The independent. [volume] (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907, 1904-09-22


1t is safe to say, however, that at any
rate about one third of this figure
represents buildings and improvements.
Each farmer may judge for himself.
He will best know how much the diner
ence is between the value OF his i'm
proyements and the value or his bare
land.
Now. under the operation OF the sin
gle tax. all improvements that the lar
mer would make upon his premises,
such as fences, buildings OF every de-
scription, stock OF every kind, crops
and orchard trees. would be entirely
free from all taxation. This would
leave for him to pay tax only on
the value of his land in its original
state, bare of all improvements. 1t
will therefore be seen that undei the
operation of this tax, the farmers
would pay on a valuation OF not more
than half of what the present valuation
is, even granting that the lying figures
OF the valuation of "city farms be
just and fair.
This is not all. Every time that the
farmer buys any goods in the city, ne
pays i'll the price of the goods the
enormous tax imposed upon tie goods
by our unfair system of taxation. When
he buys a thresher or any other ma
chine or implement he pays another
tax that is levied upon that implement
lie pays the tax in the first place when
he buys the machine, and then when
| he takes it home "for keeps" the as
SCISSOR comes around again and taxes
him for keeping it. Every time he
buys furniture to put into his home he
must stand and deliver in the same
way, both when he buys it aud when
he keeps it. He is fined coming and
going.
| Then there is still another side to
this case. The working men in the
cities have been lied to in the same
way. They have been told that as the
single tax proposes tax on LAND val
ues, and as land values are chiefly in
the cities, they will have to pay most
OF the tax, while the farmers would
escape
Note here the deliberate attempt to
| deceive. While talking on this sub
ject to farmers, they would tell them
that the single tax was tax on land,
and as the farmer had the land he
would pay the tax. Then they said to
the city man that the single tax was a
tax on land values, and as the city man
had most OF the land values, he
would have to pay most of the tax.
So both the farmer and the working
man have been SO lied to regarding
this tax that they have been made to
believe that they are each others nat
ural enemy.
1t is conservatively estimated that
the people of the United States are
paying annually something like So
100000 for nothing more than the
use OF the bare land upon which to
| live. In addition to this think OF the
enormous sum paid into these same
pockets for the mere privilege or work.
ing upon valuable sites in the cities.
In the cities the great majority OF the
people live upon rented ground and
they work upon rented ground. In ad-
dition to this they are taxed (fiIed) fer
every useful thing that they make.
Now, as most Of what the city tGilers
earn is spent for food, and as praeti-
cally none Of them get as much as
they need or of as good quality as they
ought to have, most of this enormous
sum OF more than $4,000, 100000 would
go into the pockets OF fan mers for food
stuifs alone. For there is no food that
toes not CONE from the farm. Now
what would 1t mean IL more than two
billions OF dollars that now go into the
pockets OF land monopoists were
turned into the channels OF ira ie And
when II Is considered that most of this
would be spent for food, what wouit
II mean to the farmers OF American MIR
Farmer do you not see The eat? Ds
J YOU not see where your true Interests
LIEF
So n requires. very little thought fol
any farmer 10 see that under the slngl,
tax all his improvements. buildings
FENCES. crops. trees. cattle, hogs. sheer
. and every kind of stock would be fire.,
! OF any taxation. That when he bough
tools and implements. furniture, cIoshe
or any other form of goods he MA,
: desire upon his farm or In bis home
! / he would neither have In nav n tax 4,