Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1883-07-01
THE LAND THEORY OF
HENRY GEORGE.
It Would Iniare Labor and Dis
tress the Poor.
SIXTH PAPER.

labor in three ways only: =
BY tightening the burdens OF
toll. by increasing the sum
paid as the wages of labor and
BY making cheaper the COM
modities which labor requires
for subsistence.
It must be ADMITTED that,
labor would receive no direct
advantage from the payment OF
rent to the Government-that is,
it would get no share Of the
money paid. 1t must also be adj
mitted that, labor could not be
benefited, except by the Gre
alton of mere work, diminishing
the amount Of force or length VI
time necessary to produce Il
given result, or making the
same amount of force yield
greater amount of wages. Wa
ees must be raised, or food made
cheaper, the purchasing power
of money remaining undis-
turbed. But to advance the
wages of labor there must be
more work, or fewer workers /;
and to cheaper food, there must
be a greater supply, or less con-
sumption. The law of demand
and supply controls the problem.
Now, the demand for the pro-
ducts of labor, would not be in
creased by taking rent for the
use of the Government. Pre-
cise.y the same number OF
mouths must be fed, and backs
clothed. Neither the number,
nor the condition of laborers,
would be beneficially effected.
Labor would gain no additional
employment. The hours OF
toll would not be shortened !;
nor would the burdens of labor
be made lighter.
The price Of labor would not
advance, because, there beng
no greater demand for labor,
and no diminution of laborers,
no cause exists to produce the
advance. In truth the reverse
would follow. The Imposition
of additional and heavy burdens
upon land, would discourage the
cultivation Of the soil and re
strict, rather than enlarge, the
number of employees 1t would
compel owners to additional! ex-
ertion. Land owners in moder-
ate circumstances, who now live
on rent, employ help, and enjoy
leisure, would be forced to per-
fern the labor themselves, OF
abandon the cultivation of the
soil. Thus the field Of labor
mould be narrowed; the number
of lab0rers increased; the num-
Der of consumers, and demand .fo'
supplies remaining as before. The
poor, by reason Of their depend
ent situation, would be the
principal sufferers, and theil
destitutien and misery, would
be more appalling than ever.
1t remains IT, be seen whether
the proposed remedy would
cheaper food and those article:
required for the subsistence o
labor. 1t would not, unless by
maj ing food more abundant
and food could only bec"m'
more abundant by the cultiva-
ton of more land or better cul-
tivating the land in present use
But neither result would follow
The exactiOn of rent would Ia!
IN additional and OnerOus bur
dens upon land, and make cult
walton, in the aggregate, vastl.
less profitable. It would dis
courage farming. Capital in
vested in agriculture would b
Withdrawn, and farm product
would be diminished in guam
tity, and limited to actual neces
stiles. 1t were absurd to argu
that, the products of the soil
would increase, as the bushes
of cultivation became less r.
munerative or that food w"ul
be made cheaper, by increasin
the cost of producing it.
Not only would no advantag
accrue to labor from the adop
ton of Henry Georges scheme
but a positive and iinmeasu.abl
injury would result.
1t would increase the numbe
of those compelled to live by Il
Dor, without creating additions
work, and diminish private re,
enues by appropriating to pub
lie uses, that upon which, mil
lions of individuals now sutsis
1t would create a revenue, ia
in excess of the necessitit
of legitim ate gOvernmer