The morning times., 1896-04-26
Submitted IN Rebuttal.

Editor Times: Your single tax contribu-
tor used nearly three-quarters OF column
last Sunday in attempting To show that
under the operation OF the single tax the
owner of home in this district would pay
much less tax than at present, the total
amount OF public revenue remaining the
same. The example cited is a good speci-
men of single lax mathematics, compiled
with particular reference to iiiterate au-
diences of the "anti-pOverty" stripe.
In that case, the value OF the real estate
Improvements is estimated at three and
one-baif times that of the land, while aC
companying figures show that the total
assessed valuation OF all real estate inl-
provemcnts and personal property in the
District is but about two-thirds the total
value of the land. or course, that particu-
lar man would gain by the single tax in
common with many owners OF good houses
or large amounts OF personal property and
title land. AS an offset others must lose.
The inference probably intended to be
conveyed is that the greater portion OF
the extra tax OH land under the single tax
system would fall on the owners OF unused
tracts of land. The actual fact is that as
soon as they were thus taKesi excessively and
inequitabiy, those unused tracts would inn
mediately become valueless, their owners
would refuse to pay the tax imposed
upon them, and they would become public
property on the communist, or single tax,
plan.
But if the owners were forced to re-
iinquiSh them because the tax was too
high, no other person could afford TO use
tenn. the rent charged for their use would
be equally high. The amount necessary TO
maintain the revenues would be the same,
whether taken from owner or lessee,
whether called tax or rent.
tract of land which one man gave up
as valueiesS to him would be equally
yaluelcss to every other man in the COM
muDty, for II ii were otherwise the de-
sire of members of the community to pay
the tax and use such land would give
it salabe or rental value to its owner
who would retain it. Land for which
there would be any demand as public
property would he equally in demand as
private property.
District which, though possessing little
present Use value is appraised at high fig
| ures and taxed accordingly. Its value is
| almost wholly speculative and would dis
appear in great part on the application OF
| the single tax. Valuations of business
property are also speculative to some de-
| gree as respects land If the tax is re-
| moved from real estate improvements ana
personal property, and at the same time
| speculative land values are destroyed,
| some one must pay an extra tax on land
| or the revenues must decrease.
The increase of tax would fall largely
| upon farmers and owners of small homes
| in this District especially upon the latter
| Their taxes would on an average he more
| than twice, and possibly three times as
| large as at present if the same revenues
| were raised. Communism OF any kind is
| in the end always most injurious to the
poor.
Your contributor attempts to deceive
| your readers by intimatiDg that l have
| been unwilling to meet him in argument
| The Times space is valuable and that I
! have not the same control OF a weekly
| amount that he possesses. Let the public
| judge as to who is the "dodger." II.