
- mbiondi 3y agoMaybe he means the person who makes the automobile can afford to buy an automobile?
- PaulHoule 3y agoFixed typo inserted by spell checker.
- retrac 3y agoMass production requires mass consumption.
- stagger87 3y agoYou can find a better retelling of this elsewhere, but Ford wanted his employees to be able to purchase Ford cars. The story is often used when discussing the fairness of employees wages, or the cost of goods. Auto employees have long been considered part of the middle class. I think the OP was referring to the fact that probably many of the people making these cars can't even afford them nowadays. Given that cars are practically a necessity in most of the US, I don't think that sits right with people.
- PaulHoule 3y agoI dunno, auto workers are better paid than many other workers. My son is still living at our farm but he is starting his first real job. We’ve looked at options for his first car, he is interested in getting an early 1990s Buick or something like that (which can be had under $4000), the kind of used car that I find attractive (a 2010-2020 Honda) is pretty expensive ($13-$18k). We’re leaning towards taking our chances with the bucket.