Comment by triceratops
11 hours ago
> The US saw 60% real wage growth from 1860-1890 with no empire whatsoever
I understand what you mean. But also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny
You are right that common people in Britain didn't get as much out of Pax Brittanica as America's did during its own period of expansion.
Quite a different situation. An empire is when you go to a populated place and extract wealth from the people who live there. That’s not what manifest destiny was. America expanded into land that was sparsely populated by natives americans and mexico who had no wealth to extract.
> expanded into land that was sparsely populated
Yes, that’s exactly the situation that results in highest income/wealth per capita. As long as that land can be utilized productively.
That last sentence is doing all the work though. North American indians lived on the largest continuous region of agricultural land in the world, connected with perhaps the best river network, and never had above subsistence levels of wealth per capita.
The wealth was in and on the land.
If that was true the native americans would have been rich.
"America expanded into land that was sparsely populated"
What does this remind you of?