Abolishing Poverty
I'm willing to bet that most readers who
come to this website have given up any hope that there
is a way to abolish poverty. But there is,
through understanding the structures that create it,
and then correcting those structures. Your
great-grandparents probably knew; these ideas were
widely discussed 120 years ago, and inspired thousands
of people and many movements, though none were powerful
enough to get them implemented, in the face of powerful
special interests.
Why should this century be any more amenable to the
ideas? In part because of technological
progress, the very thing that, under our current
structures has helped to create poverty! Because we can
read about them for free, at the moment we want to, and
discuss them freely with others who are also
interested, and share them readily with people we know
to be seriously concerned about the common good. We can
share ideas and build a new consensus — perhaps
the best analogy is to the movement to abolish chattel
slavery in the 19th century (and that analogy is closer
than might be obvious to those who are newly acquainted
with these ideas) — that if America is to live up
to its principles and its self-evident truths, we must
implement George's remedy.
Not only will poverty be abolished, but also some of
our other pressing problems, including housing
affordability and urban sprawl, with all its ills for
our lives, for the environment and for world peace. And
we could once again be worthy of serving as a beacon of
genuine freedom to those in other countries, by
example. No words needed!
I am heartened by the first two paragraphs from the
prologue to David Brion Davis's Inhuman Bondage:
The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World:
In 1770, on the eve of the American
Revolution, African American slavery was legal and
almost unquestioned throughout the New World. The
ghastly slave trade from Africa was still expanding
and for many decades had been shipping five Africans
across the Atlantic for every European immigrant to
the Americas. An imaginary "hemispheric traveler"
would have seen black slaves in every colony from
Canada and New England all the way south to Spanish
Peru and Chile. In the incomparably rich colonies in
the Caribbean, they often constituted population
majorities of 90 percent or more. But in 1888, one
hundred and eighteen years later, when Brazil finally
freed all its slaves, the institution had been
outlawed throughout the Western Hemisphere.
This final act of liberation, building
on Abraham Lincoln's emancipation achievement in the
American Civil War, took place only a century after
the creation of the first antislavery societies in
human history — initially small groups in such
places as Philadelphia, London, Manchester, and New
York. The abolition of New World slavery
depended in large measure on a major transformation
in moral perception — on the emergence of
writers, speakers, and reformers, beginning in the
mid-eighteenth century, who were willing to condemn
an institution that had been sanctioned for thousands
of years and who also strove to make human society
something more than an endless contest of greed and
power. [emphasis mine]
We can change this institution — land
monopoly capitalism — too, you and I.
The truth to which we were led in the
politico-economic branch of our inquiry is as clearly
apparent in the rise and fall of nations and the growth
and decay of civilizations, and it accords with those
deep-seated recognitions of relation and sequence that
we denominate moral perceptions. Thus are given to our
conclusions the greatest certitude and highest
sanction.
This truth involves both a menace and a promise. It
shows that the evils arising from the unjust and
unequal distribution of wealth, which are becoming more
and more apparent as modern civilization goes on, are
not incidents of progress, but tendencies which must
bring progress to a halt; that they will not cure
themselves, but, on the contrary, must, unless their
cause is removed, grow greater and greater, until they
sweep us back into barbarism by the road every previous
civilization has trod. But it also shows that these
evils are not imposed by natural laws; that they spring
solely from social maladjustments which ignore natural
laws, and that in removing their cause we shall be
giving an enormous impetus to progress.
The poverty which in the midst of abundance pinches
and embrutes men, and all the manifold evils which flow
from it, spring from a denial of justice. In permitting
the monopolization of the opportunities which nature
freely offers to all, we have ignored the fundamental
law of justice — for, so far as we can see, when
we view things upon a large scale, justice seems to be
the supreme law of the universe. But by sweeping away
this injustice and asserting the rights of all men to
natural opportunities, we shall conform ourselves to
the law —
-
we shall remove the great cause of
unnatural inequality in the distribution of wealth
and power;
-
we shall abolish poverty;
-
tame the ruthless passions of greed;
-
dry up the springs of vice and misery;
-
light in dark places the lamp of knowledge;
-
give new vigor to invention and a fresh impulse
to discovery;
-
substitute political strength for political
weakness; and
-
make tyranny and anarchy impossible.
The reform I have proposed accords with all that is
politically, socially, or morally desirable. It has the
qualities of a true reform, for it will make all other
reforms easier. What is it but the carrying out in
letter and spirit of the truth enunciated in the
Declaration of Independence — the "self-evident"
truth that is the heart and soul of the Declaration
—"That all men are created equal; that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness!"
These rights are denied when the equal right to land
— on which and by which men alone can live
— is denied. Equality of political rights will
not compensate for the denial of the equal right to the
bounty of nature. Political liberty, when the equal
right to land is denied, becomes, as population
increases and invention goes on, merely the liberty to
compete for employment at starvation wages. This is the
truth that we have ignored. And so
-
there come beggars in our streets and tramps on
our roads; and
-
poverty enslaves men who we boast are political
sovereigns; and
-
want breeds ignorance that our schools cannot
enlighten; and
-
citizens vote as their masters dictate; and
-
the demagogue usurps the part of the statesman;
and
-
gold weighs in the scales of justice; and
-
in high places sit those who do not pay to civic
virtue even the compliment of hypocrisy; and
-
the pillars of the republic that we thought so
strong already bend under an increasing strain.
