The Colfax chronicle. [volume] (Colfax, Grant Parish, La.) 1877-1981, 1892-01-30
SINGLE TAX DEPARTMENT.
DIFFERENT KINDS OF VALUE

Inc Journal of the KNIGHTS of y.ho
''riontes a good deal of confusion :
+au. sn' regarding the land problem {
aure TO distinguish between 9Th
saiue OF land as a means of actual nro
o.c''on' its value as giving spec;a
'ansages OF occupation and bushes
sppior'unities,' and the purely specu
.ative or fictitious value which resrIt,
from q boom" 'esui VI
advocates of the single tar p.u,,,,
uistinguish between the first and ths
tn'rd kinds Of value here sncc;ssd
saosen It is only in certain aspects o,
'e problem that the distinction is inn.
portant 1t is true, however, that thev
uo not distinguish between the first and
'ne second-between 1.-THE value of iand
as means of actual production" and
ts 'valne as giving special ADVANTAGE.
OF occupation and business opportuni.
uesY-for the simple and all-sufficient
reason that there is no such difference
to be distinguished.
Illustration of what it means by
sne nrst kind of value, the Journal re-
.ers to farms, mines and forests: and
IN Illustration of the second, it refers
20 tne business streets of a great CITY.
me writer asserts that city values do
not result from land monopoly alone.
put from land monopoly in conjunction
Win capitalism in its various forms.
Inc value of the best business sites,
ne says. lis not produced by the land
~ the same sense as wheat is produced
oy a farm. or coal by coal mine +"
4nis last is quite true. City values are
NOT produced rs wheat or coal. But
neisner are any other values Values
merely measure the relation of one
'ning to another in exchange. When
one man with pair Of shoes prefers a
nat. and another with the hat prefers
the shoes they will. IL free. make an |
even trade. We should saw, then that |
tnese shoes and this hat are of equal |
value 1t the owner Of the shoes, while |
them to one hat would
1atner have two hats than the shoes
ana the owner of two hats would rather
nave the shoes than the hats, the men.
assuming that they acted freely, would
trade on that basis; and then we should
say That the shoes were double the val
ne OF each of the hats Or. if the man
with the hat would rather have n mar
'icuiar piece OF land whether agricul-
'urai, mineral or building land. or
wnether in city or country, makes NO
and the owner of that land
you'd rather have the hat. they would. {
Tree, trade the hat for the land: and {
mem we should say that this hat and !
ms land were of equal value. The In.
reduction OF money would not change I
ne nature OF the transaction. Money. l
this connection, is only a Medium Of ]
rade' enabling traders who do not
now OF ench Others wants to come to.
ether. But II money were used, and
ne nat In terms of money, was worth
D. we should say that the land was
'orth 81 This relation. which is indi- :
Ated by the term value" is, of course. !,
OF produced" as coal and wheat are. !,
The Journal writer's confusion seems y
be traceable to his Instrumentation =
ot alone of value" but also of ..pro- =
nction- He speaks of wheat as =
produced" by q farm. and of coal as - =
by mine; whereas. -
Iough the one is produced from a %
rm and the other from a mine. both
. produced by labor We are not :.
iticising our critics rhetoric He ex- ~
esses his thought with accuracy, and ~
is his thought not his language that ::
wrong. He supposes that production 70
very different from what -
that land actively puts r.
I'm. This is obvious, not alone from a. -
use OF proposition that indicates "
lion, and from his comparison of land -
Tue and wheat as products but also -
I'M his statement that the portion of .~
nor products claimed by landlordism ="
sPresents not the real value of the y,
"a. but value created by the capi- W.
istic system of exploitation, "a II 60
al value of the land and wheat or oe'
u IN the land. were exchangeable ~,
ms, instead of being the one an ex. ple
ssion of relation in exchange and wn
other . natural elcment-part of III
land itself
production" describes not a putting vol
In by land of its natural fruits Nc na
eat coal and the like, but a draw W.
forth from the land to the con- up
her, by labor. of those fruits In T .rs'
process, the land over which the 1H'
is are transported, and that on guy
ch they are exchanged or finally de- p..
red, play precisely the same part "a
ssence If not in degree, as the land uo0
n which the commodities are origin oo
produced. In briefer terms, trade 'oa'
mt a form-an advanced form-of
luction.
urn now to the value of land Il -
Its from production in circum-
ces that secure exclusive possession .eal
articulur spots to particular people. ,n,r
e spots are more fertile than Others lase
gh in other respects the same. cna.
Sc are more valuable; that is, thew 1ust
exchange for more ~ 49,, y buy
ties than the Other. G.. =. him.
.llv fertile with 81. '"ouen $3.50
eniently situated with reference to VINO
ding site; and these are more val side
n nm hat