Bystating that “the power of producing wealth in any form is the power ofproducing subsistence” (George 143), George attributes wealth and subsistence withthe same definition. In making his claim, he compares the value of a set ofdiamonds to the value of barrels of flour. “A set of diamonds”, he says, “has avalue equal to so many barrels of flour-that is to say, it takes on the averageas much labor to produce the diamonds as it would to produce so much flour”(George 143). If the production of diamonds, however, increased in a countrywhile remaining its flour production equal, the ability of the country toproduce subsistence would not increase, while the overall wealth of the countrywould increase due to the value-difference between luxurious and subsistencegoods. Thus an increase in a country’s wealth does not necessarily infer anincrease in the country’s ability to sustain a bigger population. George’s argument would only stand true ifwealth was used to produce more subsistence, to cultivate larger crops.
In bookV, George sates his primary cause of poverty and “industrial depressions”(George 263).