People like to reference the “greatness of America” in the “good old days.” Here is an example- When someone finds out that poor people are using their cloth to make clothes they add nice patterns and make it easier for them. They didn’t include a chemical that would make the clothes leave rashes or some other punitive matter. The lofty ideals that are supposed to be the foundation of what makes America great haven’t always been upheld. Many tiles many people have been left out. But this is the spirit of greatness we should aim for. Helping people to help themselves instead of telling them “I had to do everything on my own- so you worry about you and I’ll worry about me..” in 2019 too many people would say to make the bags so they couldn’t be used for clothes just to stop people from getting a “free ride.” That isn’t great.
I would add to Guest comment that in modern times, most familie need dual incomes. Before the 1960's most women were stay at home moms. I think the homemade dress skill has been lost to the pages of history.
Can't help but notice that this company:
1. Is a capitalistic company in a capitalistic economic system, and
2. Was not compelled to do that action by government regulation or law.
Also, if there was any additional cost involved in the printing or proliferation of sack types, it was borne by the company. So, Redistributionists, take that.
Sorry funkmasterrex- I didn’t give the dv, and agree in living wages for workers- but in this context this was at the tail of the Great Depression and going into WW2. Things were quite short for a decade or so from 1920-1950, with more rural areas taking longer to fully “recover.” As others state it was also for customers not employees- and realistically the raise one could give for the cost of doing this wouldn’t likely make a difference to the person. Free fabric for home needs was likely the better universal solution.
Goddamnit I just wanted a reason to say "Bless your heart" and see if @mrscollector would reply.
You mucked it up! Grrrr!... anyway, yeah, ya'll are correct.
funsubstance.com/fun/483137/thats-thoughtful/
1. Is a capitalistic company in a capitalistic economic system, and
2. Was not compelled to do that action by government regulation or law.
Also, if there was any additional cost involved in the printing or proliferation of sack types, it was borne by the company. So, Redistributionists, take that.
Bless your heart.
You mucked it up! Grrrr!... anyway, yeah, ya'll are correct.