But in this case, you see, the farmer does get some return for his extra labour. That is to say, he gets half the necklaces in exchange for half his grain; for there is no rich man. Suppose next a community of three--one of whom is a landlord, while the other two are farmers. The landlord takes half the produce of the land in rent, but does no work. What happens? We saw just now that the two workers could produce enough grain in six hours to feed two men for one day. Of this the landlord takes half. Therefore, the two men must now produce four men's food in one day, of which the landlord will take two, leaving the workers each one. Well, if it takes a man six hours to produce a day's keep for one, it will take him twelve hours to produce a day's keep for two. So that our two farmers must now work twice as long as before. But now the landlord has got twice as much grain as he can eat. He therefore proceeds to _spend_ it, and in spending it he "finds useful employment" for one of the farmers. That is to say, he takes one of the farmers off the land and sets him to building a house for the landlord. What is the effect of this? The effect of it is that the one man left upon the land has now to find food for all three, and in return gets nothing. Consider this carefully. All men must eat, and here are two men who do not produce food. To produce food for one man takes one man six hours. To produce food for three men takes one man eighteen hours. The one man left on the land has, therefore, to work three times as long, or three times as hard, as he did at first. In the case of the two men, we saw that the farmer did get his share of the bead necklaces, but in the case of the three men the farmer gets nothing. The luxuries produced by the man taken from the land are enjoyed by the rich man. The landlord takes from the farmer two-thirds of his produce, and employs another man to help him to spend it. We have here three classes-- 1. The landlord, who does no work. 2. The landlord's servant, who does work for the benefit of the landlord. 3. The farmer, who produces food for himself and the other two. Now, all the peoples of Europe, if not of the world, are divided into those three classes. And it is _most important_ that you should thoroughly understand those three classes, never forget them, and never allow the rich man, nor the champions of the rich man, to forget them. The jockeys, huntsmen, and flunkeys alluded to just now, belong to the class who work, but whose work is all done for the benefit of the idle. Do not be deceived into supposing that there are but _two_ classes: there are _three_. Do not believe that the people may be divided into workers and idlers: they must be divided into (1) idlers, (2) workers who work for the idlers, and (3) workers who support the idlers and those who work for the idlers. These three classes are a relic of the feudal times: they represent the barons, the vassals, and the retainers.