1860s American man advertising to find a wife

I would marry this man. I'm curious what he means by buying a waterfall though, if anyone has any clue. That can't be literal.

I read that has I have a gold set of teeth lol

wat

I think you should go back to studying English, friend.

>i have got a two year old bull
con artist, slavery was already illegal under Johnson administration, an educated american woman wouldn't be fooled

>some person of the female persuasion
dude's got bantz

Attached: hahaha.jpg (800x450, 61K)

It could refer to a fashion accessory of some sort from the period.

I'm not american, so don't know 100%, but it's probably a skirt or less likely a hat with lace effects (which were in style in europe, but only several decades later)

I see, thank you.

>18 year old
>has a barn, house, 18+ acres of land
>is going to spend over 90% of his waking life working it just to provide for his basic, essential needs

>27
>NEET
>more opportunities and free time than anyone his age in history
>still not doing anything about it
There's infinite many jobs you could be doing, you just don't like idea of manual labor. I lost my cushy nearly six-figure government job and went back to being a glorified mall cop and then working at a gas station scrubbing toilets. I worked my way back up to a cushy position where I'm making almost six figures again, and I don't have any sort of degree, license, certification, or any of that crap.
Literally get up and go do something instead of complaining about it.

I guess people were more mature and articulate back then. I can't imagine an 18 year old male of today being that well spoken or wanting to get married.

>i cant imagine an 18 year-old speaking at barely a high school level of complexity
Where do you live?

That isn't particularly articulate, especially for the time period (though to be fair, it is a very brief personal ad). I've met plenty of articulate (or at least, to this basic level) teens. It's a bit unusual that he'd want to get married so soon though, even for that time period.

Waterfall is a type of skirt

>even for that time period
Not for people who lived on farms and had no one to work them with. Pretty normal for people to get married that young for most of our history. It wasn't abnormal for the working class to not want to get married at all until the late 20th century.

Another thank you from the one who asked.

Where do you live?

the idea that people were more articulate back then is a pretty back-to-front way of thinking about history. At the time, there was functionally nothing that represented anything but highly articulate (or whatever label you choose) language in writing, hence most people used that style. On the other hand, people of that time would likely have been baffled by the diversity of different codes people use today

If you want to compare it versus what a modern 18 year old talks like.

"Lyl I b fucking streamin newest hot hip-hop tracks dis shit is dope brb goin' to my bitch's crib to sling dick yo ps Tekaski 6ix9ine is innocent free him from the poke now."

I have lived all over the place. California, Georgia, right now Texas. I moved to find work. You'd be surprised how many people will be willing to let you scrub their dirty ass bathrooms for a day for under-the-table pay. Do that a few times, bam - bus ticket to where ever you think you might find better work. I've never been homeless, but I've been close to it and poor plenty of times.

The simple reality is that most people sitting around crying about how they have nothing to do while being NEETs don't realize how good they've got it. How the hell can you afford to be a NEET? Who is paying your bills? How do you eat? Where is that money coming from? You have resources available, you just aren't taking advantage of them. I have never met a poor person who didn't have a job - that gets you homeless. So, the lacking resources isn't the issue. It's lacking a goal and/or the knowledge of how to approach it.

Next goal for me is to start a non-profit to try to help young people figure this shit out, since the last generation did such a piss-poor fucking job of teaching us.

If you want to see what modern 18 year olds really write like you can just go on Jow Forums

>more opportunities and free time than anyone his age in history
Was unemployed for 2 years and lived at my moms. It fucking sucks and the only thing touching your dick is you.

>Next goal for me is to start a non-profit to try to help young people figure this shit out, since the last generation did such a piss-poor fucking job of teaching us.
Genuinely wish you good luck, you're certainly right that people need this.

This.

Farm labor required many pairs of hands back then. People got married young so they could have as many kids as possible for farm labor and in the event some died from childhood illness or accidents. Though it would still take until the kid was around 10 to be useful for farm chores in any significant capacity.

I wonder what became of him. Did he find purchase?

We're assuming the 18 year old is white though.

Type of dress

What government job did you have where you made almost 100k and what do you do now?

