Farmers In 1938

American family farmers produced goods for the global economy; however, after 1870, the depression struck the nation, meaning that the produce families grew for the market and economy would be sold for at a lower price. A family who had contributed themselves to the nation’s economy would find themselves in an event of possibly, and most likely, losing their farm since at that time farming insurance wasn’t available. Ownership of farms were not secure or stable during this time of depression.

These assumptions include: farmers had to compete with industries for workers; the emancipation of slaves left farmers with no workforce, forcing them into industry jobs; and income taxes drove farmers into debt. After our hypothesis was written, we consulted Mr. Nelson on advice in moving forward. With him, we created a list of variables to focus on: taxes, land, population, and crop production. We chose to focus on Al Valorem Taxes, as a farmer’s business depends on their land. We also chose to focus on cotton production because cotton farms were the most successful and thus biggest of farms. We filtered through data from the National Archives and U.S. Census Bureau to separate data related to these variables, and then created a separate graph for each topic. After analyzing the data trends, we researched the reasons behind these trends, and then looked for other problems related to our argument that we did not include in our assumptions.

In the late nineteenth century shortly after the Civil War and Reconstruction, farmers in the Midwestern United States found themselves in quite a predicament. During the second industrial revolution of the United States that contained mass introduction of: railroads, oil, steel, and electricity, the risk-taking entrepreneurs of this era took an adventure into the world of cutthroat capitalism. In just a little time, a handful of monopolies arose in all these industries which hurt both the consumer of the product and the producer of the material (Doc. F). Because of the corrupt politicians in Washington DC, the absence of regulation on the monopolies put into place by bribes and greed or moderation from them, and the devious ways of the

In the late 1800’s, America’s farmers faced deep financial insecurity with the fall of agricultural prices that kept them in poverty. Many farmers borrowed money from merchants and banks, and when it came time to repay their loans, they found themselves in the face of losing their land. Their financial troubles mainly attributed to the high freight rates that railroads charged the farmers in order to transport their crops, as well as high interest rates charged by loaners. This financial turmoil lead to the development of the Farmers’ Alliance, which advocated for lower interest rate loans by the Federal Government itself, so that way the farmers didn’t have to depend on independent banks and merchants for financial assistance. The Farmers’ Alliance eventually gained traction in politics and eventually formed itself into the People’s Party, or otherwise known as the Populist Party.

In the period 1865-1900, technology, government policy, and economic conditions all changed American agriculture a great deal. New farming machinery had a large role in the late 19th century, giving farmers the opportunity to produce many more crops than they had ever been able to previously. The railroads had an enormous influence on agriculture. They were able to charge the farmers large fees, expenses that farmers barely had enough to cover, in order to transport their goods throughout the expansive country. The booming industry also changed American agriculture, creating monopolies and gaining incredible wealth with which the farmers simply could not compete. Economically, the monetary policy along with the steadily dropping prices of

Following the Civil War, a second industrial revolution in America brought many changes to the nation’s agriculture sector. The new technologies that were created transformed how farmers worked and the way in which the sector functioned. Agriculture expanded and became more industrial. Meanwhile government policies, or lack of them for a while, and hard economic conditions put difficult strains on farmers and their occupation. These changes in technology, economic conditions, and government policy from 1865 to 1900 transformed and improved agriculture while leaving farmers in hardship.

In the early 19th century, farmers saw the need to cooperate with government regulation. They started to believe the government could solve their economic problems if they cooperated as part of the system. When once they were known as the epitome of the American dream, independent, and self-sufficient, they now submitted to government regulation. This decision was made in the 1896 elections. As a result of this transition, many children of farmers left and found work in the city. When generations past would have stayed on the farm their whole lives, a new window of opportunity was opening up as the market expanded.

