well workers got a place to live on and crops to plant for food, they were paid too but not as much as the landowners
in return, the farmer gave the landowner a share of crop. Landowners often loaned sharecroppers tools and seeds as well
Well the white land owners would rent their land for money. Since they couldn't keep slaves they rented out their land for a profit, PLUS the sharecroppers tended the land.
Two advantages are getting half the price of the sold crop and getting to pick the crop(s) that are grew and sold .
The landowners both had former slaves and poor whites working for them.
Taxes required of poor farmers -APEX
Landowners took advantage of the workers
scalawags
they refused to sell goods to them
It kept the black farmers poor and dependent on white landowners.
Sharecropping was often referred to as a new form of slavery because tenants were bound to their landowners economically, much like slaves were tied to their owners. Sharecroppers rarely had autonomy or control over their own lives and were often kept in cycles of debt and poverty, similar to the conditions faced by slaves. Additionally, sharecroppers were often subject to exploitative contracts and harsh treatment by landowners.
Sharecropping
Sharecropping perpetuated a cycle of poverty for many Southern farmers, as they were often unable to earn enough to pay off their debts and gain independence. It also reinforced racial hierarchies and exploitation, as the majority of sharecroppers were Black farmers who faced discrimination and limited opportunities for economic advancement. Additionally, sharecropping contributed to the concentration of land and wealth in the hands of a few large landowners, further widening the economic disparities in the region.
It kept them dirt poor and always indebted to their landlords.
sharecropping affected African Americans and poor whites.
Sharecropping was very popular after the end of slavery in the US. It enabled very poor farmers of any color to earn a living from land owned by someone else. Debt peonage kept workers poor by forcing them to purchase goods from company run stores. This occurred both in the coal mines and in sharecropping.
As Rome grew, many Rome's rich landowners lived on huge estates. Small farmers found it difficult to compete with the large estates. So a large number of them old their lands to wealthy landowners. They became poor and jobless. So if they limited the size of the roman estates, the small farmers wouldn't have to sell lands and become poor.
The landowners both had former slaves and poor whites working for them.
Many were designed to keep the former slaves poor
The rich landowners hired slave labour. With this abundant supply of labour they could expand their landed estates at the expense of the peasant farmers who cultivated small plots of land to feed their families. It is not that these farmers lost their jobs. They were independent farmers. They lost their land and became became landless. In those days most people were peasants. The landless people flocked to Rome to eke out a living there, swelling the masses of the poor.
Taxes required of poor farmers