Before there was large industries, were most common peoples in poverty?

Like wealth, poverty is relative. Serfs and peasants owned their own houses, somethhing many people today can't manage. Farmers worked according to the demands of the season, but in Catholic lands people had 1/3 of the year off in religious holidays, and work in winter could be slow and leisurely. Families worked together as a unit. Medical care was bad, but it was bad all over. Family and clan cohesion provided a stable social life. Peasants had very limited wardrobes, but they usually made their own clothing and shoes, so that actual cost was small.

In the cities tradesmen and guild members had what would be today called upper working class lifestyles. They had townhouses, which they rented for very small amounts of money, and had to buy their food. They had a more varied diet, and they could afford small luxuries such as books and more candles. Day laborers were the worst off. Wages were low, so low that the price of bread was a major consideration.

They also lived in the most cramped quarters, with 2-3 families in the same small apartment. These people could not afford heat and must have been miserable in the winters.

Before the middle of the nineteenth-century everyone except the aristocracy lived in what WE would consider poverty. In fact people we consider "poor" today probably have a higher standard of living than the aristocracy had then. Most "common people" lived what was considered a comfortable life at the time with what they considered acquitted housing and food.

There were a lot more trade workers such as family farms, welders, coopers, cobblers, stuff like that. The amount who were poor depends rather on what country they lived in.

No, most people were involved in agriculture. Poor yes, but define "poverty" in their terms, not ours.

Skilled tradesmen or merchants.