We honor Liberty in name and in form. We set up her
statues and sound her praises. But we have not fully
trusted her. And with our growth so grow her demands.
She will have no half service!
Liberty! it is a word to conjure with, not to vex
the ear in empty boastings. For Liberty means Justice,
and Justice is the natural law — the law of
health and symmetry and strength, of fraternity and
co-operation.
They who look upon Liberty as having accomplished
her mission when she has abolished hereditary
privileges and given men the ballot, who think of her
as having no further relations to the everyday affairs
of life, have not seen her real grandeur — to
them the poets who have sung of her must seem
rhapsodists, and her martyrs fools! As the sun is the
lord of life, as well as of light; as his beams not
merely pierce the clouds, but support all growth,
supply all motion, and call forth from what would
otherwise be a cold and inert mass all the infinite
diversities of being and beauty, so is liberty to
mankind. It is not for an abstraction that men have
toiled and died; that in every age the witnesses of
Liberty have stood forth, and the martyrs of Liberty
have suffered.
We speak of Liberty as one thing, and of virtue,
wealth, knowledge, invention, national strength, and
national independence as other things. But, of all
these, Liberty is the source, the mother, the necessary
condition. ...
Only in broken gleams and partial light has the sun
of Liberty yet beamed among men, but all progress hath
she called forth. ...
In our time, as in times before, creep on the
insidious forces that, producing inequality, destroy
Liberty. On the horizon the clouds begin to lower.
Liberty calls to us again. We must follow her further;
we must trust her fully. Either we must wholly accept
her or she will not stay. It is not enough that
men should vote; it is not enough that they should be
theoretically equal before the law. They must have
liberty to avail themselves of the opportunities and
means of life; they must stand on equal terms with
reference to the bounty of nature. Either this, or
Liberty withdraws her light! Either this, or
darkness comes on, and the very forces that progress
has evolved turn to powers that work destruction. This
is the universal law. This is the lesson of the
centuries. Unless its foundations be laid in justice
the social structure cannot stand.
Our primary social adjustment is a denial of
justice. In allowing one man to own the land on which
and from which other men must live, we have made them
his bondsmen in a degree which increases as material
progress goes on. This is the subtile alchemy
that in ways they do not realize is extracting from the
masses in every civilized country the fruits of their
weary toil; that is instituting a harder and more
hopeless slavery in place of that which has been
destroyed; that is bringing political despotism out of
political freedom, and must soon transmute democratic
institutions into anarchy.
It is this that turns the blessings of
material progress into a curse. It is this
that crowds human beings into noisome cellars and
squalid tenement houses; that fills prisons and
brothels; that goads men with want and consumes them
with greed; that robs women of the grace and beauty of
perfect womanhood; that takes from little children the
joy and innocence of life's morning.
Civilization so based cannot
continue. The eternal laws of the universe
forbid it. Ruins of dead empires testify, and the
witness that is in every soul answers, that it cannot
be. It is something grander than Benevolence, something
more august than Charity — it is Justice herself
that demands of us to right this wrong. Justice that
will not be denied; that cannot be put off —
Justice that with the scales carries the sword. Shall
we ward the stroke with liturgies and prayers? Shall we
avert the decrees of immutable law by raising churches
when hungry infants moan and weary mothers weep? ...
read the whole chapter
I begin the publication of this paper in response to
many urgent requests, and because I believe that there
is a field for a journal that shall serve as a focus
for news and opinions relating to the great movement,
now beginning, for the emancipation of labor by the
restoration of natural rights.
The generation that abolished chattel slavery is
passing away, and the political distinctions that grew
out of that contest are becoming meaningless. The work
now before us is the abolition of industrial
slavery.
What God created for the use of all should be
utilized for the benefit of all; what is produced by
the individual belongs rightfully to the individual.
The neglect of these simple principles has brought upon
us the curse of widespread poverty and all the evils
that flow from it. Their recognition will abolish
poverty, will secure to the humblest independence and
leisure, and will lay abroad and strong foundation on
which all other reforms may be based. To secure the
full recognition of these principles is the most
important task to which any man can address himself
today. It is in the hope of aiding in this work that I
establish this paper.
I believe that the Declaration of Independence is
not a mere string of glittering generalities. I believe
that all men are really created equal, and that the
securing of those equal natural rights is the true
purpose and test of government. And against whatever
law, custom or device that restrains men in the
exercise of their natural rights to life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness I shall raise my voice. ...
read the
whole column
Henry George: Thou
Shalt Not Steal (1887 speech)
We are told, in the first place, by the
newspapers, that you cannot abolish poverty because
there is not wealth enough to go around. We are told
that if all the wealth of the United States were
divided up there would only be some eight hundred
dollars apiece. Well, if that is the case, all the more
monstrous is the injustice which today gives some
people millions and tens of millions, and even hundreds
of millions. If there really is so little, then the
more injustice in these great fortunes.
