The Only Permanent
Cure For Unemployment
John C. Lincoln
[Reprinted from Land and Freedom,
January-February, 1935]
Every community, by its presence and activity, creates a fund which
is the natural source from which its expenses should be drawn. This
fund is ground rent. For instance, there is a little candy store on
Euclid Avenue, in Cleveland that rents, I am told, for $2,000 per
year, per foot. It is very clear that this $2,000 per year, per foot,
is a community product which is appropriated by the owner of the fee
to the property. It is further clear that this $2,000 per year, per
foot, produced by the community and appropriated by the fee owner,
defrauds the community by just this amount. Our present land laws make
it legal for fee owners to defraud the community by appropriating the
community-created ground rent to the extent of twelve or thirteen
billion dollars per year in the United States. This fund is ample to
take care of reasonable governmental expense.
A little thought will make it clear that the selling value of land is
the ground rent, actual or expected, capitalized and the amount of
this ground rent in such a city as New York is partially appreciated
when it is realized that the privilege granted to the fee owner to
appropriate the community-created ground rent is, in places worth
$400,000 per foot front. It is clear that the provisions of our law
which make it legal for fee owners to appropriate such enormous sums
of money, which they do not earn, but which are created by the
activities of the community, are unethical, unscientific and should be
changed. One hundred years ago it was legal to hold slaves, but most
of us are convinced that it was never right to hold slaves. Our laws
should be altered so as to make it impossible for individuals to
appropriate the enormous amounts cf community created ground rent,
which it is now legal for them to do.
THE EFFECT ON UNEMPLOYMENT OF HAVING THE COMMUNITY COLLECT ITS
OWN GROUND RENT
It might as well, at this point, to get clearly in mind that
wealth-pioducing employment is simply the application of labor to land
or the products of land. It is very clear that employment in raising
wheat, or cotton, or cattle, or dairy products, is the direct
application of labor to land. Employment in manufacturing of
automobiles, ginning of cotton, or milling of flour consists in
modifying the products of land into more useful forms. Employment on
the railroads, and bus lines, express offices and post offices is
increasing the value of these products of land by transporting them
from one place to another.
Is it not clear that if all land was held out of use that all wealth
producing employment would cease?
If all land was held out of use, there would be no employment in
raising the food we eat, or mining the coal we burn, or in building
and keeping up the roads we travel on, or in building and keeping up
the houses we live in.
If all land was held out of use, life on this planet would cease.
It is clear then that if any land is held out of use, employment is
to just that extent decreased. Our present land laws make it pay to
buy land for speculative purposes and hold it out of use, or out of
its best use, until it can be sold at a profit. The writer lives,
during the summer, in Aurora, a suburb of Cleveland, and near his home
are many thousands of acres which are held out of use in this way. In
Arizona, where this is being written, I would say that fully half of
the land within ten miles of Phoenix is held out of use until it can
be sold.
Is it not clear that a large part of the load of bonds under which
our municipalities are staggering, are bonds for paving, and sewers,
and water lines in front of miles of vacant lots? These improvements
were put in to help sell land.
If it had not been for land speculation such of these improvements as
were not needed would not have been made and millions of dollars worth
of bonds issued for improvements the community did not need and which
may be defaulted would not be a burden on the tax payer today.
At the present time the actions of our governing authorities are
based on the assumption that the use of capital makes employment and
consequently the Reconstruction Finance Corporation is making huge
loans, for the purpose of increasing employment. A moment's thought
will make it apparent that land or its products are the only
essentials to employment. The use of capital renders this employment
more productive than it otherwise would be.
The pioneers who spread over our country from the Atlantic Coast to
the Pacific during the century that ended about 1875 had no lack of
employment, but they did almost entirely lack capital.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO LAND VALUE IF THE COMMUNITY COLLECTED THE
GROUND RENT CREATED BY ITS PRESENCE AND ACTIVITY?
Since land values are simply ground rent capitalized, it is clear
that if the community collected its ground rent, the selling value of
land would go practically to zero. If this occurred it would be
unprofitable to hold land out of use. Consequently it would be thrown
on the market and be bought at an extremely low cost. Such a change as
this would entirely prevent land speculation but in no way interfere
with the productive use of land. At the present time ground rent goes
into the pocket of the individual. Under the proposed scheme the
amount would be paid to the community in the shape of taxes. The use
value of land would be the same in either case.
