Jinx wrote:
> In the past, regions with specialised and concentrated industries built
> towns for the workers. The potteries, steel and cotton mills, coalmines
> and shipyards in Northern England for example. That's why there is
> so much terraced housing oop north. That sort of housing, built on that
> scale, is cheap, and convenient for both the worker and the employer.
> You could rent-to-buy, like state housing, if you wanted to
>
> You're free to live anywhere you choose, and commute, but for 100
> years after the Industrial Revolution, when the Great got put in Britain,
> you more than likely had to walk to work. Yes, there was some
> ghetto-isation, but you had community spirit too. Like the neighbour-
> hoods of New York or any big city

Ok, makes sense. It's like buying health insurance on the company scale --  
it's cheaper that way. You do sacrifice a measure of flexibility, though.

> Is it too obvious to say that symbiosis is the name of the game ? Workers
> and companies need each other.

I'll agree with that. Companies need people, and people need companies. 
Moreover, companies *ARE* people (plus the means of production :).

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist