The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1919-12-16
MIR. FORD'S OWN PAGE

contributing by his cultivation and interest to the welfare of the city. He is probably a house holder, living under conditions which represent more than mere maintenance, in that they re- present the graces of social life. More than that, he is probably a father with a more or less nu- meroUs progeny, all of whom must subsist and be reared to usefulness on what he is able ID earn.
 Now, it is obvious that to re- gard the man s..oue, refusing to reckon with the nome and the family in the background, is to arrive at a series of facts which are misleading a nd which alone can never even suffice even for a temporary solution of the qucs- tions that concern Us.
 How are you going to figure the contribution of the home to the days work of the man? You are paying the man for his work but how much does that work owe to his home? How much
 
 much to his position as the pro- wider of a family? The man does the work in the shop, but his wife does the work of the nome, and the shop must pay them both: on what system of figur- ing is the home going to find it's place on the cost sheets of the days work? It finds it's place there already in a sort of a hap hazard way. If a man cannot support himself, his wife, his children, his habitation, his pos ition in society-why, he does not stay on the job, that's all. It isn't a matter of cost and profit to him; it is the matter of a '"Iiving''.
 Is a mans own livelihood the "cost"? And is his ability to have d home and a family the profit?
 Is the profit on a days work to be computed on cash basis only, measured by the amount a man has left over after his own and family's wants are all sup piled?
  persons beside those of the ac- tuaI worker to be charged up to ''profit'?
 Or, are all these relationships to be considered strictly under head of ''cost'', and the profit to be computed entirely outside of them? .? That is, after having sup ported himself and family, clothed them, housed them, edu- cated them, given them the priv leGes incident to their standard of living, ought there to be pro- vision made for still something more in the way of savings profit, and all properly charge able to the days work? These are questions which call for ac- curate observation and computa- ton.
 Perhaps there is no one item connected with our economic life that would surprise us 5-.ore than knowledge of just what excess burdens that days work actually carries.
 It carries all the workers ob- legations outside the shop; it car rieS all that is necessary in the way of service and management inside the shop. The days pro- ductive work is the most Valua- ble mine of wealth that has ever been opened.
 Certainly it cannot be made to carry less than all the workers outside obligations. And cer- tainly it ought to be made to take care of the workers sunset days when labor is no longer possible to him, and should be no longer necessary. And if it is made to do even these, industry will have to be adjusted to :hedule of Croduction distribu~ioa and re- ward which will stop the leaks toward the pockets ot men who do not assist production in any way, and turn all straalns for