4 ms·

> and if there was a marked dropoff in employablility even in just that group, it should absolutely be visible. Based on statistics and records from over a 100

• wyattpeak 5y ago
  Yes. It's 1920, not 1620. Here's a page from a 1920 census: https://raogk.org/census-record/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/10/1920-United-States-Federal-Census-for-Griggs-County-North-Dakota.jpg https://raogk.org/census-record/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2... Here's a tax return form from the same year: http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/1040forms.nsf/WebByYear/1920/$file/1040_1920.pdf http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/1040forms.nsf/WebByYear/1920/$...
  • jefftk 5y ago
    The tax return says it is only for people making at least $5k, which would be $70k today.
    • wyattpeak 5y ago
      If you want the actual data sources used by the paper, read the paper. I'm not trying to replicate an academic's source-finding, that would take months. I'm trying to quickly demonstrate that the US was a thoroughly bureaucratic nation by 1920, not some kind of backwater where we have to guess and infer demographics.