Lecture Week 2 and Lecture Week 3

Lecture Week 2 and Lecture Week 3

Lecture Week 2

From the notes, we learn that Fordism is characterized by integrated firms, scientific management, economies of scale among others. In other words, Fordism acted as a form of transformation from a world of agriculture to mass production, industrial as well as mass consumption of the economy. Fordism is evident to have helped develop markets given its character of economies of scale and scope. However, the fact that Fordism acted a creative force which propagated the automobile industry raises questions. For instance, can it be concluded that all the success gained from Fordism resulted from the use of force since the existence of industrialization changed peoples’ fundamental ideas in the sense that they were dictated in all they did? Their buying behavior, thinking, and living were all controlled. While the notes talk of economies of scale, facts such as the use of fixed expenses to reduce unit costs is questionable.  Looking at the Golden Age of Capitalism and its relativity to Fordism, it is asserted that these practices led to the rise of the welfare state, decline in inequality as well as political representation of labour.  As much as all this seemed effective in promoting the economy, Fordism gave rise to crises such as the issue of oil in 1974. The decline of Fordism led to post-Fordism which is evident to be defined by job stability, low-cost, high wages among other factors. However, the model of post-Fordism is blamed for having had limited chances for improvement given the fact that advantages that came from competition could be exercised by others too. This fact is questionable in the sense that if competitive advantages could be copied with others, then it means t

Pay to View the Entire Post

To view this post and other posts in this category please pay the amount below