[WalterBright]

Yes, because bone evidence shows the pre-Columbian Indians suffered periods of starvation, as did the pre-Revolution colonists.

Then there's the evidence that the average height of Americans shot up from 1800 to WW2.

See Eugene Weber's "The Western Tradition".

[User23]

Which pre-Columbian Indians? There'a a big difference between the Iroquois, Navajo, and the Lakota ways of life, and that's just naming a few very well known tribes in the territory of the present day USA. And for what it's worth, none of those societies had anything remotely like a big government, so they were closer to a free market than any industrialized state.

Also just because arable land is there doesn't mean it's being farmed effectively. The Iroquois were a relatively sophisticated agrarian society, but the Lakota were essentially fire hunter gatherers by comparison. And of course the Navajo worked wonders feeding themselves in an extremely arid environment.

Don't get me wrong I'm a big fan of free markets. On the other hand all the successful farmers who are personally known to me either established their business on the back of generous government loans in the latter half of the 20th century, or inherited or otherwise acquired a concern that did. I'm a big fan of small government, but I'm an even bigger fan of food security, so not starving is definitely an area where I'm open to big government intervention. That's not to downplay the creation of perverse incentives that come out of those policies, but the fact of the matter is nothing is perfect and maybe it's worth accepting a little inefficiency to avoid famine.

So yeah I'd say it's more the US federal government's interventionist policies that have caused this country to make such effective use of its arable land and not the invisible hand at work.

[WalterBright]

> Which pre-Columbian Indians?

From what I read, all of them that were investigated.

> so they were closer to a free market than any industrialized state.

The Indian economies were pretty basic, as far as I can tell. They did engage in trade, but also raiding and slavery. They did not appear to have much of a conception of inalienable rights, or of individuals owning plots of land, although there was certainly the concept of tribal land. Frankly, not a whole lot is known about pre-Columbian Indian societies. Even estimates of their numbers vary by over an order of magnitude.

Much of what we do know comes from random accounts and letters written by Europeans, such as how the Cheyenne lived and operated.

Farming in colonial times and in the US got its start with giving away land to settlers who promised to farm it.

> maybe it's worth accepting a little inefficiency to avoid famine

The famines ended in the US around 1800 and never reappeared. We're doing fine.