Los Angeles daily herald., 1890-02-08
SINGLE TAX.
Answer to Crft1cisms by a Disciple
of Henry George.

Answer to Crisicisms by n Disciple
of Henry George.
EDITORS HERALD-Your recent criti-
cism of the single tax is, I believe, unin-
tentionally unfair. The general inference
to be drawn therefrom is that land which
heretofore has been paying 81 per acre
taxes would, with the single tax in vogue,
pay $40 per acre, and that this increased
tax would be added to the product of the
soil.
First, let me explain that in Los Ange-
les county, according to the official as
sessment returns of last year, real estate
was valued at $40 OOO, 900, while improve
ments we're $50, 900 600 Gin round num-
oers). How would the taxes on land be
raised tenfold by exempting so per cent.
of the now taxable property and adding
enough on the remaining 20 per cent. to
make up the deficiency? Ordinary
mathematics would give the following re-
suits: Ii 100000 600 worth of property
Yields enough revenue at 81 per
500 taxes, $4,000, 900 worth OF
property would yield enough rev.
enue if taxed at the rate of 81 AZ per
500 Therefore, instead of an increase
of 900 per cent. in the land tax, as you
figured it, the single tax applied to this
county alone would increase the land tax
oalv AZ per cent.
It will probably be said that the single
tax is intended to absorb tie whole ''un-
earned increment" or, to use the correct
terms, the whole economic rent, and
that the above mentioned increase of the
land value tax would not absorb the
whole land rent. To this 1 would say
that by the time the tariff taxes as well
as all other Federal taxes are abolished,
and in lieu thereof an increase is made
on the iand-value tax, which will tend to
discourage, and in time eliminate, spec
ulation in land, the effect of which will
be to reduce land values, it will be found
that the economic rent is just about ab-
sorbed by the single tax.
: But you say this tax would be added
to the price of the products of the land,
and in the city the landlord would add
the tax to the rent. There, Mr.. Editor,
you have the opinion of all the great
political economists of the last century
against you, and what is more, both the
ory and practice show that the more
taxes are put on land the more anxious
|
the more land is forced upon the market
the lower its price and rent What a
howl went up in this county because
land was assessed little high last year.
If this tax could be added to the rent,
landlords would not object. They would
do just like tobacco and whiskey men
do-howl to have the tax made higher.
There is every reason to believe, and
we have the opinion of such men
as Ricaido, Mills, McCoulloch, Buckle,
and others, that of all the taxes this
country levies for any purpose, the tax
on land values is the only tax which can
not be shifted upon the consumer OF
user.
To those who cay that the landlord
would add the single-tax to the rent,
this question might be put with per-
tiDence: Why don't he raise his rent
now? 1t is just as easy now as it would
be after he is taxed more. The trouble
is, if they raise the rent higher than the
location is worth, the renter moves out.
There is always cheaper land to be had
especially when the tax makes it unproft-
able to hold land idle.
The fact is rents are determined by
the law of supply and demand, and
landlords always take all the rent they
can get regardless of what tax they pay.
To the farmer l would say, you need
not fear the single tax; you would have
less taxes to pay than now, because now
you are taxed on speculative land values,
and taxed on all yeur improvements and
personal property. We aim to tax land
values, not land, and you know very
we'll the valuable land is in the cities
there is where the High ground rents are
paid. These are what would be taken
for revenue. Other sources of revenue
would be the rich coal lands, iron noun
tains, timber lands, water fronts, ETC.,
those rich bounties of nature which now
fill the pockets of the monopolist.
| I wish TO make one observation, Mr..
Editor: When Henry George faced the
Los Angeles audience for two hours an
swering questions, not one protectionist
question was asked the man.
S. BYRON WELCOME.