Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: [v. 101, no. 2602: Articles]: January 26, 1918

Text version:

AND (Copyright, 1917, by The Record and Guide Co.) NEW YORK, JANUARY 26, 1918 >OME EFFECTS OF "SINGLE TAX" ON REAL ESTATE Psychological Composition of Our People Partly Re¬ sponsible for the Widespread Influence of the Doctrine HE "Single Taxers" and their first cousins, the "Half Taxers," are re- 5onsible for much of the antagonism ) landlords. The spread of the single ix doctrine is one of the most astonish- ig phenomena of our times, and when 'e examine this doctrine we are still lore amazed that a theory built upon uch impractical ideas and illogical con- iusions should gather to its standard 0 many devout believers. The reason for this, however, is to be Dund in the psychological composition f our people. We must remember that ■om the beginning and up to recent mes this country was settled by peo- le eager for the millennium. Here athered the nations in search of the romised land. These settlers, under Te hypnotic spell of orators, preachers nd demagogues, came to this country D find relief from the ills they had uffered in their own lands. Considering that these men left their ative land to face the terrors of the nknown American wilderness, took leir families with them, and that even ntire communities emigrated, all allowing the call of their supposedly rophetic leaders, then we are struck y the fact that the leaders were men f great personal magnetism, and their )nowers impressionable. From these ^o types of leaders and followers the Licceeding generations inherited their lental capacities. But, alas, the sheep 'ere many and the bell-weathers few! Most of us have the inherited hunger 5r perfection, a hysterical longing for le ideal. We lack poise, calm judg- lent. and we are impatient for the lillennium. The susceptibility of our people to Liggestion was well illustrated by the Sixteen to One" fizzle, which had ypnotized almost one-third of our opulation. The dancing craze is nother instance of "psychic infection," nd the "Single Tax" outburst belongs > the same class with these. Let a prophet but claim to know the 'ay out of darkness or suggest a anacea and in a short time he will be jrrounded by an army of followers. 1 fact, if a thing is said loud enough nd often enough a lot of people will elieve it, no matter what it may be. his accounts for the great variety of olitical faiths, and the infinite multi- ide of industrial reform groups. So we see that it is easy to win the laudits of the mob, but thoughtful peo- le will not be misled by the amount f clamor for the "Single Tax" without ivestigating its merits. I would like to ask the "Single and [alf Taxers" if they consider it ethical Dr the State to establish and encourage 3r centuries the "private ownership" f lands and then suddenly confiscate le land. The "Single Tax" proposition lust, first of all, be judged as an ethical uestion. Let us consider the equities f the case. The State or the "People" annot seize directly or indirectly that 'hich belongs to the individual. The People" as a community may not rob r steal with more impunity than the idividual, and taxation to the point of Dnfiscation is plain "robbery." The roper way then for the "People" to egain the land they have knowingly By FREDERICK C. ZOBEL turned over to individuals is to "buy it back" from these individuals at a fair market value. Are the people prepared to act righteously and acquire the land by purchase and are they able to meet the expense involved ? "Single Taxers" claim they are not going to confiscate the land, only tax the land so that it will be unprofitable to hold without improvement. Now it does not matter whether you shut out a man from his land or rob him of his property by unjust taxation. In either case you are violating his rights, and any defense of such action is based on ignorance or malice. State Right to Condemn. The right of the State to condemn land for public purposes is established; and, in fact, since the State always re¬ tained that right its ownership never ceased, and what is commonly called "ownership" really is not more than ordinary "occupancy," the obligations on the part of the occupant being the payment of taxes, and on the part of the State to protect the individual in the quiet possession of the land. This is the essence of the implied contract now existing between the State and private owners, and this contract cannot be broken by either side without proper compensation. If the owner fails to pay taxes his land is sold to satisfy the State's claims against him. What re¬ dress should be given the owner when the State abrogates the contract by confiscating his property? And now let me point out some of the fallacies of the "Single Taxers." Their first error is that "all land is God- made and that all other things are man-made" and that the "supply of land is limited." This is only a half truth, but the whole truth is that "some" land is God-made and "some" is man-made. Reclamation by Irrigation. Our Federal Government is reclaim¬ ing millions of acres in the Western States by irrigation, making fruitful land which God had left unfit for the habitation of men. Recently the Gov¬ ernment built thirty-two acres of land, extending Governors Island in New York Harbor, and New York City itself has built hundreds of acres of land along its waterfronts, which formerly were completely submerged and un¬ available. And what about the land manufactured by men in the construc¬ tion of houses? Every time a ten- story building is erected on a city lot approximately nine additional lots are manufactured by the builder. So we see that all land is not God-made, and that furthermore land can be produced in absolutely unlimited quantity. Now it may be argued that while the manufacture of lots may apply to space that is habitable by men it does not apply to the cultivable soil. I venture a prophecy: Just as soon as men discover how to grow plants under artificial light (and experiments with electricity have been fairly suc¬ cessful) we shall see five and ten story farms within cities just as there now arc one-story green-houses, where crops will be raised all the year round. Land in its natural state is not fit for man's use. His labor must go into it just as labor goes into the production of clothes or food. If I have no right to own land, then you. friend "Single Taxer," have no right to the coat on your back, for the title to the coat is as obscure as that of my land. You bought the coat from a man who robbed a sheep of its wool; the sheep was stolen from its dam, and the dam was restrained against its will, as was its original ancestor by some cave man. If it is not moral to own an inanimate clod of earth, how much more immoral is it to deprive living creatures of its protection, its liberty and even its life? The right to real property lies in its use, but as to what and when that use shall be is too delicate a matter for any one to decide, and if some one could be found with omniscience to desig¬ nate the proper use of each thing we would all violently resent such dicta¬ tion as an invasion of our personal rights. One of the pet themes of "Single Taxers" is the "unearned increment." Now there is not the slightest differ¬ ence between the man who buys real estate, hoping for a rise in value, and the man who buys bales of wool and stores them in his warehouse in hopes of a better market. The "unearned increment" comes to everything that is in demand, whether it be real estate, potatoes, sugar or ships. It is the result of supply and demand. If I buy railroad stocks or ships or dye stuffs and sell them at big profits I'm a good business man, but if I buy land and sell it at a profit Fm a "grafter" because I'm getting "unearned increment." Curious reasoning these "Single Taxers" have! They never mention "unearned depreciation" of real estate. Think of lower Fifth avenue! "Single Taxers" claim that increased values of land are produced by popula¬ tion, and this again is only a half truth, for up to a certain point population does enhance the value, but as soon as congestion goes beyond this point values begin to recede again. Think of lower Fifth avenue again I Rather is it true that the character of the improvement upon the land attracts people to that particular locality, and the improvement is deter¬ mined by the geographical advantage of the land. Population and high land values do go hand in hand, but they are coincident symptoms, not cause and effect. New York City would not have become the home of millions if it had not the advantage of a magnificent harbor, giving it unrivalled shipping facilities and making it practically the largest market or distributing center of our country. The nearer you get to the market or distributing center the better and cheaper you can buy, and if millions congregate in the City of New York it is solely for reasons of economy, the market advantage. It is amusing to contemplate the strenuous efforts of "Uplifters" trying to drive the people from the large cities into the open country. They would actually have us believe that there are seven million fools living in the Metro¬ politan district! If so many people live