Los Angeles daily herald., 1890-02-09
THE RESULT.
Henry Georges Single-Tax Theory
AmalyZed.

Editors HERA,D-The substance of Mr..
Georges proposition seems to be this:
The object he aims at is to exempt
from taxation all labor and its prod
ucts. To effect this he proposes
that the public expenses shall be
wholly paid from the public earnings.
These public earnings that he would
thus use are the increased values given
to certain lands by the aggregation of
population, and the increase OF business
on and adjacent to these lands. This
increased value of land is called its un-
earned increment, because the increase
is given to it by community as whole.
and not by the labors of the owner, and
therefore is unearned by the individual
owner of the land. The increased value
given to the land by the buildings,
trees, crops and other improvements
placed thereon by the labor and
capital of the owner, belongs
to the owner. The land itself at its orig
inal value also belongs to the owner;
although Mr.. George did not make clear
how or for what price the first individual
owner acquired his title. All that be-
longs to the owner, however; that is, the
land at its original value and all the I'M
provements made on it by its successive
owners, the present owner and bis sGc-
cessors in title are to own, occupy and
use free Of rent, tax or charge OF any
kind. But the increased value given to
it by the silent operation of an increasing
population and civilization belongs to the
community. For the use of that por-
ton of his possessions, the owner
of the land must pay rent
to the Government, the agent of the
community. This rent the Government
calls tax. To illustrate: Assume say
$40 an acre as the original value of cer-
tain lands when society was in its prim-
tive state. The improvements placed
on an acre since then by. its successive
owners are now worth 81 900. But the
acre is now in or near thriving village
or city, and is, by reason of this, worth,
with its improvements, So 600; which
value has been bought or created, and is
therefore owned thus
By the individual owner, the original
onas,s ants ono
Total belonging to the individual
OWner ......-............- .s..........' .@l,OlO
by reason of its proximity to popula-
ton and business. s.....................,$ 800
Total value OF property. 50, 900
For the use or advantage of this 1890
value, created by and therefore belong
ing to the community, the owner of the
81 ,010 value, who is in possession of the
whole, must pay rental or tax. But for
his own 81 ,0l0 value he pays no tax.
Another and similar acre with like i'm
provements may be 30 remote from and
unaffected by aggregations of population
and business that community has not
added to it's value, and therefore having
no proprietary interest therein, it asks
no rent or tax. The only value OF the
acre is:
Its original value e....................$ s 10
Owners improvements .................. 1000
Total present value ........S1 ,O1O
This 81 ,010 value the owner possesses
and uses free of taxation the same as the
owner OF the 1,0l0 value in the acre
near the town enjoys the same value free
of taxation. Neither the town nor the
country owner pays any tax on what be-
longs to him, but as all there is of the
country owners acre belongs to him he
pays no tax at all, and the town owner
pays tax only on the 5000, the value of
the unearned increment on his town
acre
The result of this method of taxation
would be, OF course, to throw the entire
burden thereof on cities and villages and
the farms near them. The rate of taxa
tion would be highest ar the center of
business in each city and village, and
would gradually diminish away to the
residence portion, then to the suburbs,
to the near by vegetable gardens
and farms, and to the thickly settled
agricultural districts and taxation would
finally disappear wholly on reaching the
sparseIy settled farms which, by their
remoteness from centers of business and
population, would have no value except
their original value and that which their
owners have added to them by their in
dividual efforts in improvements.
This appears, from Mr.. Georges utter
ances while here, and without going to
his books to study up his doctrines in
detail and with accuracy, to be his plan
of taxation in it's salient features and
the reason for it. His idea seems to be
that society in its most primitive condi-
tion needed no government that
cost nything-consisting, perhaps, OF
single families, each wholly iso-
lated from all the others. Family
government answered all needs
and cost nothing. But as population
and business increased, the increase de-
veloped necessity for government
that was attended with expense and the
same increase also developed an en-
HANGED value of lands in certain locai-
ties. Mr.. Georges proposition to apply
the profits growing out of this change
from savagery to civilization, to the pay.
ment of the expenses necessarily attend
ing it, would appear to rest in sound
reason. If this policy had been adopted
in the beginning, there would have
been no difficulty in it's practical appli-
cation, and if persisted in down to the
present time, it would have been and
would be now to the great relief of the
heavily taxed tcilers. In fact it looks as
if it would relieve labor of all taxation.
But the utilization of this apparently
correct principle at that time and under
those circumstances is a very different
affair from applying it to the present
condition of things. Society has never
laid claim to this unearned increment of
land value and the individual owner of
land has appropriated it to bis own use.
He has regarded it as his own, the same
as the original value and the value Of
his improvements. When he has sold
he has sold that with the rest and has
received its equivalent in cash. What