LAND AND LABOUR.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6487, 6 April 1908, Page 5

LAND AND LABOUR.

(To the Editor "N-Z. Times.”) Sir, —I am entertained by the condescending tone of your correspondent, “Wairima.” Perhaps I did state my arguments “in a confused way,” but I am not too confused to see the absurdity of your correspondent's comparison between the price of land and the mice of buggies. Increased demand for buggies will soon cause an increased number of buggies in the market, whereas it is Beyond human power to increase the supply of land. Hence the man who possesses the monopoly of the ground rent of land is placed in a po tion entirely different from the vendor of buggies, who must submit to the competition of other vendors who arc as well able to vend buggies as Ira. “Wairima” is himself too confused in his ideas to see that land is different

hem any other form of property, because (1) no man made it, and hence no man can claim the rent in return for a service rendered, as the vendor of a buggy can, and (2} competition locs not cause an increased supply, but a more intense demand. Your patronising correspondent, therefore, i : study the subject before he trios to instruct mo.

•* Weii ima” has evidently a poor opinion of my'mental capacity, for he takes it for granted that I will deny that “rents are fixed by the Tenants and not by the landlords.” What dors he take me for? Does he think that a working man is a mental monstrosity? Of course it is the demand for land that determines the rent of land, but the point is that the taxation of land-values, if it were heavy enough, would put an end to the holding of and idle. Therefore the result would be to put a stop to the prevailing artificial scarcity of land and inflated values incidental to mere speculation in land.

1 repeat that land speculators are mere parasites who grow rich on the earnings of labour, but I do not blame anyone, unless tho workers for allowing themselves to bo looted. The weakest thing about “AVairima’s” letter is that he suggests no remedy himself. I bog ids pardon.' Ho does state a remedy by the way. The only way to cheapen houses is to increase their number, he tells us. Exactly so. But you can’t build houses without land; therefore before you can increase the number of houses you must cheapen land, and place it within reach of the people. Your' correspondent’s suggestion of cheap trams show's that he has never given the subject a moment’s real thought. If you construct trams to the suburbs you raise land values, and if the faro is added to the suburbn’i rent you will find that the tenant is “a-j you were.” Cheap trams are like betterment taxes and workers’ homos—mere quackery- Henry George has showui us the one unfailing w'ay t.> remove the barrier that keeps labour from its own, and labour will yet realise that, though in turn denoun ted both by Socialists and landlords, ho "was a phophet if ever there was one. I note tho terms on which your cultured correspondent offers to debate with me. Permit mo to say, however, that I will state my facts my own way, subject only to the censorship of the editor of “The Times,” if I go astray. I don’t profess to be as highly informed as “Wairima,” but I think it is possible for me to see a hole in a ladder as well as he can, and I should bo sorry ti swop logic with him—if his letter affords a true sample of his brdinary reasoning.—l am, etc., A WORKING MAN. April 4th.