Been there, though not for quite that long. Spent 8 months doing odd jobs under the table living out of a car for a bit and then what was basically a rundown crackhouse on a month-to-month lease.
>only thing touching your dick is you
This might be easy for me to say now, since I've been married the whole time, but you've got to stop being so concerned about sex. The first step to personal independence for the modern man is to stop believing that getting laid is the best thing you can do. Any jackass with $30 can get a hooker. Caring about that kind of stuff just keeps you depressed and makes it harder for you to succeed.

The military then into contracting. Right now, I'm going to school full-time while working as a tutor. I tutor at my school and on a one-on-one basis. I got pretty much all my work by posting on community facebook pages. I occasionally build computers for people and offer simple IT help (mostly rescuing pictures off old HDD's). My wife works as a secretary at an assisted living place.

Before the military, I traded manual labor for room and board with a guy in my neighborhood. He had all of the trees in his yard topped and wanted to renovate, but was slightly older and worked a lot. I told him I'd do it for free if I could sleep on his couch (home life was absolute shit, pretty much left at 16 and haven't looked back much since). When I wasn't clearing his property and doing renovation work on it for him, I was working under the table with illegals at restaurants and in construction work.

It's possible to get yourself out of being a NEET, it's just not very easy and requires a lot of legwork/knowledge people just don't have these days. That's something I'd like to try to fix, which is my next big project.

Back then there were few or no taxes and the farm could have been inherited from a deceased older relative.

>Be 18 years old in 1860s America
>Have a nice farm
>Everything good except for blue balls
>Post ad to get qt wife
>Get drafted in civil war
>Die of dysentery
At least that's my theory

Not like it was easy to have casual sex back then. Getting married is his only option unless he risks being forced to marry some girl he gets pregnant.

Prostitutes always existed, but it seems like the guy genuinely wanted a relationship.

They were easy to get too and there were few legal restrictions on prostitution until the late 19th century.

Since Andrew Johnson was president there, this is in 1865 to 69, so the war's over.

Sure, but right now, today, you have significantly more avenues for developing yourself than someone who's entire worldly knowledge might be collected from local newspapers - if he's lucky - who would have had to worked hard manual labor for 16+ hours a day just to feed himself and keep his property manageable. That dude may never have seen a general store in his entire life if he was rural enough. Even if he was near somewhere that was a bit built up, there's the whole issue with having to work most of your waking life just to eat, clothe yourself, and avoid dying to exposure.

Even if you work full-time, in most places that's only 40 hours a week. That's, on average, 8 hours a day, leaving you at least another 8 plus all the weekend to do something. The simple reality is that you've got more free time now than anyone in the working class has had in history. The only people in the past who were are available to do something with their time as we are now were rich people.

I'm not saying it's easy to just stop being a NEET and magically fall assbackwards into success. I've been very lucky to find the opportunities I have. But you won't ever find any opportunities if you don't go looking for them.

There were no pensions or retirement for most people either; they worked into their elder years and often until they died or developed an incapacitating health condition.

>I believe in Andy Johnson
Yeah I overlooked that part

there is nowhere and no time in history where normal people worked 16 hours a day, unless you count POWs in 1944/45 nazi germany as "normal people." it just has never happened. you're telling yourself a lie on every point that you present in your post and every conclusion you make based on those points is equally fallible.

That's an excellent point. There's also way more help available for young people these days from social programs and charity than back then. I haven't paid a dime for school, my wife's or mine, because I take advantage of the ridiculous number of unused scholarships that are available at basically every school. The two of us wrote 3 or 4 essays a piece and ended up getting nearly $6,000.

That's horseshit, I worked 16 hour days all the time in the military. I personally still work 12+ hours a day right now as a civilian. I worked on a cattle ranch in Georgia. My day started at 5 am and ended at 8pm, and all I did was feed the dogs, maintain fences, and occasionally milk a cow or two who couldn't be hooked up to the machines. I've worked plenty of 12-hour days just doing yard work on the weekend at my own house.

I'm sorry, but you have a significant misunderstanding of history if you honestly believe a thing you just said. Maybe in Norway the days were shorter, but a 15 or 16 hour day was never uncommon for people who were living off their own labor on farms and ranches. If you legitimately believe that you don't have the most free-time of anyone in history, either Norway's history is significantly different than the rest of Europe and the world or you've been miseducated.

