Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1891-01-01
SINGLE TAX DEPARTMENT.
TAXING LAND VALUES.
Henry George in n. Y. Standard
CONTINUED FROM LAST ISSUE.


necessarily taxes IN favor of monopoly
since the more capital it requires to &c
into any business, or to make any i'm
provement, the smaller the number o.
those who can do SO. And, besides this
general characteristic of the taxes we
would abolish, many of these taxes are
specially designed to foster monopolies.
1t is. moreover, evident that when a
large part of the produce of labor and
capital of the community is taken in
rent by those who do nothing to aid in
production Cfor land owners as land
owners in no wise aid production), there
| is not merely created an unnecessary
and unnatural inequality in the distri-
| bution of wealth. but this primary in
| equality gives rise to tendency to fur
Their ineq uality Unto him that hath
shall be given. and from him that hath
not shall be taken away" is the express
sion of a universal law. To take from
one and give to another is, both by de-
| creasing the relative power of the one
and increasing the relative power of the
| other, to put them upon unequal foot
ings in treating future divisions. If we
trace to their cause the major
ity of great fortunes, we shall
find it in monopolies of some
kind-the primary and most i'm
| portant of all being the monopoly Of the
land. 1t is not because capital gets an
undue proportion of the wealth that it
helps to produce Though capital in some
| of its aggregations which involve
monopoly does) that, in spite of all the
| enormous advances which invention and
| improvement and the growth OF popula-
| ton have made, and still are making. in
| productive power, labor gets but such a
| scant living, and wages tend constantly
| to the minimum that will support life
| With the advance of the arts and the
| progress of society, interest-which
| measures the return to capital-does not
| increase, but tends rather to diminish.
1t is rent which goes up, and UP, and up.
To divert to common uses this great
fund which, though drawn from the pro-
| duction of the whole community, now
goes to but portion of the community.
would be to turn into promoter of
equality what is now a promoter of
inequality. To release capital from tax
alton, to lift the burden W hich now rests
upon Improvement and production, to
destroy speculative land values, and
throw open land to those who would use
it, would open opportunities for labor in
every direction and send wages up. In
all industries laborers would get fairer
proportion than now of the value their
labor creates.
With relation to the factors of pro-
duction and the primary distribution of
the produce, society is divided for pur-
poses Of economic investigation into
three classes-land owners, capitalists
and laborers. OF these it is evident
that the change would be to the advan-
tage of the capitalists and 1aborers, and
to the disadvantage of the land owners.
But it is only in the abstract that such
a distinction can be clearly made in any
country, and especially in such "a coun-
try as ours. We have, it is true, con-
siderable class of laborers who are
neither capitalists nor land owners; but
we have few capitalists who are not la
borers. for in the economic use of the
term the managing head of any great in
drstrial enterprise is as truly a laborer
as is any workman in his employ; and
we have probably no land owners who
are not either laborers or capitalists,
for. in the strict definition of the term,
not land (*). A very great number of
our people combine the characters of
land owner. capitalist and laborer, and
there are certainly large majority who
com bine at least two of these characters.
Thus, while all would profit in the gem
eral social gains, it is only in the char
acter of land owner that against these
general gains any one could set indi-
vidual loss. Therefore, the proposition
to concentrate taxes on land values
should, as matter of mere individual
interest, commend itself even to land
owners whose interests as land owners
do not exceed their interests as capital
lists or laborers, or both.
With reference to the ownership of
land and with regard to actual facts, our
people may be divided into three
classes-those who own land which they
do not themselves use, those who own
land which they use, and those who own
no land. The latter class may contain
some capitalists, but it is mainly COM
posed of laborers-farm hands, manual
laborers, operatives, mechanics, clerks,
professional men, etc, who depend for
their living upon the earnings of their
labor. This is the class which it is most
important to consider, not merely for
sentimental reasons, but because, since
they constitute the base of the social
pyramid, whatever improves or de-
presses their condition, will affect all
the rest. Now, it is manifest that to
take taxes off capital and improvement
and production and exchange would be
greatly to benefit all of those who live
by their earnings, whether of hand or
head. 1t is manifest also that it would
benefit all who live partly by the earn
ings of their labor and partly by the |
earnings of their al-store-keepers, |
manufacturers, etc.-and |
that by increasing the net productive /,
ness of capital it would benefit those |
whose incomes are drawn from capital |
alone.
Take now the case of those to whom
the opponents of the single tax are so
fond of referring-the farmers who till /
their own acres, the men who own their
homesteads in which they live. 1t is
true that the change We propose would
diminish the selling value of their land
(but merely of the bare land, not of the
Or improvements, and if fully
carried out would virtually destroy it.
But it would in no wise diminish tho
usefulness of their land: it would in no
wise diminish, but would in fact in
crease, their incomes. They would pay
under this system less taxes than they
paw now. The clerk or mechanic or
business or professional man who own,