The Hood River glacier. (Hood River, Or.) 1889-1933, 1912-10-31
VOTE AGAINST SINGLE TAX

lUlE AuAlNSl DlNulE thA
To the greater portion Of the citizens
of the state of Oregon. who have
thought clearly and have given the
subject their serious attention, it ap-
pears that to abolish our present sys-
TEN of taxation and established the So
called graduated tax would be a ealam-
ity. In community where property
values were not established. a country
unsettled, at the formation Of the rules
of government, s system Of single tax
might be inaugurated without injury.
Yet we find, even where such process
has been allowed to work out, that
cries are being raised against the sys-
TEN.
Citizens of Alberta and British Col
umbia are raising their voices IN an
appeal against it, showing that its ap-
plication is retarding their eommuni-
ties.
Where has an old established com
munity faced such situation as Ore
gon is facing today? In such a com
monwealth the system has never been
applied. Oregon's system Of taxation
has met the needs of the state. 1t may
have minor defects. However, many
citizens who are opposed to the present
system. declare that they will not vote
for single tax. "The propaganda OF
the Single tax commission leads US no
where" they say. 'Its opponents
make promises, which, however, they
fail to show, in any conclusive manner
whatever, will come about. Their
strong point is that the poor man, who
labors, will be exempt and the wealthy
citizen, who lives from the labor Of
others, will pay heavier portion OF
than others.
Indeed, the single takers argument
is mainly one of sentiment. 1t is
beautiful theory, but an investigation
of reason digs up fallacies.
For wnat are taxes collected? To
protect members of the states society [
and to maintain the different necessary 4
arms of the government. No matter e
whether it be landed estate, precious a
stones, an income from manual or men h
tai efforts, all forms Of wealth and N
value are protected alike. Each should al
bear proportionate share Of the ex- cl
pense of maintaining this protection. 1t
This is just and reasonable.
The exponents of the campaign for HI
specific graduated single tax on land kr
say that it cannot be evaded. To show di
The error. we reprint below an editor OF
al from Mondays 0regonian: at
"In New Zealand the sheep land Nj
owner subject to the graduated tax di- mi
1ides his holdings by actual sales until or
hey are reduced to point where the T,
graduated tax does not apply to them. ~
Sales are made to the sheepherders, vi
Who pay down a nominal sum and give til
mortgage payable on demand for the
balance. The original owner then
leases the several tracts thus sold,
paying the herdeTs sum sufficient TO
reimburse them for the first payment
and keep up the interest on the mort u
gage. The herders thus are not out of
the original owner gets back in
his lease money in the form of inter :,
est, and he keeps the land without u
paying the graduated tax. AS mort al
cages are not taxed and as small land m
holdings escape the graduated tax the G.
result is satisfactory all around except :,
to the state. VI
'The system is beautiful from the NJ
standpoint of high finance, and it d.
could be worked as easily in Oregon as m
in New Zealand if the Fels propaganda ),
succeeds. The Oregon law attempts :
to prevent transfers of property to u
persons as agents or dummies a
made with intent to eyade the tax. |
The provision declares that such trans /
fers shall become actual and that the u
dummy shall become the real owner Of |
the property. But in the application S
of the New Zealand scheme the con I
veyancC is actual The person to whom
the land is sold is the legal owner of
the land. But he has given a mortgage
in such terms that the original owner
plays safe in the transaction.
Moreover, as the Oregonian has
heretofore pointed out, the section Of
the amendment which seeks to prevent
the evasions of the graduated tax
would effect only those persons who at
the time the amendment became etfec-
tive owned land valued in excess of
$4,000 in one county 1t would not
apply to the purchasers Of land there
after Forfeiture for dividing property |
among dummies would apply only to |
the grantor. John Jones, who owned |
500, 600 worth of land, would be prohib- |
tied from dividing IT among dummies |
or fictitious persons on penalty vi |
losing it. But John Smith, in pur-
chasing, might acquire land in the
name of friends and escape the tax.
The amendment is so lax in its pro-
visions that in operation it would be
actually single tax. All revenues for
state ard local purposes would be
raised by taxing land on uniform
basis. The rich man would pay no
more in proportion than the poor man.
Land spectators would not be bur
dered to a greater extent than the
man of small means who invested in a
home site. The sO-called graduated
single tax amendment in effect is a
single tax amendment and It's adoption
would foreshadow confscatiou Of land.
AITCHIS0N FOR COMMISSIONER