Return to Answer

For more on the crops that sustained settlers and where they were grown, see T.E.D.'s answer on another related question here. Note he refers to indigenous peoples being removed from temperate areas for farming land - one of the reasons you don't have large indigenous populations in temperate countries like the United States or Argentina, both of which received the largest influx of immigrants and both of which conquered and removed indigenous people. Note that Argentina has a larger GDP per capita than most Latin American countries, and has historically been somewhat more stable.

For more on the crops that sustained settlers and where they were grown, see T.E.D.'s answer on another related question here. Note he refers to indigenous peoples being removed from temperate areas for farming land - one of the reasons you don't have large indigenous populations in temperate countries like the United States or Argentina, both of which received the largest influx of immigrants and both of which conquered and removed indigenous people. Note that Argentina has a larger GDP per capita than most Latin American countries, and has historically been somewhat more stable.

It’s hard to tell what is being said here, but these areas extended from subtropical to temperate, were better off, and as I said before Argentina received the 2nd most amount of immigrants of all European colonies. The part of Brazil in this area, Rio Grande do Sul, is 1.6 times the size of Uruguay, its larger population is centered around Porto Alegre, a port where five rivers converge and the chief industrial and commercial center of Brazil, and Uruguay’s GDP per capita and its GDP per capita are equitable.

It’s hard to tell what is being said here, but these areas extended from subtropical to temperate, were better off, and as I said before Argentina received the 2nd most amount of immigrants of all European colonies. The part of Brazil in this area, Rio Grande do Sul, is 1.6 times the size of Uruguay, its larger population is centered around Porto Alegre, a port where five rivers converge and a chief industrial and commercial center of Brazil, and Uruguay’s GDP per capita and its GDP per capita are equitable.

So they could grow enough food to feed themselves, then enough grain or arable grassland to feed enough cattle that they could get rich off of exporting meat, and this is "delusional" prosperity? It sounds like regular prosperity to me, the type of prosperity that could only come from a place with regular rainfall and a climate hospitable to the European crop/livestock package. This is, in fact, the same kind of cattle-focused prosperity that led to the expansion of the U.S. into the western states.

So they could grow enough food to feed themselves, then enough grain or arable grassland to feed enough cattle that they could get rich off of exporting meat, and this is "delusional" prosperity? It sounds like regular prosperity to me, the type of prosperity that could only come from a place with regular rainfall and a climate hospitable to the European crop/livestock package. This is, in fact, the same kind of cattle-focused prosperity that led to the expansion of the U.S. into the western states. Meanwhile, once again, the GDP per capita in these places is still much higher to this day. That is not delusion.