The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1890-10-01
SINGLE TAX. DEPARTMENT.
THE SINGLE TAX WILL DOT.
A Labor Paper OF Alabama Stands Square,
~ on Our Platform.

The labor Advocate, OF Birmingham, !,
Ala, is the official organ of the trades
council Of that city, and is Endorsed by
the Knights Of Labor and the Farmers
Alliance of Alabama 1t is an exponent
of the principles Of trades unionism, but
advocates the single tax, and
ballot reform. Here is its argument in
favor Of the single tax:
Unemployed labor means dull times
for business, but the rent collector
makes his unfailing monthly round, and
gas and water bills must be met, rain or
shine.
To aggravate matters, the assessor
now calls upon every citizen for state
ment Of hissproperty, that largo per-
centage of its value may be taken for
public use.
Has a lot owner erected a building,
thus giving employment to labor and
creating business? The city and State
will punish him by taxing the value thus
created.
Has merchant large stock of
goods on hand, the production of which
has given employment to laborP The
State must have share Of their value
also.
Even the household furniture of the
poorest men and the most unfortunate
women must be taxed by the sovereign
people. .4
8 Is this just? Is it sensible? To tax
improvements is to discourage the em-
ployment ofslabor. Taxing goods has
the same effect. Taxing the poor mans
furniture is no better than highway rob
berry.
Our manufacturers say they can not
compete with Europe in the production
of goods. If we. take the taxes off the
manufacturers plants and products, he
then can compete with them.
If we take the taxes off houses, goods
and furniture, the cost Of living will be
less. Wages are tho last thing thatshould
be reduced, for good wages mean good
times. Reduce the workingman's abil-
ity to buy, and hard times are the nee.
essa.y result. 1876
' !, also hear tho senseless cry of over
at the very time when those
who. e labor produces all wealth are snf-
feril from want of the things they
have 7oduced.
Ruiz Gus taxation is tho main cause OF
there Icing such few manufacturing en-
terpri. sin the South. In many States
these industries are wholly or partly
exempt from taxation, but here all the
costly buildings and machinery are tax
ed to the fullest extent, some paying as
high as 81, 900 per. year.
We want boom, not a boom in sand
lots, but boom in business, in building
and manufacturing, and legitimate en-
terprises OF every kind. We want to make
work plenty and business brisk, and place
our city on a broader basis of prosper
ity. Therefore we must abandon this
stupid plan OF t.. king industry and en-
tcrprise. fhat
We have great natural advaF & u.
should give us the foremost. nnt.ctrra
most every branch q - asyant.ga
Work J, can ), 1e s,Ips sssa It is never too
~ nov 'te~Scold. All we need IS that
NV =, - cease to hamper and discourage
on.sindustries by unwise. unjust and
fliinous taxation.
Taxes are necessary, If justly laid and
honestly expended, they are benefit,
not an injury. 1t pays to have effective
iire, and police departments, good sew
ers and wcll-paved and lighted streets.
Then why do we grumb.e at paying Tor
them? - ....
The principal reason is that those who
pay the taxes do not get their just pro
portion Of tho benefits. Some pay heav'
lily and get but littlo benefit, while 9th
! crs who are greatly benefited pay little
or nothing.
Who pays them?
The man who is Industrious and en-
terprising; the man who builds house
factory or business block. Such
man increases tho value Of every foot o
land in the city, and we discourage hin
! by fining him for every nail he drlve'
and for every brick he lays.
| Is it any wonder that he grumble
I when We tax him for giving employ
ment to labor? Is itany wonder that me-
are out OF work when we punish capita
for employing them? We have adapte
the Turkish method of taxation: "Whe
you see any thing, grab it"
T. It isa great injustice to tax one ma
for the benefit of others, when he ha
already increased the value OF thei
4 property by his improvements. III
i burden OF. taxation falls mainly upo
the man who improves, while those VIII
stand in the way Of improvements al
q left off with nominal tax.
This is not equitable. Those who r
ceive the benefit of taxes spent shou
! pay them. This is but simple justic
and the only question should be wi
J reaps the benefits?
4 Do public improvements increase u
81 value Of buildings? No; but they do l
crease the value OF land. Therefore,
we wish to tax the man who receiv
. the benefit, we must tax the Value
the. land only.
It may be said that the rate won
have to be raised. Well, suppose
+. were, what difference would it ma
whether man paid $50 a year on
Il house and lot,5or $50 year on his
alone? Not any; but it would maxi
!. great difference 10 the speculator, v
j blocks improvements by asking !
!. prices for vacant lands.
q Mathematical demonstration
: show that If all the taxable land in t
! city was assessed at its market val
/ and all other property exempted,
. would not be necessary to raise the r