ANTI-POVERTY LECTURE AND MR JORDAN.

Auckland Star, Volume XX, Issue 288, 4 December 1889, Page 2

ANTI-POVERTY LECTURE AND MR JORDAN.

(To the Editor.) Bifc,_Y6ur correspondent), Mr Jordan, is labouring undet a strange delusion. Hβ propounds hia question 6n two erfbneoUs Suppositions. First he takes it for granted that one shilling per acre, or five per cent, on the unimproved value, or cost, price of the* land, will be the amount required by this "single tax." Why he should do so ib is difficult to say. Second, he assumes that a, "Single tax" oh land would foe so assessed as to swallow up the entire ndt profit from the use of his land. Based oh such erroneous assumption, his proposition is very misleading. Most unquestionably, if a single tax OH unimproved land value would or could lead to such results as he supposes, t ib would be tiniust. Bub euch a supposition shows a Want of knowledge of the subject. So far as I know, the most ardent advocate 61 a single tax never for a moment supposes thai such a revolutionary act as substituting a single tax oil land value ftir all taxes now raised could be carried into effect all at otice. Mr Jordan's question implied? that ib would, and hence ruin him and others like Whafcwenoio Wanbia a tax on all land, both town and country, on its present Utf' improved valtfey ac a substitute for bhe iriiqilitaus property tax, wliiph U dHving awdy capital from the eoldny, attd Ing abd progreeSi LeC a laM

tax be so assessed as to raj# about the same amount as the property tax. Let the assessment of value stand good for three years. Then leb another valuation oi the land take place, nob taking into account any improvements or outlay of the owners. Simply take its then selling value according to its situation. On this the tax is to be levied. Ib will be equivalent to a ground rent, which takes no account of what is in or on the ground ; for some cases land would have decreased in value; for others, should population increase, and with that, prosperous times, all land round the centres of population would increase in value.apart from any improvements by the owner. . Let the b\x\ be increased or decreased in proportion. That is, tax the " unearned increment." Unfortunately, it is this unearned increment in , land value that everybody is so anxious to catch hold of. Alihosb everybody who has a pound to spare is ready to speculate in land With the expectation of making a profit when there isa prospecb of booming times. Few buy land, then, with the intention of using it. They buy ib because they know with the increase of population the necessary wants of a growing community will increase the value of the laud. The people must have the land, and those who so buy and hold the land can dictate just suoh terms for its use and purchase as the growing wants of the community will allow of. They thus trade on the" growing needs of the people. This speculating in land gives them power to levy a tax, ihe!ieavieistofatltaxcß,onthewholecommuniti/. Oue of the greatest benefits to tho community arising from an equitable land tax will be the death blow ib will strike at land speculation. Land would still be bought and sold, but it would be for use only. There would be ho inducement to buy it for any other purpose ; and thab is the only legitimate purpose for which land should be held by anyone.

After a fair trial of a land tax as suggested, there is no fear that the people of New Zealand will ever again submit to a property tax being imposed. They might desire tho addition of an income tax, if necessary, a# a substitute for the unequal and iniquitous Cnsfcotns duties, which cost the country such enormous sums to collect. If the " wage earners," who are the largest) sullerers' by these Customs duties,- which press ao heavily on their expenditure, could only open their eye? to see how unequal tho incidence of taxation is at present, Uiey would ab once combine together to create si new ■political- party, which would revolutionise the whole legislation of tho colony. —Yours, etc., J. P. PkoxeßlX