No Massively Industrialised (US of) America

You confound prosperity with industrialization. They are not sinonimous at all. Russia and many East Europe countries developed a lot of industrial districts (usually awfully polluting).

ah, come on guys, I'm just tweaking CW's nose, stop interfering with my fun...
 
First off, let me presume this doesn't equate to swimming lessons for a certain *ahem* marine mammal?:p

I think you may have 2 mutually exclusive issues here. Reducing population or immigration may not be the way to go. As I understand it, the U.S. has historically had low pop relative to Europe, or lo #of artisans, & so had to rely on machine tools & innovation, emphasizing, even demanding, it. Reducing immigration may well increase that trend, rather than reduce it. IMO, there might be a better way. While I admit my knowledge of economics could fit on a postcard,:p I do know shocks (panics, they used to be called:p) tend to make banks leery of lending. (Can't imagine why...:p) So around the Panic of 1819, or the failure to recharter BotUS or 2BotUS, or somewhere, can you get an extended period of "shakiness" or nervousness? My thought is something like a long tension around slavery, where the free soil-slave issue never reaches "Bleeding Kansas" levels but simmers longer, enough that foreign money is extremely leery of coming to the U.S. (& it was mainly Brit & Fr $, AFAIK, that built much of the U.S. infrastructure in the '30s-'60s). As a result, U.S. industries are slower to grow. This also, probably, means industrialization elsewhere (Br & Fr, Canada, Oz, SAf, even India, plus Germany & Russia) is greater; the $$ are going to go somewhere.... You might see a greater pressure on China & Japan sooner, too.

If it's due to less immigration, you could delay the ACW by a decade or more, as fewer people come to northern states/territories, & there's a greater balance between free/slave states. (How you deal with the flood of the California Gold Rush, & the exploration north to Frazer, Barkerville, Yale, & the Yukon, & inland to Cherry Creek, I don't know...)

If you get greater development in Europe, that could have real ramifications on future wars. Semi-auto rifles, armored cars, tanks, "modern" (WW1 OTL) submarines, & airplanes could all appear sooner than OTL. Large luxury liners probably don't as soon. Immigration from Europe to Canada, SAfr, & Oz is probably a lot higher than OTL (& speaking for Canada, that could well push forward the National Railway by over a decade versus OTL), but still less, IMO, than to the U.S. until quite late. (Of course, if the numbers to Oz & SAfr are higher, the big ships might appear roughly OTL for those routes, but the Blue Riband probably is less significant.) In the same vein, you might get earlier zeps (using Lenoir's 1860 engine?) & airlines, plus tourists into N India, NZ, Polynesia, & Hawaii (annex by Britain instead? Russia?), & earlier exploration of Africa (by air). I can also picture a growth of domestic bicycle industries much sooner than OTL in Canada, Oz, India, China, & Japan (maybe in all countries, for greater $ invested, in a period when newness was desirable), followed sooner than OTL by cyclecars, motorcycles, & cars. This, naturally, demands better roads... Greater mobility in armies breeds a demand for greater infantry firepower breeds SARs, SMGs, & ultimately assault rifles, as well as (probably) something like tanks (tho IMO they'd happen rather later, with armored cars first) & APCs (again, IMO, more BTR-60 than M113 at first); I picture armored cars with 8 or 10 wheels & sand tires (dune buggy tires) for quite awhile before tracks. This will tend to demand liquid fuel; could be oil from Ontario,:D:p Alberta,:D:p Saskatchewan,:D:D:D:p or Baku,:eek: or could be palm/nut oil from Central America.... And rubber for tires, from Brazil & DEI.
 
Reducing population or immigration may not be the way to go. As I understand it, the U.S. has historically had low pop relative to Europe, or lo #of artisans, & so had to rely on machine tools & innovation, emphasizing, even demanding, it. Reducing immigration may well increase that trend, rather than reduce it.

But this would be true even for Europe. It's exactly what happened after the great 14th century plague: for the first time there was a need for incentivate mechanization (well for the times, of course :p).

In the example I proposed, Europe would become more industrialized than OTL, while the lack of emigrants would curb the US expansion toward the west, allowing for indipendent states to arise.
 
Top