SOCIALISM V. THE SINGLE TAX.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 96, 16 January 1908, Page 4

SOCIALISM V. THE SINGLE TAX.

j V. pi~U CrJUJ!f IAA. Sir, —I often conio. across statements in the. newspapers to tho effect that tho Singlo Tax policy of .taxing the. unearned increase, in the value of land would, if adopted, | " abolish poverty." The'statement' is repeated in this morning's issue, of. your paper by Jfr. F. W. Burke in. Ilia letter with reference to Mr.. Keir Hardie. I agree with your correspondent that. the, land question is a very important ono; hut. when ho mpkes the statement that Stato /ownership of tho land would abolish poverty,: 1. must demur on tho following grounds The severity of'the Struggle l for existence in modern countries, 'although complicated by-tho existence of private landowiiership and other monopolistic injustices, is essentially duo to that " old Adam " of competition, which we inherit from the Cave-men, which wo ought long ago to be ashamed of, and wherein every man is after his neighbour's job. It is not tho'existence of inequalities in tho competitive, . struggle,. bijt competition itself which makes the lives of the majority of men to-day a continual' strugglo with poverty. Let a trade become depressed, or let its methods change, and what! is tho position . of. ,tho,..xorker? Bad •enough in all conscience. Then -he feels how beautiful is competition. But why need we labour obvious facts? Are. not all the organisations of labourers .a proof that workers must protect themselves as far as possible against the effects of indiscriminate competition amongst themselves ? Why do doctors ,and lawyers form trades unions? .To keep out " freo competition." If there were as many doctors and lawyers in Wellington, as thero aro unskilled labourers', fees would be low. Henco both these professions insist upon_a certain amount of literary, and other 'knowledge before a man can even begin his technical studies, and both are very severe iipon the unlicensed practitioner, or upou a duly 'qualified member of tho.profession who " cuts prices," in deference to tho groat principle of " free competition." Labourers, ■imitating their, betters,"/.try to. form, unions in self-defence. _ In most trades the number of apprentices is limited. Who seek to limit them? The workers who feel the effects of competition. Who seek to prevent limitation? The employers, who hope 'to benefit by the competition of apprentices, .and who hopo to . get more of them and so ,to displace men's labour. Every'man likes competition for tho other fellow, but ho 'wants shelter from competition for himself? ;Mr. 0. M. Luke, for example, would like to • increase the -'number of apprentices 'in his: •foundry, beeausc ho is a ' buyor .of . labour from his employees, but ho seeks protection ■for his goods, because he is a. seller of pro-, to the public. Of course, I am not blaming him. It is only human nature:. Is it competition or choice that makes girls work in factories and offices for 10s. to 255. iper week? It would be a severe showing-lip-;for somo firms if their'wages -sheets'for this latter class of labour were mado public. . I am quito well aware that if the Stjjite owned the land and let it for use to tho man, iwho paid tho : annual valuo of it-, no man woula be able' to--keep land idle, and so many of tho ovils wo see to-day would disappear. It would be impossible to keep up 'rents, for. instauce, and as tho labourer would be at least no worso off as regards tho competitive struggle, it-is probable that lie would mako a considerable gain.. With moro : opportunities demanding his labour,', tho severity of competition would be. relaxed., But the uncertainty of. life would'still weigh heavily upon tho mail at the bottom of the ladder. Sickncss or ill-health in his family might place the worker, through no fault of bis own, in dire poverty; and those dependant upon liini would stiil have an unconscionable amount of suffering to go through if anything should happen to the breadwinner. As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with the Single Tux. It is a nec.es- ■ sary stage, through which Socioty must ovolve. ■ But to say that it is the filial stage of a complete solution of our. economic illjustices seems to me unwarranted. By the way soin.o Single Taxers seem to mo to have' forgotten tho doctrines of their great apostle, Henry George. Ho said that the adoption of his policy would make publice ownership of railways and other public monopolies, depondent, as they are, upon land values, more easy to establish, and thus he evidently thought that public ownership of tlicso things was an advantage (seo "Progress and Poverty" and "Social Problems" by Henry George). Wn Socialists continue his principles; wo hold that not merely valuo of land, but the value of all propert'.v. is a social product, and consequently tho people should own these, so far as may be necessary to the protection of its citizens, and to the prevention of that exploitation of the. worker \vhieh_ now goes on under the agency of competition. All properly that is not employed in exploitation may still be'left in individual hanrls. If a man paints a picture or does Maori carvings, lie can keep these products of his labour to adorn or disfigure his house, or he can make a present of them lo his friend at his own sweet will. In conclusion, I say that every Christian ought to he a_Socialist. The early Christians wen: communists, and it is only in a Socialist community Hint the Golden Rule can bo applied. It has no place, for it is an impossibility in a world governed by "free competition." J am, etc,, PUBLIC OWNERSHIP.