Evidently, a great deal more of manual labor is necessary to serve the ever-increasing amount of factories in our nation due to the industrial revolution. I myself have witnessed the growth of many cities due to the sheer amount of workers necessary to provide the labor for our country. Should an abundance of workers be provided, I am convinced that the American economy would flourish in a way that was previously unfeasible. Moreover, factories have seen immense success employing children as their small stature enables them to easily perform certain tasks. Thus, I propose that each impoverished American family shall provide a minimum of three children to government-funded slavery, where they will labor at factories until they come of age.

I can think of no possible argument of any validity against implementing this in society promptly. Assuming that each impoverished family is given at most ten years to complete this task, and that each child spared is no younger than 7, this is entirely achievable should the mother bear a child at least once a year. Furthermore, the workplaces could easily provide living quarters for the children, as well as complimentary food and water assuming that the children did not receive payment for their labor. I have calculated that the average adult unskilled worker receives approximately two dollars a day in wages. Should a factory replace much of its workforce with children, of which there is an abundant supply, they shall be able to provide the necessary food and water for no more than two dollars, possibly resulting in a slight increase in profits, or at the very least assuredly no decrease. 

The pure logic of this proposal aside, let us consider the many benefits of this solution to both the children involved and to American society. Firstly, my proposal would provide impoverished children with a useful, if somewhat harsh education in the ways of factory life, whilst making them useful to the public. Exposing poor children to factory work provides them a position in society that will insure that they do not turn to dishonest means of supporting themselves. Some may argue of the supposed "cruelty" of child labor, yet fail to weight its costs with its benefits. A good friend of mine, the renowned John D. Rockefeller, has assured me of his resolute support of employing children. Alas, conceivably, many children would lose a finger, or perhaps even an arm or a leg to the factory machines, but this is hardly a valid argument. It was likely to happen anyways considering these children are bound for factory work, and it builds character.

Lastly, it would be foolish to avoid discussing the obvious economic prosperity that the utilization of poor children could provide our country with. With a great number of workers at their disposal, factories could produce goods at a record-breaking rate, supplying our nation with a profuseness of wealth. A boosted economy would facilitate more inventions, and therefore an increase in factories and employment, continuing the cycle of prosperity for our nation. Such economic growth would allow America to establish its rightful place as a world power, dominating the domains of technology and manufacturing.

I cannot see how any man of a sound mind and conscience could possibly oppose this proposal, now that he has been assured of its strong logic and indisputable benefits to our nation’s impoverished children and the economy. Regrettably, those of us who share my humble perspective are sadly decreasing in numbers. However, I leave you with the thought that America has the power to better the lives of impoverished children whilst simultaneously increasing the prosperity of its own economy. Anyone in opposition to this proposal must not truly possess love for our nation and sympathy for our needy children.