Annual Report Finds Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Remains Largely White, Male


Harvard Square Celebrates Oktoberfest


Harvard Corporation Members Donated Big to Democrats in 2020 Elections


City Council Candidates Propose Strategies for Supporting Low-Income Residents at Virtual Forum


FAS Dean Gay Hopes to Update Affiliates on Ethnic Studies Search by Semester’s End

English 6.


Question: Resolved, That a properly adjusted tax on land should be substituted for the present system of taxation.

Brief for the affirmative:


Best General References: Spencer's Social Statistics, ch. IX; Progress and Poverty; American Soc. Sci. Ass'n, Report for 1890; Ricardo's chapters on rent; Mill, Bk. V, ch. III, sec. 2.

I. Our present system of taxation is so bad as to demand radical change: it is indirect, wasteful, confused, shifting, unjust to the poor, and promotive of dishonesty: Carey, Vol. III, ch. XLIII, secs. 5, 7, 9, and 10; D. A. Wells, Cobden Club Essays, 1871-72, p. 504; D. A. Wells, Lectures at Harvard, March 24th and 31st, 1890; Tucker, "Evils of Indirect Taxation," Forum, Feb. '86; Nathan Matthews, Jr. "Double Taxation," Qr. Jl. of Econ. Vol. IV, p. 339; Quincey, "Double Taxation in Massachusetts."

II. A tax on land values would be direct, economically collected, simple, incapable of being shifted, just and easily borne: Am. So. Sci. Ass'n, discussion by E. Benjamin Andrews, S. B. Clarke, Lewis F. Post, W. L. Garrison, and James R. Carret.

III. Land being a gift of nature and not the product of labor, is the inheritance of men, consequently not a fit subject for private appropriation: its site value is created by society and not by the individual owners: Political Science, Vol. XXXVI, p. 348; Barry. "Moloch of Monopolies," Forum, June 1889; vide "Best general references."

IV. The land tax system can be brought about without any social convulsion: Progress and Poverty, Bk. VIII, ch. II; S. B. Clarke, A Reply to Criticisms.

V. In operation it would (a) prevent speculation in land, (b) lower taxes on food, (c) reduce the capitalized value of land, (d) lead to a more effective use of land, and (e) relieve the extreme competition of the labor market: Labor Movement, ch. XXIII, p. 561 et seq; Sherman's articles in Forum, Sept., '89, Nov. '90, Jan., '91.

Brief for the negative:

J. L. DODGE and H. D. LENTZ.

Best general references: The Single Tax discussion, Am. Ass'n at Saratoga, Sept. 5. 1890; Forum, III, 15-28, 433-42; J. B. Miller, Progress and Robery; G. B. Stebbins, Progress from Poverty, 19th Cent. Mag. Vol. XX.

I. The Single Land Tax is unjust;

a. it would place the whole burden of taxation on a small portion of the community; b. it would prevent the poor from owning desirable land, P, 6 L. T. Dis.; c. it would violate the fundamental principles of taxation-universality, equality, ability to pay.

II. It is unconstitutional; a. it is it is contrary to fundamental principles of law: Blackstone's Conmt. I, p. 129; Kent II, p. 1, Elliott's Debates; b. it violates the rights of private property, (98 N. Y. 105), U. S. Const. Amend. V, XIV; c. it is not uniform taxation, U. S. Const. II 3.

III. It is revolutionary and socialistic in its tendencies; a. inaugurates government ownership of land; b. abolishes entire revenue system; c. gives too much power to central government.

IV. It would not accomplish the ends desired; the practical working is not understood; would not yield sufficient revenue; would not remove present hardships, N. Amer. Rev. 104, p. 109; Century, vol. 40, pp. 386, 390, 396, 405.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.