9. The development of economic freedom. (Seligman, _Principles of Economics_, chapter xi.)

10. Distribution of wealth in the United States. (Taussig, _Principles of Economics_, vol. ii, chapter liv; King, _Wealth and Income of the People of the United States_, chapter ix.)

11. Place of machinery in the capitalistic system. (Hobson, _Evolution of Modern Capitalism_, pages 27-29.)

12. The impersonality of modern life. (_Lessons in National and Community Life_, Series B, pages 97-104.)

13. The extent of poverty in modern life. (Burch and Patterson, _American Social Problems_, chapter xvi.)

B. PROGRAMS OF INDUSTRIAL REFORM

CHAPTER XI

SINGLE TAX

104. DEFINITIONS.--The words "single tax" refer to a policy under which all public revenue is to be raised by a single tax on land value. All other taxes are to be abolished. By land value is meant the value of the land itself, irrespective of all improvements, such as ditches, drains, and buildings. Everything done on the land to increase its value would be counted as an improvement, and would thus be exempt from taxation. This would leave only location value and fertility to be taxed. By location value is meant that value which is due to the situation of the land. For example, land in a wilderness has little or no location value, but if, later, schools, stores, railroads, and other elements of community life develop in that region, the land may take on great value because of its location in the community. The fertility value of land is that value which is due to natural endowment in the way of moisture, climate, and soil elements.

105. HENRY GEORGE AND HIS WORK.--The doctrine of single tax is closely a.s.sociated with the name of Henry George, an American reformer who died in 1897. His theory was best developed in his book, _Progress and Poverty_, published in 1879. In this book George points out that in spite of the progress of the world, poverty persists. This is due chiefly, he contends, to the fact that land-owners take advantage of the scarcity of good land to exact unduly high prices for its use.

According to George, this monopoly of the gifts of Nature allows landowners to profit from the increase in the community's productiveness, but keeps down the wages of the landless laborers.

"Thus all the advantages gained by the march of progress", George writes, "go to the land-owner, and wages do not increase."

George proposed to use the single tax as an engine of social reform, that is to say, to apply it with the primary view of leveling the inequalities of wealth. Value due to improvements was to be exempt from taxation, so that land-owners might not be discouraged from making improvements on their land. On the other hand, it was proposed that the single tax take all of the income due to location and fertility. This, according to George, would "render it impossible for any man to exact from others a price for the privilege of using those bounties of Nature to which all men have an equal right."

106. RESULTS CLAIMED FOR THE SINGLE TAX.--George claimed that the application of the single tax was highly desirable. If, through the medium of this tax, the government were to take from the land-owners all the location and fertility value of their land, two great benefits were to result. First, rich landlords would be deprived of much unearned wealth. Second, the wealth so secured, called the unearned increment, could be used to make life easier for the poor. Ultimately, George went so far as to claim, the single tax would "raise wages, increase the earnings of capital, extirpate pauperism, abolish poverty, give remunerative employment to whoever wishes it, afford free scope to human powers, lessen crimes, elevate morals and taste and intelligence, purify government, and carry civilization to yet n.o.bler heights." The steps by which George arrived at this gratifying conclusion are obscure, and practically every modern economist agrees that too much has been claimed for the theory. Nevertheless, there is much to be said on both sides of this interesting question.

107. ARGUMENTS FOR THE SINGLE TAX.--Single taxers claim that it is just to take from land-owners that land value which is not due to their individual efforts. Fertility, on the one hand, is due originally to the bounty of Nature, and as such belongs to all men alike, rather than to particular individuals. Location value, on the other hand, is due to community growth, and should therefore be taken for the benefit of the community at large.

A very strong argument in favor of the single tax is that land cannot be hidden from the tax a.s.sessor, as can stocks, bonds, jewels, and other forms of personal property. A single tax on land would, therefore, be relatively easy to apply.

A tax on the location and fertility value of land would not discourage industry. Location value is largely or entirely due to community growth, rather than to the efforts of the individual land-owner.

Fertility, of course, is largely a natural endowment, and as such cannot be destroyed by a tax. The land would continue to have all of its location value, and probably much of its fertility value, whether or not the owner were taxed.

Another argument is that a single tax on land would eliminate taxes on live stock, buildings, and all other forms of property except land, and that this would encourage the development of the forms of property so exempted. This would stimulate business.

