Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current, 1891-01-23
SINGLE TAX DEPARTMENT.
TAXING LAND VALUES.
Henry George In N. Y. SiNndard1
CONTINUED FROM LAST ISSUE.

into any business, or to make any i'm
provement, the smaller tho number OF
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
rapital of the community is taken in
lent by those who do nothing to aid in
production (for land owners as land
owners in no wise aid production), there
is not merely created an unnecessary
and unnatural inequality in the distri-
button of wealth, but this primary in
equality gives rise to tendency to fur
Their inequality. Unto him that hath
shall be given, and from him that hath
not shall be taken away" is the express
SIGN of a universal law. To take from
one and give to another Is. both by de-
ereasing the relative power OF the ono
md 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
lty 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 tho
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-
b,x 40 Nd l., In,
productive power, labor gets but such
scant living, and wages tend constantly
to the minimum that will support life.
With the advance of the arts and tho
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.
10 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 q promoter of
equality what is now a promoter of
inequality. To release capital from tax
alton, TO lift the burden which 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
of in irro+ in RI
three classes-land owners, capitalists
and laborers. OF these it is evident
that tho change would be to the advan-
tage of the capitalists and laborers, 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 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
dustrial enterprise is as truly 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,
buildings and improvements are capital
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
combine at least two of these characters
Thus, while all would profit in the gen.
eral social gains, it is only in the Char
acter of land owner that against these
general gains any ono 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
sts or laborers, or both.
With reference to the ownership OF
land and with regard to actual facts, our
cople may be divided into three
{asses-those who own land which they
40 not themselves use, those who own
and 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 OF
head. 1t is manifest also that it would
benefit all who live partly by the earn
lngs of their labor and partly by the
earnings of their capital-store- keepers
merchants, manufacturers, etc.-anG
that by increasing the net productive
mess of capital it would benefit those
whose incomes are drawn from capita
alone.
Take now tho case of those to whom
the opponents of the single tax are 81
fond of refcrring-the farmers who til
their own acres, the men who own thei
homesteads in which they live. 1t i.
true that the change we propose would
diminish the selling value of their lant
(but merely of the bare land, not of tn,
buildings or improvements), and If full,
carried out would virtually destroy it
But it would in no wise diminish tn,
usefulness of their land; it would in n,
wise diminish, but would in fact in
crease, their incomes. They would pa,
under this system less taxes than the,