THE  SINGLE  TAX  AND  THE  FARMER  123

command?  What  better  indication  can  there  be
of  his  proportionate  share  of  these  public  advantages ­
  than  the  site  value  which  they  contribute
to  his  land?
The  farmer  is,  so  to  speak,  to  a  great  extent  his  own
commonwealth,  his  own  municipality,  and  very  sensibly ­
  municipalises  most  of  his  own  public  utilities
instead  of  farming  them  out.  The  usual  items  of
common  town  expenditure  are  for  water,  light,  fire
department,  police,  sewerage,  pavements,  sidewalks,
roads,  schools,  and  the  poor.  As  to  water,  light,  fire
department,  police,  and  sewerage,  the  farmer  furnishes
himself  at  his  own  expense,  and  this  is  a  sufficient
practical  reason  for  exempting  him  from  the  burden
of  contributing  for  village  services  of  the  same  sort
provided  at  common  expense.  This  leaves  in  general
three  things  for  which  the  farmer  ought  to  be  taxed,
viz.,  the  roads,  the  schools,  and  the  poor.  These
three  things  represent  needs  which  the  farmer  has  in
common  with  the  community  in  which  he  lives,  and
it  is  submitted  that  in  justice  to  him,  and  greatly  to
his  advantage,  they  should  be  provided  for  by  a  common ­
  tax,  levied  in  proportion  to  land  values,  either  by
the  State  or  by  a  minor  political  division,  as  efficiency
and  economy  may  dictate.
A  tax  laid  upon  land  values  is  by  far  the  most  “proportionate ­
  and  reasonable  ”  because  every  man,  woman,
and  child  contributes  to  this  value.  The  farmer  today, ­
  whose  land  values  are  so  small  —  almost
insignificant  —  but  whose  labour  values  —  his  buildings ­
  and  improvements,  such  as  drains,  fences,  trees,
crops,  reclamation  and  fertilisation  of  land,  and  his
personal  property,  which  is  of  course  a  labour  value  —