Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1893-07-27
City Taxes.


people gather together, as in cities and
towns, it is found cheaper to divide GER
tain portions of necessary work, SO that
some may give their undivided atten-
ton to specialties.
For instance, we have water works
that supply water at a very low cost,
compared with the amount of labor
that would be expended if every man
drew his own supply with horse and
wagon. We have scavengers, street
sweepers, electric lights. etc, because
it is cheaper and better to have those
things done by the city than it is for
| each man to supply himself.
1t pays to have good fire depart
ment. 1t pays to have an effective po-
lice department 1t pays to have well
paved and lighted streets. Then why
do people grumble at being obliged to
pay for them, when manifestly it is to
their interest to do SO?
Why are taxes heavy? It may be
said that corruption and bad manage
ment make them heavy; and undoubt-
edly this is the case to a certain extent,
but the great reason is that those who
pay them do not get their just proper
ton of benefits returned to them in
service and improvements. Some
people pay, others reap the benefit and
pay little Or nothing.
WHO PAYS THEM?
The man who is Industrious The
man who builds a house Or a factory,
Or business block The man who inn
proves the value of every foot of land
in the city, he it is whom we discourage
by tining for every nail he drives, and
every brick he lays. Is it any wonder
that he grumbles when we treat him
SO unjustly for giving employment to
our labor? Is it any wonder that there
are over a million men out of work in
the United States when we place fine
on the man who employs labor? We
have adopted the Turkish method of
taxation, when you see anything,
grab it, But it may be said that the
owner of a house or other buildings
gets the benefit of taxes spent; SO he
does, if he owns the land, otherwise his
rent is raised, but his neighbor gets it
who does nothing but hold on to vacant
land, until improvements are made by
others, when he pockets the benefit of
the improvements paid for by the man
who builds. 1t is the man who sits
idly by, or works" the council to have
public money spent in his locality
whose land is made to rise in value.
It is the height of absurdity and in
justice to tax one man for the benefit
of others, when he has by his labor al
ready improved their property. In our
city we find that the great burden of
taxation is borne by the man who inn
proves, while those who stand in the
way of improvements are let off with
merely nominal tax This is not
equitable. The men who receive the
benefit of improvements should pay for
them. This is but simple justice, and
the only question with fair-minded
should be, ''who reaps the p
Suppose public improvements Ae
in a certain locality, do they increase
the value of any ones house Or build
ing? No. but they do increase the val
ue of the land. The land is the better
for being in proximity to them and
''land goes up" Therefore, it is quite
evident that if we wish to tax the man
who receives the benefit of public i'm
provements we must tax the value of
land only.
Itmay be said that the rate would have
to be raised. Well, what of it? What
difference does it make whether man
pays $50 a year on his house and lot
or $50 year on his lot alone? Not any,
but it makes vast difference to the
Spectator, who is blocking improve
ments by holding his land at high
figure. He would be discouraged from !
holding his land idle, and encouraged
to improve it.
1t can be shown. however, by figures |
that are indisputable, that if all the |
taxable land in the city was taxed up |
to its full value, and all improvements |
exempt, the rate would be lowered and |
would not exceed So mills on the dol |
lar.
Do we want our taxes lowered? Do !
we wish that those who receive the |
benefit of taxes should pay them? Do
we wish our city to prosper and four |