I have heard the story about the suit before.  It is bogus but they did sue Ford
about other company policies.

On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 09:35:54AM -0700, Jim Devine wrote:
> I agree that Diamonds factlet is likely bogus. But his point was that
> a corporation that didn't actively seek profits could be sued by the
> stockholders (who could win). I think that's right, though I'm no
> lawyer.
>
> On 8/12/06, Shane Mage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jim Devine wrote:
> > >
> > >3. According to Jared Diamond (in his COLLAPSE),  stockholders sued
> > >Henry Ford for paying his workers $5 per day -- and won. Is this true?
> > >if so, why do historians make such a big thing about the $5 day?
> > >(Diamond refers to this payscale as charity, but that's crap. It
> > >lowered turnover.)
> >
> > If I recall correctly, old Ford had bought out his minority stockholders
> > lomg before he introduced the $5 day.  In any case Diamond's claim is
> > scarcely believable, because if that had been the case it would have
> > created a legal precedent that minority stockholders could interfere
> > with a corporation's ordinary business decisions--which is anything
> > but the case.
> >
> > Shane Mage
> >
> > "Thunderbolt steers all things...It consents and does not
> > consent to be called
> > Zeus."
> >
> > Herakleitos of Ephesos
> >
>
>
> --
> Jim Devine / "It is however always important to remember that the
> ability to see things in their correct perspective may be, and often
> is, divorced from the ability to reason correctly and vice versa. That
> is why an economist may be a very good theorist and yet talk absolute
> nonsense...." -- Joseph Schumpeter [edited]

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
michaelperelman.wordpress.com

Reply via email to