Maybe when you read "work" you think "be employed by someone else at one job"? You might have a point then, but by work I mean "work", as in laboring. Whatever you do to provide for yourself. Many people work multiple jobs. It's well known-history that early factory workers in the U.S. pulled 12+ hour shifts before labor laws came into affect, and then they had to go perform other duties (many of them children).

I just don't know how you could come to this conclusion without misunderstanding something or relying on a simplified definition of what "work" actually is. Do you think a woman "staying home" to cook, clean, and raise children isn't work? Do you think someone performing necessary maintenance on their home so that it doesn't fall into disrepair and expose them to the elements or other hazards isn't work?

great argument, I will now repost my entire post with caps for your benefit:
there is nowhere and no time in history where NORMAL PEOPLE worked 16 hours a day, unless you count POWs in 1944/45 nazi germany as "NORMAL PEOPLE." it just has never happened. you're telling yourself a lie on every point that you present in your post and every conclusion you make based on those points is equally fallible.

possibly, while working 16 hours a day, then 12+ hours a day, etc. etc., you missed the opportunity for an education

ourworldindata.org/working-hours

70 hour weeks were once *average* which implies even longer working periods were not unusual

I need you to define "normal people" since you're obviously operating on some kind of No True Scotsman definition here. If by "normal people" you mean the average person, or even a majority of the population, it is well-known history that people around the world would labor dawn-to-dusk. There are still people pulling 14, 15, and 16 hour shifts in factories in China to this day.

I'm certainly and obviously more educated on this subject than you. I think you've confused your own personal perspective on things with well-known historic fact.

Families tended to look after their elderly. Many of my ancestors lived well beyond their 80's and 90's but no way in hell would they be working the fields at their age.

No no he's right, at least in my experience. The common line was "8 hours of work, 8 hours of play and 8 hours of rest". I don't think you could define farmwork as being the same as modern wageslaving. With farming, you wake up early to feed the animals and then go about the rest of the day at your own pace. You'd constantly be in and out of your house since you live there and socialising with whoever you meet out and about. Whereas in a modern job, you go into work at 9 in the morning and, barring a lunch break, you're stuck in there under some degree of supervision for another 8 hours.

The tl;dr is, farming isn't like normal work since even though you might be outside all day, you wouldn't spend every minute ploughing fields.

you'll notice your graph goes back to 1870, includes only "working hours" (i.e. no housewives, farmers, etc.) and only concerns industrial workers whose working hours were statistically measurable and measured

all of this, as opposed to the vast majority of people, in the vast majority of countries, in the vast majority of situations, for the vast majority of history

I'm certainly and obviously more educated on this subject than you. I think you've confused your own personal perspective on things with well-known historic fact.

What about during the industrial revolution?

>The common line was "8 hours of work, 8 hours of play and 8 hours of rest"
That was an aspiration for labor unions, not a description of what life was already like

negro, if you think the majority of people worked in factories during the industrial revolution I'm not sure what else I can do for you

>8 hours of play
I guess the cunts didn't have to commute back then

The percentage of people >65 in the workforce steadily dropped over the 20th century and reached a low of about 5% in 1990. It has risen to about 10-15% since. Isaac Newton worked for the Royal Mint of England until shortly before his death at 84 when he developed a serious hacking cough and had to quit.

eh.net/encyclopedia/hours-of-work-in-u-s-history/

This estimates American farmers worked 11-13 hours a day in the colonial period with average hours worked increasing in the first half of the 19th century

>Many of my ancestors lived well beyond their 80's and 90's but no way in hell would they be working the fields at their age
But that's just what you said. Farming has many jobs and someone that old probably would have retired from the more physical ones. You could still quite conceivably perform tasks like feeding chickens where not much exertion is required.

That is true, although one may also guess the average 80 year old back then was fitter than today since he had an all-natural diet, wasn't exposed to pollution, or many of the various other nasty modern lifestyle practices that poison you with chemicals. Probably got more exercise too.

On the other hand you were SOL if you developed cataracts, hearing loss, or broke your hip, none of which were really treatable prior to the second half of the 20th century.

>You can buy 18 acres of land for less than $30,000
Where?

>the vast majority of people, in the vast majority of countries, in the vast majority of situations, in the vast majority of history
Have routinely been documented to work 12+ hour days, like the evidence appearing in this thread is showing.
>statistically
You don't understand statistics at all, my friend, so you shouldn't use the word so freely.

