The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1894-05-17
THE SINGLE TAX.
SOME REPLIES TO a STATESMAN Ed.
ToRILL ON THAT SUBJECT.
The Letters Came From Far Distant Points
and 1t Is For You 10 Silt Out the
Sound Argument and Think
For Yourself
ATLANTIC, Ia, May 6.

ion that the application OF the theory
of Mr.. George would only benefit agri.
cultural interests.
While it is true that the adoption OF
the single tax would directly and,
still more so, indirectly, benefit the
farmers, it is also true that its beneti'
cent effects would be quickly felt in
all other pursuits, excepting always
the land spectators, who "toil not
neither do they spin," etc.
Take, for instance, the city of Chi
cago. What would be the result sup
posing it's citizens should adopt the
single tax? Having then but one
source of revenue the rate of assess.
ment would require to be about three
times what they are now, but with
this important difference, that the
man who had house, q store, fac
tory, or whatever, on his land would
nay no tax, either on them or their
contents. In many cases the amount
of the tax would be much less than
it is now when we aim to levy on
everything man has in sight. The
nser OF land would be no worse of
than now.
But how about the land Spectator ?
| @ finds his taxes tripled, and he Is
citing the land lie IDLE. He at once
concludes to either make use OF the
land or sell out to some one who is an
xious to use it. The improvement OF
this land would employ labor, and the
army of the unemployed would dlsap.
pear like mist before the rising sun
The increased demand for labor would
soon raise wages. High wages would
mean more money to spend for the
products of the farm. the mine and
the workshop. The supplying OF
wants would mean more employment
at higher wages to other workers, I'M
til the forces Ofsociety were all profit.
ably engaged, with no land monopo'
lizor standing idly by, producing
nothing, yet levying tribute on capt.
tai and labor for being allowed to use
the earth-that bounty which a low
ing Father intended for the use of all.
Many people look upon the single
tax as pauacea, relief, a plaster, to
be applied to thu body polite, and so
confound it with artificial nostrums
like socialism, and therefore do not
see the force of the idea. 1t is only
when they come to view the single
tax from the opposite eide, and see
that it is simply a return
from unnatural to natural
conditions that they see it in all it's
grandeur, in all its simplicity. But
the idea, simple as it is, comes only
after thoughtful study. The man
who brushes the single tax aside as
an absurd theory either gives it the
most superficial examination. or else
Jacks intelligence to comprehend it.
The most ardent advocates today OF
this greatest of reforms were at one
time it's bitterest opponent, but nav.
ing at last grasped its great central
truth, are bound for evermore to work
for its recognition, which now is but
question of time.
EDMUND Fl. STRIKER.
CINCINNATI, o May 6.
Editor of The Weekly Statesman Austin,
Texas:
SIR-In your issue of April 10, you
have an editorial in which you ask
single takers to answer some q 7es.
tions that YOU PROFOUND. If you will
kindly permit me, l will endeaVor TO
answer them. You ask whether the
single tax proposed relief to all other
classes besides the farmer. | hardly
believe that you thoroughly under
stand the subject, or you would not
have asked this question. The pro.
fessional men aud those in mental
capacities whom you mention as not
recurring land, are in fact as much
workers on land as is the farmer, in
ssmuch as their labor consists in as
sisting those who apply their labor
more directly TO land, so as to increase
their powers of production; thus
physician, whom the superficial OBJ
server would say only needs enough
land tor his office, by improving the
health and consequently the ability
TO produce of O Iaborer, Is in fact as
much producer of health from land
as if he had applied his labor directly,
and the same applies to all the others
who you appear to believe do not re-
quire land. You speak OF the
numbers who you say get
rich without access 10 lanu,
but you will have a har time to
find one of those who did not get rich
through holding a monopoly of some
kind, and if this monopoly did not
rest on the exclusive possession of
some particularly valuable piece of
land, it rested on some law that
placed tax on the products of labor,
thus restricting the number of those
who might engage in the production
of this article. or it rested on a patent
or copyright law. the effect OF which
ia of course. similar tn the prohibitive
tax on production. But it is strange
that YOU do not see how the single tag
would beueticslly effect other as
we'll a. the farmer. Imagine a tax
equal to tho rental value to he laid on
all the empty lots you havein Austin,
would not the owners be compelled
Immediately to build on them and
otherwise improve them in order tn
make them WELD a revenue to pay
this tax? Would not this be an enor-
nous benefit to the mechanics en-
ployed in the building trade? Would
not your merchants be benefited by
the increased trade they would get
thereby? Would not these mer'
chants Increase the orders they give