Small farmers could lose their farms
Tobacco would be the salvation not only of Jamestown but of the state of Virginia. Tobacco remain a profitable case crop in the region until the negative campaign against the tobacco industry decreased the demand.
The encomienda system had several negative effects on the Spaniards. Some of those were that the natives were exploited and treated badly, the religious beliefs of the natives were threatened and even destroyed and the natives faced severe discrimination due to the system.
The advantages of the civil service system was that getting a job in office was not determined by heredity. That is to say: If your dad was the king, and you were a bad ruler, you might be kicked out of power by someone who can actually rule if a civil service system was in place.
bad....very bad
because they are two opposing views, the Conservatives want a small government with private companies to do more for the economy and the Liberals want a larger government with more of a mixture of government and private companies in the economy. (I am thinking in UK politics)
They often could not collect on debts
Their businesses failed if they could not collect debts.
. If they could not collect what they were owed, they went out of business.
The crop lien system was detrimental for small farmers because it often trapped them in a cycle of debt. Farmers would take loans against their future harvests to purchase seeds and supplies, but if crop yields were poor or prices fell, they struggled to repay these debts. This situation frequently led to loss of land and property, as lenders could seize collateral. Ultimately, the system perpetuated poverty and dependence, making it difficult for small farmers to achieve financial stability and independence.
Small farmers could lose their farms
Should be made affordable to everyone
The crop lien system was detrimental to small farmers because it often trapped them in a cycle of debt. Farmers would borrow money from merchants to buy supplies and, in return, pledge a portion of their future crop as collateral. However, high interest rates and low crop prices made it challenging for them to repay these debts, leading to a loss of their land and economic independence. This system disproportionately favored wealthier landowners and merchants, further entrenching the economic struggles of small farmers.
The crop lien system was detrimental to small farmers because it often trapped them in a cycle of debt. Farmers would borrow money against their future crops to cover immediate expenses, leading to high interest rates and fees that they struggled to repay. Additionally, poor crop yields due to unfavorable weather or market conditions could leave them unable to meet their obligations, resulting in loss of land or further financial ruin. This system effectively tied farmers to a cycle of poverty and dependence on landowners or merchants.
They often could not collect on debts. There were times when the loans were not repaid.
Small farmers could lose their farms
Because the crop lien system would sometimes run out of money to the point that they would be broke, they would scam and have these poor farmers in debt
The crop lien system was detrimental to farmers because it often trapped them in a cycle of debt. Farmers borrowed money against their future harvests to purchase supplies, leading to high interest rates and exploitative conditions. Poor harvests due to weather or market fluctuations meant they could not repay their debts, resulting in the loss of land and further financial instability. This system perpetuated poverty among farmers, limiting their economic mobility and independence.