>With farming, you wake up early to feed the animals and then go about the rest of the day at your own pace. You'd constantly be in and out of your house since you live there and socialising with whoever you meet out and about
That's still all work. Easier work is still work. If you work at a place where you have to be under constant supervision, that just means you have a harder job.

>Based on the amount of work performed — for example, crops raised per worker — Carr (1992) concludes that in the seventeenth-century Chesapeake region, “for at least six months of the year, an eight to ten-hour day of hard labor was necessary.” This does not account for other required tasks, which probably took about three hours per day. This workday was considerably longer than for English laborers, who at the time probably averaged closer to six hours of heavy labor each day.
And again, like this notes, there are other necessary tasks that must be performed simply to get by in your life.

The Norwegian dude has a pretty constrained idea of what work actually amounts to.

mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/farmer-108-britains-oldest-man-9069907

This fellow was doing labor on his farm until he was 98.

>most people didnt work in factories during the industrial revolution
Which one, and at which point, because in the U.S. by the time the 20th century rolled around, over half the population was living in cities and employed in some kind of manufacturing job.

Yeah but not specifying exactly what he did. He may well have not being doing highly physical stuff at 80+. Farm labor as I said can mean a lot of things.

my friend,

there is nothing "routine" about historical documentation, and none of the examples cited here support your initial claim of 16 hours (), but why do you continue to malign my education, claiming you're more well-educated or that you understand more about statistics than me? why do you refuse to refute any of my counter-claims? (that average work days never exceeded 16 hours anywhere, that the closest history offers was during the industrial revolution, that these statistics concern only exceptional parts of the economy, being industrial workers during a certain period of the industrial revolution representing only a limited subset of industrial workers, that all available data show this to be a generally abating trend, etc.)?

>That's still all work
But it's disingenuous to suggest it's the same as working in a factory for 16 hours when the two simply aren't comparable.

winnersdrinkmilk.com/2012/09/farming-with-grandpa-2/

Or this dude. Farming does tend to produce hardier than average people. So yes it's entirely believable that people 200 years ago did still actively farm in their elder years, perhaps using hired help/younger relatives for some of the more demanding jobs.

the EH census of manufacturing data referred to earlier in this thread place the average workweek in manufacturing jobs in 1900 (150 years after the commonly understood beginning of the industrial revolution) at 59.6 hours. Assuming the remaining half of the population worked the fabled 16-hour workweek, that number comes out to americans in 1900 working an (impressive) average of 24.5 hours every day

American working conditions in those days were notoriously shit and the rate of workplace accidents much higher than in Europe. I'm not sure if American wages were higher than Western Europe or not but American cost of living was lower.

what? huh? what does this have to do with anything? fucking what? do you realize that workplace accidents, wages, cost of living and working hours are all completely different measures?

War's long over at this point, and most farmers were exempt from the draft because they needed to be around to provide food for the war effort. It was people in the cities that tended to get drafted.

literally still Aroostook county, Maine

Attached: land.jpg (597x430, 50K)

The Civil War draft was mostly a bad joke anyway.

>pay $300 to get out of it
>most richfags did this and hired a substitute
>these substitutes were usually the lowest of the low--criminals, bounty jumpers, people with physical and mental disabilities
>the volunteer soldiers also looked down upon conscripts and loathed bounty men (people who accepted a payment to enlist) or substitutes

Is it arable?

Modern farming is very different. It requires a very different set of skills and a much greater initial investment if you want to be competitive in today’s market.

Yes. They grow a lot of potatoes up in the county
The 18.5 ac lot is forested and hilly so probably not the best for that use. There are a shitload of property listings up north though.

Not him but in my state the average value for farm land in 2017 is priced
$2000/acre for non irrigated
$1250/acre for pasture
$3000/acre for irrigated

The Confederacy had begun using conscription from spring 1862. All white males from 18 to 35 were liable to be drafted for three years. This was not popular and draft evasion was widespread, not in the least because the planter class were exempted from military service.

By the end in late 1864-early 1865, they were so desperate for manpower that they started drafting old men and boys under 18--it was like Germany in the closing days of WWII. When the Union troops made the breakthrough of the Petersburg trenches on April 2, 1865, they were shocked to find the bodies of Confederates as young as 14-15.