In the case of the pre-industrial (I realize my source is mid-industrial revolution, but we can agree the percentage involved in agriculture when moving back in

In the case of the pre-industrial (I realize my source is mid-industrial revolution, but we can agree the percentage involved in agriculture when moving back in time, I hope) figure, the vast majority of the support labor of farming was done directly by farmers (necessary because they also made up the majority of the workforce). In the modern figure, these hours are explicitly not included. The US is a net food exporter, though[0], so I feel comfortable with the conclusion that a modern farmer is roughly two orders of magnitude more productive than a pre-industrial farmer. Even if we disagree on the reasonableness of that conclusion, I think it is an untenable position that the modern farmer is not at least one order of magnitude more productive even accounting for indirect inputs. Please let me know if you disagree on this, as it would pull the conversation in a different direction and I like to at least be on the same page, even if we're currently at odds about what it says. [0]I'm using the second document available on this page: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/agriculture/agricultural_exports_and_imports.html http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/agriculture/agri...