People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1893-05-05
Single Tax vs.. Naturalization.

hoH %
ED. VOICE:-As it has been a long
time since | trespassed on your gen.
erosity, grant me small space for a
few remarks on the above topic.
l do not wish to attack the theories
as laid down by Henry George, for it
is obvious to any unbiased mind who
has read Progress and Poverty, Pro-
lection and Free Trade, that those
books contain much beauty and truth.
But what DO wish to attack is. that
no ONE prescription will cure all evils.
This is the exact position that single
takers assume. They would have us
believe that tax on land values
would right all the inequalities, cure
every social disease, set every striking
workman to work, change the auto
cratic mOnOpOliSt into a philanthrO-
piSt, in fact, be the great equalizer.
They seem to overlook the the fact
that inequality does not arise from
production, but from distribution.
The single tax theory would equalize
production, but not distribution.
Naturalization would do both.
1t will be seen that these two theo-
rieS of government do not conflict,
but the single tax is to nationaliza-
tiOn what the alphabet is to the Eng
lish language. This theory of a single
tax on land values is myStifying to
some, but let me say that after it is
boiled down to an ineligible point,
1t means the naturalization of the
lald and the contents, with a tax or
rental Of the same sufficient to run
the government. Thus we see that
single tax is the alpha of national
izatiOn.
Before proceeding further, we wish
to lay down a fundamental principle
and discuss from that standard.
Anything that is of national impor-
tance should be controlled by the ma
tiOn and held for the equal benefit of
all.
Proceeding from this standpoint.
the first thing to find out is, what
constitutes national Importance. We
answer that anything is of national
Importance when it is absolutely nec-
essary to the public good and the
general welfare of the people: things
that are absolutely essential to the
preservation of civilization and life
itself. This principle is SO broad and
yet so simple that none can deny it.
But the single taxer lays down as a
principle that land being a national
production, it should be as free as air
or water. But that is not the reason.
for the land itself cannot benefit man
in the least. 1t is what the land pro-
duceS. This brings us back to the
first proposition: that it is diStribu-
tiOn that produces inequality. And
what can we think of a system that
would allow free land and not the
productions of the land. Man is Just
as much a natural production as land.
in fact, it is impossible to conceive of
an unnatural production. Applying
the rule of the single taxer, that
natural productions should be con-
trOlled by the government, we find
it would apply to everything, which
is, naturalization.
Corn, wheat and cotton are as
truly natural productions as iron,
coal or oil and just as necessary.
What excuse. then, can be given for
natiOnalizing coal, oil, ETC., and not
corn, wheat, cotton and wool? | an
swer none. They are all natural pro-
ductiOns and absolutely essential to
the public good and general welfare
of the entire people.
1t is no argument to say that man
had no agency in producing the great
mineral deposits, for with equal force
we might maintain that our great
forests and boundless fields Of mead
ow and paSturage do not owe their
existence to any agency of man.
Neither is there any trace of mans
agency in the first ball of cotton or
the first sheep. 1t is true that man
has improved these things, but also,
must oil be refined, salt purified
and iron undergo many changes be-
fore they can be put to use. So that
we see that the single taxer is really
narrow, for he applies a fundamental
principle to one thing and not to an
other. What would we think of a