Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
AIUI American homesteads starting in the late 19th century were the most prosperous example of subsistence farmer ever in the history of the world, and the gap in per farmer productivity vs the old country opened up very early.
Was this an artifact of social equality? Of more land per farmer? Of better access to markets due to settlement patterns?
More (good!) land per farmer plus mechanical reapers. If you didn't know, harvesting ripe grain used to be the limiting factor for farm sizes: it's a very short time frame when your wheat is ripe and dry and not falling off the stalk. It's a lot of literally back-breaking labor to cut the stalks and tie them into sheafs since you cannot use horsepower to do that, so the amount of grain you can harvest is limited by the size of your family that abandons all other activities and spends whole days in the field, young and old alike.
With a mechanical reaper you could reap the way you ploughed and sowed: by walking behind a horse, the reaper cutting and baling the wheat for you. A typical Midwestern farmer could harvest a massive surplus of grain, turning him from a subsistence farmer into a businessman.
Well yes, this is a relevant factor in the late Victorian era. But the per farmer productivity gap opened very early.
Could the difference be corn or higher solar indexes than northern Europe?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link