FAIR RENTS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10306, 13 March 1895, Page 3

FAIR RENTS.

TO THE EDITOH,

5m, —I sincerely sympathise with your correspondent " Citizen" in the unfortunate position in which he is placed, as explained by his letter in your issue of the 16th inst. Bat I would respectfully ask him and those who think with him to reflect and see if they can find a better way to arrive at fair rent than by legislative regulation. A bill was passed by the House of Representatives last session, and killed in the Upper House, which, if its provisions were adopted, would at once reduce rent to its proper level. I allude to the Unimproved Value Eating Bill. Unnaturally high and unjust rents are the logical concomitant of our present absurd system of rating on improrements. The remedy is simple: Exempt improvements and let rates be levied on the value of properties, irrespective of improvements. Our present method of fining a man for his improvements, besides being totally out oj keeping with the parrofc-cry about encouraging industry, places a premium on land speculation. The result is that valuable land — especially urban and suburban sites—is held out of use. This is what has been aptly termed " the vacant lot. industry," and, decry it how we may, it will continue to exist and flourish as long as the present stupid system of rating is tolerated. Go into any town you like and you -will see, if you want, unimproved sections which owners are holding in the hope of reaping a reward at the expense of their more enterprising neighbours. True, we had a most unique apology for thi3 iniquitous Bystem last session by Sir Robert Stout, when he gravely informed the House that " vacant lots were the luDgs ef cities." "We want," said Sir Robert, " breathing spaces for our people and ground for the poor man's child to play on! " As if unimproved lots, the repositories for rubbish, and often redolent of stagnant water holes, were conducive to pure air ! But despite this eminent authority it will cot be ea9y to convince any man who reflects that this gambling in land — for it is gambling of the very worst kind—is conduoivo to either physical or moral health or business morality. The value of land (rent) 13 measured by the needs of the commnnity. Increase of population infallibly raises land values, but tae present system of rating, by inducing owners to hold land out of use, produces exactly the same effeot as increased population by causing an artificial scarcity of land. And this tendency becomes aggravated as the community advances, because, though the population does increase, the area of laud does not; it is always a limited quantity. It is, therefore, manifest that to rate improvements is to discourage men from effecting them, and in direct proportion to encourage them to hold land idle. This must force land values to a speculative or fictitious height, and co lead to land booming and consequent depression. Let the rates on improvements be totally abolished, and let local revenue be derived from unimproved values only, and clearly owners will then cither improve their holdings or sell; and the amount of land thua forced into the market by the natural law of supply and demand must have the effect of reducing rent to its normal rate, thus everyone who wished could get lend at its using value. A tendency would infallibly oet in to increase the number of buildings, and this would at ones cause the rents of nouses and shops to fall. The landlord would no longer have the tenant at his mercy, for the latter would be free—he would be able to choose his terms. To illustrate more plainly what I mean, let U3 suppose that here are three sections of equal area. Two are each worth £500, taking improvements and unimproved value together; the other, which lias no improvements, is worth £200—equal to tbe unimproved value of the other two. The effect of exempting improvements is easily seen. The vacant section being taxed on the same basis as the other two would not long remain vacant, or at any rate the owner would let go his hold and leave the land free. And more than this: the destruction of land speculation and the incentive given to improve would at once open avenues for employment. There would be work and wages

for fencers, bush-fellers, drainers, ploughmen, carpeuters, cabinetmakers—in a word, for all classes of labour, for the labour trouble is caused everywhere by preventing the natural union of labour with land. In the lasti analysis everything depends on mother earthnay, even we ourselves are its fruits. Front dust we came and to dunt we all must return. Lot the people demand the destruction of lam\ monopoly—and it can ba effected by tha powerful lever of taxation—and each man, even tho poorest and lowliest, will scon be restored to his God-ordained inheritance. —I am, lie,

Keefton, February 23. P. J. O'Recah,