There was time when a village (community or habitat) was self-sufficient, a la Gandhiji's dream. It had all - carpenters, (black, brass, gold, tin, gun & other kinds) -smiths , water carriers, oil-pressers, potters, weavers, tailors, pundits, midwives, apothecaries, doctors, money-lenders, teachers sans cooks, plumbers, electricians, beauticians, realtors, taxicabs - apart from main stream agriculturists. We, in my language have a popular verse of a famous medieval poet, an advice to a prospective settler in search of village to put his bag down to settle. It says 'don't enter a village if it doesn't have (in order of priority) - moneylender, doctor, a perennial stream along side and a brahmin (pundit, priest or maulah)'.
With most artisan-trades vanishing into a thin air with steady inroads of industrialisation where it is possible to mass produce in a centralised factory in a big town or city and sold in a big shop in a town or city, who would patronise an xyz-smith in a uvw-village? It seems 'Smith' used to be the usual & most prevalent English surname; that shows that the society there was basically of working class origin, .
The tailors that I used to see everywhere are not there any more. In the past, in a social situation like a refugee or exodus problem where the inmates in the camp need to be provided employment, the first thing that comes to mind is a 'sewing machine' to each lady & with tailoring classes to impart the training, that would ensure her & family three meals a day. But not now, she would go hungry. I wish someone read a short story (Bombay Tailor) in Telugu, by my friend Khadir Babu.It is the story of a leading tailor in a small town who goes to join a garment producing sweat-shop & comes out in disgust.
Now the village farmers sell off all their produce and buy th same from the super bazaar.
With all this the stage is set for the migration of people from villages to cities = Urbanisation.
So the question really is why...