Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1907-04-13
A THREE coRNeRED ARGUMENT.

/ A THREE CORNERED ARGUMENT.
i A banker capitalist, successful
farmer and an ordinary newspaper mar
were hot In an argument over the pros
and cons of tax on inheritances. The
farmer thought that 1t was not fair tc
tax mans estate after he was dead
and could not defend himself" This
banker thought that a tax on what q
! man had accumulated for his children
would discourage thrift and enterprise
| The newspaper man thought that taxes
| should be paid in a large measure by
/ those able to pay them with the least
| burden; that after man was dead and
| done with his possessions was very
opportune time for the state to step
| in and exact tax before the estate
had passed to some one who had not
| earned it and who might proceed to
| roll it up to dangerous proportions or
waste it in idle consumption. About
this time the man who deals in tax
titles put in with the opinion that such
tax was all wrong. So stood the
fairly representative opinions.
! AS might be expected the success
full farmer was an extreme individuals
! st Farming tends to make a man an
| individualist. A student of the rise
and fall of past nations and of eco
| monte conditions in the older coun-
tries of the world, however, has learned
that the growth of large estates has
become distinct menace to the well
fare of the whole people. AS popula-
ton grows uncomfortably dense the
amount of land or other property any
one man owns becomes of very great
Importance. If one very successful!
man. having accumulated enormous
holdings, is to be permitted to pass his
holdings on to another man who will go
on increasing the possession thru his
lifetime, only few need to do such q
thing to crowd the many off the land
or at least out of any possibility to own
it. In the United States there has al
ways been such an outlet to new lands
that this problem has not become
acute but it is wise now for us to help
the process of distributing wealth
among the many by raising our needed
revenue in part from the estates Of
deceased owners. The owners them
selves no longer have need for them
and the heirs. economically, have no
more, right to them than does that
great body OF people we call society.
The banker denied this proposition
on the ground that 100000 was not
very large sum to leave boy ito do
business on" and man might have
several boys but the banker did not
+ seem to realize that the money he was
investing in unimproved lands to be
doubled in value was to receive it's In
crease solely because society was
crowding upon those lands with its
population, building cities and farms
around them and actually creating. the
increased values in the making of
which said banker was doing absolute
lily nothing except waiting; yet he was
sure that the public had no right to
levy a tax for the maintenance of the
public safety and education, upon his
estate which it had just created.
For the purpose of merely taking
away and giving back to the many
tax on inheritances under our present
|leffort to provide the largest induce
ment to men to, acquire private pro-
perry would be Objectionable, but when
it is known that fixed sums of tax
money must be raised that if one set
of men do not pay it others must, it
his certainly a fairer proposition for the
state to step in and take tithes from
that property which is about to pass
to heirs who have done nothing to earn
it than to take it from the men who
have been compelled to struggle hero
lcdlly 70 acquire ana WHO, generally,
have dependant ones to provide for
now, with an old age of deprecated
earning power before them The argu-
ment of the farmer that che is dead
and can't defend himself becomes idle
for, when man is dead hesis supposed
to pass to regions where he no longer
has need for property and certainly he
is not abused by any method of dis
tributing that which he has abandoned
forever The controversy becomes
soley an issue between the state and
the heir about to receive the inher-
itance. The trend of the best modern
thought, prompted by conditions pres
ent in older countries, is toward the
tax on inheritances as fair place for
the state to take some of the money it's
citizens must pay for the expenses of
government since taxing an heir upon
something he is about to receive for
nothing is a tax with as little burden
about it as possible and is about as
far removed from a tax on thrift and
enterprise as it can be. Bring on your
Wirdfalls. We can better afford to pay
on tbap, tI,o,, ,,a