It has also been said that the single tax would force into productive use land which is now being held for speculative purposes. It is claimed that many city tracts remain idle because the owners are holding them in the hope of getting a higher price in the future.

According to the single taxer, a heavy tax would offset this hope of gain, and would force speculators either to put the land to a productive use, or to sell it to someone who would so employ it.

A last important argument in favor of the single tax is that it might force into productive work certain capable individuals who are now supported in idleness by land rents. Professor Carver has pointed out that if the single tax deprived such persons of their incomes, they would be forced to go to work, and thus the community would gain by an increase in the number of its productive workers.

108. ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE SINGLE TAX.--The most important objection to the single tax is that the confiscation of land, or, what amounts to the same thing, the confiscation of the income which land yields, is unjust. "Pieces of land," Professor Seager points out, "have changed hands on the average dozens of times in the United States, and present owners have in most cases acquired them not as free gifts of Nature, nor as grants from the government, but by paying for them, just as they have had to pay for other species of property." Where individuals have acquired land in good faith, and under the protection of a government which guarantees the inst.i.tution of private property, the confiscation of land value would be demoralizing to the community and unfair to its land-owning citizens.

Another difficulty lies in the ease with which value due to permanent improvements is confused with value due to location or fertility.

Where money has been expended in draining land, removing stones or applying fertilizer, it is hard to tell, after a few years, what part of the value of the land is due to improvements. The possibility of this confusion would cause some land-owners to neglect to improve their land, or might even cause them to neglect to take steps to retain the original fertility. Thus the single tax might result in the deterioration of land values.

It is also objected that the single tax would provide an inelastic taxation system. This means that it would tend to bring in an equal amount of revenue each year, whereas the revenue needs of government vary from year to year. A good tax system will accommodate itself to the varying needs of the government, always meeting the expenses of government, but at the same time taking as little as possible from the people. [Footnote: Some opponents of the single tax declare that the heaviest possible tax on land would yield only a fraction of the revenue needed to finance the government. Single taxers, however, maintain that the tax would yield more than enough revenue to meet public expenditures. The merits of this argument are uncertain.]

It is doubtful whether the single tax would force into productive use land now being held by speculators. Even though a heavy tax were laid upon such land, it would not be utilized unless there were an immediate use to which it could profitably be put.

A last important argument against the single tax is that there is no good reason for removing the tax burden from all except land-owners.

Land is only one form of wealth, and it is unfair not to tax individuals who hold property in some other form. Some land value is indeed unearned, but there are other forms of unearned wealth, as, for example, monopoly gains and inherited property. Taxes ought to be levied upon these forms of unearned wealth, as well as upon the unearned income from land. It is desirable, too, to levy at least a light tax upon the propertyless cla.s.ses, in order to encourage them to feel an interest in, and a sense of responsibility for, the conduct of their government.

109. SERVICE RENDERED BY THE SINGLE TAX AGITATION.--Economists are unanimous in agreeing that the single tax, as expounded by Henry George, is too drastic and special a reform to find wide favor.

Nevertheless, the single taxers have performed a valuable service by emphasizing the fact that in many cases the income from land is largely or entirely unearned. It would be manifestly unjust to dispossess present-day land-owners who have acquired land in good faith; on the other hand, most economists agree that we ought to reform our tax system so as to take for the community a larger share of the future unearned increment of land values. As Professor Taussig has pointed out, no one has a vested right in the indefinite future.

The taking of this future unearned increment, it is hardly necessary to add, would not const.i.tute a single tax, but rather a heavy land tax. Many other taxes would continue to be levied. [Footnote: The general problem of taxation is discussed in Chapter x.x.xIL]

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT

1. Define the single tax.

2. What is location value?

3. Define fertility value.

4. Who was Henry George?

5. What benefits, according to George, were to result from an application of the single tax?

6. Give the chief arguments in favor of the single tax.

7. Give the chief objections to the doctrine.

8. What service has been rendered by the single tax agitation?

9. What is the att.i.tude of most economists toward the future unearned increment of land?

REQUIRED READINGS

1. Williamson, _Readings in American Democracy_, chapter xi.

Or all of the following:

2. Carver, _Elementary Economics_, chapter xlv.

3. George, _Progress and Poverty_, book ix.

4. _International Encyclopedia_, vol. 21, article on "Single Tax."

QUESTIONS ON THE REQUIRED READINGS

1. Who were the Physiocrats? (Carver, page 372.)