We naturally discussed this point a good deal, and they brought up a little party of the new economists to enlighten me--Dr. Harkness, sociologist; Mr. Alfred Brown, Department of Production; Mrs. Allerton of the Local Transportation Bureau; and a young fellow named Pike, who had written a little book on "Distinctive Changes of Three Decades," which I found very useful. "It was such a simple matter, after all, you see," the sociologist explained to me, in an amiable class-room manner. "Suppose now you were considering the poverty of one family, an isolated family, sir. Now, if this family was poor, it would be due to the limitations of the individual or of the environment. Limitations of the individual would cover inefficiency, false theory of industry, ill-judged division of labor, poor system of production, or misuse of product. Limitation of environment would, of course, apply to climate, soil, natural products, etc. No amount of health, intelligence or virtue could make Iceland rich--if it was completely isolated; nor England, for that matter, owing to the inexorable limitations of that environment. "Here in this country we have no complaint to make of our natural resources. The soil is capable of sustaining an enormous population. So we have merely to consider the limitations of individuals, transferring our problem from the isolated family to the general public. "What do we find? All the limitations I enumerated! Inefficiency--nearly every one below par in working power in the generation before last, as well as miserably educated; false theories of industry everywhere--idiotic notions as to what work was 'respectable' and what wasn't, more idiotic notions of payment; worst of all, most idiotic ideas that work was a curse . . . Might as well call digestion a curse! Dear! Dear! How benighted we were! "Then there was ill-judged division of labor--almost universal; that evil. For instance, look at this one point; half the workers of the world, nearly, were restricted to one class of labor, and that in the lowest industrial grade." "He means women, in housework, John," Nellie interpolated. "We never used to think of that as part of our economic problem." "It was a very serious part," the professor continued, hastily forestalling the evident intention of Mr. Brown to strike in, "but there were many others. The obvious utility of natural specialization in labor seemed scarcely to occur to us. Our system of production was archaic in the extreme; practically _no_ system was followed." "You must give credit to the work of the Department of Agriculture, Dr. Harkness," urged Mr. Brown, "the introduction of new fruits, the improvement of stocks----" "Yes, yes," agreed Dr. Harkness, "the rudiments were there, of course; but no real grasp of organized productivity. And as to misuse of product--why, my dear Mr. Robertson, it is a wonder anybody had enough to live on in those days, in view of our criminal waste.