JUSTICE OF THE SINGLE TAX 
117 
on both “visibles and invisibles.” We would exempt 
buildings, because, by the same system under which 
you collect from the poor man a tax upon his house in 
which he lives, you are assessing the rich man for his 
store, his office building, and his apartment house, a 
tax which he himself can never be made to bear. 
Equalisation is possible only by abolishing the tax on 
all buildings. i 
Single taxers want to shift the taxes from the house 
to the land, because every time this is done it is made 
easier for the individual to get the house; whereas 
when the tax is shifted from the land to the house, it 
becomes harder to get both house and land. 
We say, tax the land and exempt all other wealth, 
because, when you tax both the opportunity to produce 
(land), and the thing produced (wealth), you are in the 
broadest sense inflicting double taxation. 
You do not tax the old building, because, commer 
cially speaking, it has “gone to decay.” Why, then, 
should you tax the new building, which, from the 
moment it is finished, is fast “going to decay”? We 
say, tax only the land value, which never decays. 
The millionaire should pay for the same sort of land 
the same tax per acre as the poor man, and no more. 
When he occupies a similar seat in the theatre, 
to see the same show, he simply pays the same price for 
his ticket, full value for what he gets. When taxes 
are levied in proportion to “benefits bestowed,” no 
need remains for taxation according to ability to pay. 
Justice of the School Tax 
We sometimes hear the question: Is it proportionate 
and reasonable that the poor man’s vacant lot should