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,  commercially ­
  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