The Waterbury Democrat., 1932-01-08
FRIDAY, JANUARY 8, 1882
Why Not Get Together?

With Dr George B. Clarke. assistant pro- lessor of economy at Connecticut Agrieul- tural College. preaching his doctrine of wider tax bases and lower governmental expenditures throughout the state we should think that the recently formed League of Municipalities would enlist his support or the economist would offer his. Just at present both are following parallel routes that have not as yet crossed. They should, for both are of similar construction. The League seeks to find new sources of revenue in this state to meet the rising costs of government. The Storrs professor seeks to show how our government is overlooking tax sources right at hand, while permitting cities and towns to plunge headforemost into dest'
 We have quoted Dr Clarke on numer- ous occasions. It is generally pleasure to do so, as he speaks with much author ity on the subject of municipal and state government as it pertains to tax adminis- traitor and the like. Speaking this week in Hartford to the Connecticut Vegetable Growers Association he declared that The remedy for our present tax situation lies in the appointment of a competent conn., mission by the legislature for thorough study of the entire subject. .. He laid down fve-point program whereby pres ent conditions might be bettered to the mutual enjoyment of both the state and the individual taxpayer.
 It is hard not to sympathize with many of Professor Clarke's suggestions. They seem to strike right at the root of the entire trouble. It is true to-day that real estate bears burden far out of proportion Farm lands have declined rapidly in value of re- cent years. yet Professor Clarke can show figures to prove that taxes on them have in- creased over 100 per cent. Take any city or town in the state. Without exception it will De found that taxes there are higher to-day than they were in 1920, yet the majority of them will be struggling with bonded debts. back taxes, etc. Don't blame it on the city officials They have tried to make both ends meet. Wed blame it on American ex- travaganee, thing against which the late philanthropist. Julius Rosenwald fought for years.
 Here is pertinent statement from the economist. The general property tax when first imposed was intended to be tax in proportion to ability to pay. this ability being measured by the possession of tangl- bc wealth. Under modern conditions prop crty tax is no longer satisfactory tax base because possession of real estate is not good indication of ability to pay. Personal property tangible and intangible, largely escapes assessment The defects of the general property tax are emphasized by an assessment system which gives wide spread in the ratio of assessed to fair market value at which pieces of real estate are assessed and which tends to undervalue high value farms and overvaiue low value farms.
 We must have d thorough survey of conditions in Connecticut before many years have passed. The League of Municipalities can do a great service by starting such pro- vided it is in earnest in its efforts to relieve the burden of the taxpayer. It could call for study of the situation when the next Legislature eonvenes. Mores the pity one was not advocated last year. We have ar- rived at the point, though, where the prop erty owner cannot be bled any longer. We once laughed at the expression land poor How true it is many of us know today. Under our present system of taxation it IS far better to rent or lease than to own. That is blow against the structure of our gov ernment based on the solidity of the home and family. It should be eradicated as soon as possible.