COMMUNITY HAS NO RIGHT TO TAKE INDIVIDUALLY CREATED WEALTH
If the above proposed scheme were adopted and the community took the
ground rent created by its presence and activity for community
expenses, it would be unnecessary to levy taxes on individually
created wealth as it does at the present time. Last winter the writer
lived in a house in the middle of an orange grove, in Phoenix,
Arizona. You will all agree that he has no right to take the fruit
from this orange grove without paying the owner for it. The community,
however, takes the position that it has a right to take a considerable
part of the product of this orange grove in the shape of taxes every
year. If theie are 50,000 people in Phoenix, and the taxes on this
orange grove equal the value of 50,000 oranges, it is equivalent to
saying that each individual has a right to take one orange from this
grove without paying for it. Most of us are convinced that the
government of Russia is doing an unjust thing in taking from the
peasants of Russia such a large amount of the crops as they do. But is
it not clear that our tax system does exactly the same thing, but
possibly not to the same degree? To put it rather bluntly, our laws
permit the fee holders to steal about twelve or thirteen billion
dollars per year of ground rent created by the presence and activity
of the community. Then the community steals from the individual an
almost equal amount to pay the expenses of our federal, state and
local governments. Is it not clear that we do not suffer from lack of
land in this country to give everyone employment? What we suffer from
is the fact that this unused land is held at such a high price that
the ordinary person is unable to obtain any of it to use.
The number of jobs which would be created if twenty-five per cent of
the unused land in the United States were put into use would largely
relieve our present unemployment situation. If all of it was put to
use there would be more jobs than there are people to fill them and
unemployment would be a thing of the past. Under a system in which
there were more jobs than there were workers, wages would rise to a
point where they practically equalled the value of the product,
thereby obtaining: a just distribution of wealth which must be
obtained if our civilization is to last. The foolishness of our
taxation laws is apparent when we realize that a man who builds a
building, thereby furnishing employment for hundreds of people in its
construction and for many people in its operation, is fined by the
community in the shape of increased taxes. At the present time this
tax item is great enough to very considerably decrease the number of
buildings which would otherwise be erected. At the same time we allow
a person to hold title to coal lands, for instance, for thirty or
forty years until the owner can find somebody who will pay him his
price for it, rather than levying taxes against this land so that it
will have to be worked or sold to somebody who will work it. It is
land that is being worked that makes employment, not the land which is
being held un- worked until the owner can get the price which suits
him. At present if a man starts a factory and gives employment to
hundreds of people, he is fined in the shape of taxes on his building,
taxes on his machinery, taxes on his inventory, and in those states
that have sales taxes, in taxes on his sales.
Our tax laws would make one think that it was a crime to add to
wealth of the community or to increase employment and that it was a
praiseworthy thing to decrease employment by holding land out of use
for speculative purposes.
We must realize that land is provided by the Creator and that all His
children have an equal right to a life use of an equal share. We must
realize that wealth is the product of an individual or of groups of
individuals and that while the community does have the power to
appropriate part of this wealth it has no right to do so.
We must realize that society can be healthy only if it obeys the
moral law, "Thou Shalt Not Steal" and that getting something
for nothing is the essence of stealing. If society permits land values
to arise by allowing fee owners to appropriate community -created
ground rent, it must pay the penalty in unemployment and low wages,
caused by holding vast areas of land out of use or out of its best
use. If society discourages thrift and individual initiative and
business activity by appropriating part of the value created by the
individual in the shape of taxes on wealth, it must pay the penalty in
the decreased employment and consequent lower wages resulting from
lessened business activity. Until we act on the very obvious truth
that what the community produces should be collected by and for the
community and not by and for fee owners, and also recognize that what
the individual produces is his and the community has no right to it,
we shall be plagued with unemployment and Communism. Very little
change in our laws would be required to obtain the results desired. We
are already taking part of the community-created ground rent in the
shape of taxes on land value; all that would be necessary would be to
take the rest of the ground rent and abolish all taxation on wealth.
|