The cost per acre is less, no fuel or chemicals. The down side is animal care and time.
Yes, exactly! The cost may be less, but production will be much less.
Remember, there is a good reason that oil is so valuable and widely used - it is a lot of energy per volume. Oxen are less. You put less in, you get less out and vice versa. You get less, it becomes more expense and less available. And, people have to work much, much harder. It is what it is.
You mean with a magic ox you do not need fertilizer, and weed and bug management not to mention all the types of plant fungus.
The cost per acre is less? When one farmer could easily till and cultivate a section of land (640 acres) at just a few dollars per acre, and yield $160,000 of wheat at average yield and price of $5.
And a farmer using oxen would be heavily challenged to farm 80 acres, and earn a whopping $20,000. Well, then another 8 farms would have to spring up to handle what one farmer used to easily handle with one tractor.
You also did not consider the large land area it takes to support and feed the oxen. (or horses) You also eliminated the use of “chemicals” which includes high yield fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides which adds another 50% to the overall crop yield.
You are either incredibly naive, a hard core hippie Liberal, or vastly ignorant to make these claims on this thread.