If an Austrian wine-producer or a farmer is six times less capable to produce than an American farmer; and if this Austrian farmer [SN: POVERTY IS IMPOSSIBLE.] can easily defray the multiple expenses of his family and his own out of the results of his less capable labor and live comfortably every year, the American farmer ought to have five times as much of net profit from the results of his capable labor energy as the Austrian farmer can spend every year for his living. So that, living in the same way as the Austrian, the American farmer ought to be in six years fully thirty times wealthier than an Austrian farmer of an ordinary type. How is it then that the wealth of the sturdy American farm tenant consists on the average of but $360 per family of nearly five members each; while an Austrian farmer is incomparably better off, being almost always a propertied man? And if seven American laborers are able to serve 1,000 persons with bread and feed themselves every year, it is perfectly legitimate, then, that every one of them should have a yearly profit of his labor, which is equal to the value of bread, yearly consumed by nearly 143 men. And this yearly profit must quickly make a considerable amount of wealth in his store. How is it then that the millions of American producers of bread, each supplying hundreds of [SN: POVERTY EXISTS.] persons, are obliged to live from hand to mouth, having neither property nor land, nor any other wealth in store for their future? And if their productivity testifies that they are able to feed and clothe the world, as Mr. Atkinson very reasonably affirms, is it not highly important to find out who profits by their remarkably efficient labor energy? Or, who yearly devours the surplus of their products, leaving them in poverty? Further, the work of one American miner, “for one year, divided between the coal-mine, the iron-mine and the iron-furnace,” ultimately [SN: NO ROOM FOR POVERTY.] “suffices for the supply of 500 persons” with the metallic goods and utilities they consume in a year. “One operator in the cotton factory can provide goods for 250, in the woolen factory for 300, in a boot or shoe factory for 1,000 men or more than 1,000 women”—one worker in any of these industries, in one year, can work out the respective goods these numbers of consumers require for a year, thus showing that the productivity of every operator is simply phenomenal.