The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1891-02-04
VOL. XLVI.-NO. 6.

ton that lie enjoys anu 10 De lelt Tree
to improve to the extent of his desire?
The burden of taxation that farmers
will have to bear will depend, like that
of the home owner, on the value Of the
bare land they appropriate. Farmers
are now taxed on the value OF their
land, their buildings, their fences, their
drainage, their stock and their produce.
Let our brilliant Kansas editor submit
to The farmers of his acquaintance the
alternative of a tax on all these values
or on the value of the land alone, and
see which they will chose.
When the average working farmer APP
praises the value of his buildings, fences,
drainage, stock and produce in one
class and the value of his bare land in
another. he will find that the totals are
about as four to one. The total of the
first class it is proposed to exempt; but
under the present system the total OF
both classes is taxed.
And this is not all. When taxes are
imposed solely on land values, SO much
land that is now held out of use for spec
ulation will seek market that the value
of all land will fall; and as it falls the
farmers tax will recede. It's probable,
if the speculative value of land were
eliminated, as it would be under the
land value tax, that the value of the
average working farmers improve.
ments, stock and produce, compared to
the value of his bare land, would he as
ten to one. In many cases it would be
as the whole is to nothing.
Home owners and farmers now bear
the burden of taxes, and the land value
tax would emancipate them. When we
consider the special privileges that the
wealthy classes enjoy, their taxes are
exceedingly light compared to those OF
the house owner and the farmer, whose
special privileges are meager. The only
special privilege that the average home
owner and working farmer enjoys is
the exclusive right to piece of land,
the value of which relatively to the val
ue of the wealth he produces is trifle;
but there are mine owners, city lot.
owners, railroad owners, telegraph
owners and currency makers whose
special privileges. relatively to the
wealth they produce are in value close
on to hundred times. Owners of coal
mines, for example, get thirty-five cents
a ton for all coal mined; how much
wealth do they produce? None. Under
the land value tax, which bears only
upon special privileges, they, and such
as they. and not the home owner or the
farmer, would bear the burden of tax.
alton; and it is in the interest of bene.
fciaries of these special privileges that
the farmer is appealed to to defeat the
land value tax.
Thus far of the farmer who owns his
farm and the head of \ family who
owns his home. But what of the ten
ant farmer and the tenant house holder,
two constantly growing classes? They
must now pay annually to a land
lord all that their land is worth and
an indirect tax on what they con-
sumo, as well as direct taxes. Under
the land value tax they would pay no
more for the land than they do now; in
deed, they would pay less, for land val
ues would fall with the increase of the
market supply of land. They would
pay no more for the improvements than
they do now, but less; for with the in
crease of production and reduction OF
land values both parties to an exchange
would get more with less work. And
they would pay no.taxes on what they
consumed, nor any other tax except
what they paid to the landlord in the
form of ground rent.
But the sum total of benefits to the
farmer and the home owner is not yet
reached. The average farmer and the
average home owner are workingmen.
have considered, SO far, only the BEN
efts they will enjoy as consumers; their
benefits as producers. are veto be seen.
We have already observed that their in
terests as capital owners and laborers
are greater than their interests as land
owners; therefore tax that exempts
their interests as capital owners and
laborers, even though it wholly absorbs
their interests as land owners, must be-
beneficial to them. And SO it is. The
wages of their labor will rise with wages
| generally.
Stating the proposition in the terms OF
political economy. the land value tax
will raise the margin Of production,
and as wages rise with the rise Of the
margin of production wages will rise
with the imposition OF the land value
tax. In terms more familiar TO the
Kansas editor, the land value tax will
i abolish the value Of all land not espec-
tally desirable. Any land that is not in
demand for use will bear no rent; and
land that is not more desirable, even
though in use, will also be free OF rent.
Consequently, occupiers Of such land
/ will have no tax to pay. Now, there Is
q great deal Of just such land, but be
cause it is held out of use for specula-
ton users OF land must take up with
less desirable locations, and as wages
are regulated by the produce Of the
least desirable land in use wages are
lower now than they will be when the
more desirable locations are to be hal
free of rent or purchase price.
BY wages is meant, Of course, the re
turn for ones labor, whether paid by
/ an employer as in factories, or direct,
, out of his produce as in the case o
{ farmers. Hence, the condition Of ,
/ working farmer in his capacity o
: producer, as well as in that Of consum
er, must improve under the land valu
q tax, as will that of the small HON
4 owner, what ever be his vocation
h Louis f. Post, in the Standard.