The first national organization of farmers, the Farmers Alliance united the United States’ agrarian civilians at both regional and state levels. The scramble for wealth brought by the industrial Gilded Age left those connected to an earlier agrarian America economically dependent on larger corporations as the demand for manufactured products exceeded organic goods and therefore lowered the overall product value. Agricultural prices depleted as industry excelled, the price of cotton, for example, decreasing from $0.11 per pound in 1881 to $0.046 by 1894. However, the lowering of transportation prices for the exportation of cotton and other products into cities did not accompany the drop of product value, placing many farmers in debt and even under threat of foreclosure. In his book The Populist Movement:

Arguing that the majority of farmers during the Great Depression benefitted from the government policies produced through President Roosevelt’s New Deal is an inaccurate claim. While history textbooks highlight the improvement of finances for people in rural areas in the United States of America, the personal experiences of family farmers contradict those textbooks. Writers of textbooks about American history should consider looking further into the delicate topic of how the Great Depression effected common farm families. In the West, farmers endured the Dust Bowl. In the North, people in rural areas competed to make a profit. Although statistics show the most economic damage of the Great Depression beginning at the end of 1929, small farm families refer to the effects of the Depression dating back as early as 1925 since government policies mostly benefitted large farm industries as small farms were forced to foreclose.

In 1890 clergyman Washington Gladden wrote an article called “The Embattled Farmers”. In it he blamed the ruin of the farmers on “protective tariffs, trusts…speculation in farm products, over-greedy middlemen, and exorbitant transportation rates.”

There was a surplus of farmer’s foods when the great depression started in America. The price for food had fallen from 109 in 1919 to 64 in 1931. The Federal Farm Board bought millions of bushels of wheat and bales of cotton to try to stave off some the minor surplus on the market. It was a temporary situation that did not help deal with the overproduction. The Government had to announce they were pulling out of the wheat market in 1931 which plunged the Kansas City price down to 27 cents a bushel. Many could not survive the sudden drop in the stock market. The Federal Farm Board made many enemies with their actions. “(Poppendieck & Nestle) The result of the overwhelming

The Agricultural Adjustment Act in Great Depression Era in 1933 was a the United States federal law, part of the New Deal, which reduced agricultural production by paying farmers subsidies not to plant on part of their land and to kill off excess livestock. Its purpose was to reduce crop surplus in order to effectively raise the value of crops. This act represented a transformation about government’s role playing in the country. Before the period, the government only taxed import or export; it didn’t touch economy. But the AAA showed that government started to have power to change its economy.

Growing up on a small family wheat farm in southwestern Oklahoma, I have experienced the harsh conditions of farming firsthand. The job that used to employ the largest amount of people in the United States has lost the support and the respect of the American people. The Jeffersonian Ideal of a nation of farmers has been tossed aside to be replaced by a nation of white-collar workers. The family farm is under attack and it is not being protected. The family farm can help the United States economically by creating jobs in a time when many cannot afford the food in the stores. The family farm can help prevent the degradation of the environment by creating a mutually beneficial relationship between the people producing the food and nature. The family farm is the answer to many of the tough questions facing the United States today, but these small farms are going bankrupt all too often. The government’s policy on farming is the largest factor in what farms succeed, but simple economics, large corporations, and society as a whole influence the decline in family farms; small changes in these areas will help break up the huge corporate farms, keeping the small family farm afloat.

Before 1930 the federal government had no role in regulating American farmers. It wasn’t until Hoover’s presidency that we saw the beginning of agriculture subsidies. Hoover’s program was the farm board, which included that when certain crops fell below a certain price the government would step in, buy the crop, pay for it to be stored, and hopefully resell it later at a decent price (“Brent.fm.”) Although hoover had great intentions by doing this there were some major complications. Famers rushed into whatever crop that was being protected because it was being supported and provided a secure income. After a few years of the buying surpluses the government just gave up and began giving them away or sold them to the world market at huge losses. Roosevelt also intervened in the farm business, he support

The farmers living in the southern had a 30 percent collapse of farming goods. In the 1990’s,USA and Europe retained subsides. Two million mexican campesinos lost their farms due to subsidized corn from the north. Along with this about thirty million people had to face losing their land. The U.S. had to also face competition in dealing with Mexico’s and Canada’s imports.The Power of agribusiness began to raise and companies were using foreign stocks to sell transported