Evening star., 1935-11-19

squeeze" on Slum tenants. Through
out the country there Is depressing
number of such racketeers and they
do not operate in secret.
During the years Of great immiara-
ton, the deliberate congestion of our
cities proved to be gold mine for
property owners. II profit could be
made by crowding four immigrant
families into a Shoddy tenement. 1t
could be doubled by doubling the
height of the building. No need to
give tenants a window in every room.
or heat, or light. or water, or toilet.
Those things cost money and cut down
profits and, besides, the tenants we're
an inferior people who would not ap-
preciate such luXuries. The result OF
such practices was the notorious lower
east side in New York, where, in one
census tract. picked at random. the
following conditions were found. Is
per cent of all dwelling units had no
heat; 81 per cent had no bathing
facilities; 66 per cent had no toilets;
88 per cent were IS years or more
old; and AZ per cent either needed
major structural repairs or were unfit
for habitation.
Through these sinking fire traps
has poured q steady stream OF be-
wildered foreigners, whose simplicity,
illiteracy, or ignorance of our ways
and language, have made them the
perfect prey of those chiselling land
lords whose only concern in their ten
ants was to blk them of a maximum
of their pitifully earned pennies. AS
these foreigners became naturalized.
learned their way about, and began
to reap some small benefit of their
hard work, they refused to submit
longer to such exploitation. They
moved from the Bowery to the Bronx
or the suburbs. But there was always
a fresh crop from Galicia, Hungary,
or Sicily, To keep these warrens full.
With the end of wholesale immigra-
ton, however, the steady flow of prof.
its in this type of housing began TO
dry up. The lower East Side has lost
nearly 40 per cent In population since
1920. There are no further limo
cents abroad" to be exploited. The
means by which this racket is being
killed is indirect and less satisfying
than a frontal attack. Yet it surely is
effective
An extremely complicated and con-
troversial issue In our program is the
question of taxation. So long as our
projects are under the control Of the
Federal Government, they cannot pay
ad valorem taxes on the same basis
as private residential properties. At
first sight it will seem unreasonable
that such apparent discrimination
should be afforded the tenants of our
projects. The most vituperative critics
of this policy do not, imagine, pro-
ceed further in their analysis.
Problem of Taxation.
But there are good and sufficient
reasons for such a policy. 1t is prob
ably true that the bulk of local tax
revenues is raised from tax on real
property. Yet 1t is not the property
which pays these taxes, but the people
who live in these properties. Fluctua-
ton OF their means is independent Of
the type and condition Of housing they
may occupy. At the present time slum
dwellers or their landlords pay very
small real estate taxes. The condi-
ton of tenements and shacks Is such
that, they have the most nominal
value and it would be useless to tax
them higher in any case since the
slum dWellers simply have not the
money to pay. This then Is the pres
ent condition.
Let us say the Government has de-
cided to build a slum clearance
project. We tear down the existing
shacks or tenements and replace them
with decent new housing to be
rented at reasonable prices to the
former slum dwellers. In so doing
we have created opportunity for these
people but-and this is the crux Of
the whole question-we have not
raised one iota their capacity to pay
q higher real estate tax. They are
the same people with the same in
comes as recently lived in misery and
paid but a pittance In taxes.
To assume that such people can
promptly step up their tax payments
to the level required by an ad yalorem
tax on the new improvements Is to