But we do not propose to abolish poverty by
dividing up wealth. We propose to abolish poverty by
setting at work that vast army of men — estimated
last year to amount in this country alone to one
million — that vast army of men only anxious to
create wealth, but who are now, by a system which
permits dogs-in-the-manger to monopolize God’s
bounty, deprived of the opportunity to
toil.
Then, again, they tell us you cannot abolish
poverty, because poverty always has existed. Well, if
poverty always has existed, all the more need for our
moving for its abolition. It has existed long enough.
We ought to be tired of it; let us get rid of it. But I
deny that poverty, such poverty as we see on earth
today, always has existed.
...
We propose to abolish poverty, to tear it up by
the roots, to open free and abundant employment for
every person. We propose to disturb no just right of
property. We are defenders and upholders of the sacred
right of property — that right of property which
justly attaches to everything that is produced by
labor; that right which gives to all people a just
right of property in what they have produced —
that makes it theirs to give, to sell, to bequeath, to
do whatever they please with, as long as in using it
they do not injure any one else. That right of property
we insist upon; that, we would uphold against all the
world.
To a house, a coat, a book — anything
produced by labor — there is a clear individual
title, which goes back to the person who made it. That
is the foundation of the just, the sacred right of
property. It rests on the right of people to the use of
their own powers, on their right to profit by the
exertion of their own labor; but who can carry the
right of property in land that far?
Who can claim a title of absolute ownership in
land? Until one who claims the exclusive ownership of a
piece of this planet can show a title originating with
the Maker of this planet; until that one can produce a
decree from the Creator declaring that this city lot,
or that great tract of agricultural or coal land, or
that gas well, was made for that one person alone
— until then we have a right to hold that the
land was intended for all of us.
Natural religion and revealed religion alike
tell us that God is no respecter of persons; that He
did not make this planet for a few individuals; that He
did not give it to one generation in preference to
other generations, but that He made it for the use
during their lives of all the people that His
providence brings into the world. If this be true, the
child that is born tonight in the humblest tenement in
the most squalid quarter of New York, comes into life
seized with as good a title to the land of this city as
any Astor or Rhinelander. ... read the
whole article
Rev. A. C. Auchmuty: Gems from George, a themed
collection of excerpts from the writings of Henry
George (with links to sources)
LABOR may be likened to a man who as he carries home
his earnings is waylaid by a series of robbers. One
demands this much, and another that much, but last of
all stands one who demands all that is left, save just
enough to enable the victim to maintain life and come
forth next day to work. So long as this last robber
remains, what will it benefit such a man to drive off
any or all of the other robbers?
Such is the situation of labor today throughout the
civilized world. And the robber that takes all that is
left, is private property in land. Improvement, no
matter how great, and reform, no matter how beneficial
in itself, cannot help that class who, deprived of all
right to the use of the material elements, have only
the power to labor — a power as useless in itself
as a sail without wind, a pump without water, or a
saddle without a horse. — Protection or Free
Trade — Chapter 25: The Robber That Takes
All That Is Left -
econlib | abridged
THERE is but one way to remove an evil — and that
is, to remove its cause. Poverty deepens as wealth
increases, and wages are forced down while
productive power grows, because land, which is the
source of all wealth and the field of all labor, is
monopolized. To extirpate poverty, to make wages what
justice commands they should be, the full earnings of
the laborer, we must therefore substitute for the
individual ownership of land a common ownership.
Nothing else will go to the cause of the evil —
in nothing else is there the slightest hope. —
Progress & Poverty
— Book VI, Chapter 2, The Remedy: The True
Remedy
BUT is there not some line the recognition of which
will enable us to say with something like scientific
precision that this man is rich and that man is poor;
some line of possession which will enable us truly to
distinguish between rich and poor in all places and
conditions of society; a line of the natural mean or
normal possession, below which in varying degrees is
poverty, and above which in varying degrees is
wealthiness? It seems to me that there must be. And if
we stop to think of it, we may see that there is. If we
set aside for the moment the narrower economic meaning
of service, by which direct service is conveniently
distinguished from the indirect service embodied in
wealth, we may resolve all the things which directly or
indirectly satisfy human desire into one term service,
just as we resolve fractions into a common denominator.
Now is there not a natural or normal line of the
possession or enjoyment of service? Clearly there is.
It is that of equality between giving and receiving.
This is the equilibrium which Confucius expressed in
the golden word of his teaching that in English we
translate into "reciprocity." Naturally the
services which a member of a human society is entitled
to receive from other members are the equivalents of
those he renders to others. Here is the normal line
from which what we call wealthiness and what we call
poverty take their start. He who can command more
service than he need render, is rich. He is poor, who
can command less service than he does render or is
willing to render: for in our civilization of today we
must take note of the monstrous fact that men willing
to work cannot always find opportunity to work. The one
has more than he ought to have; the other has less.
Rich and poor are thus correlatives of each other; the
existence of a class of rich involves the existence of
a class of poor, and the reverse; and abnormal luxury
on the one side and abnormal want on the other have a
relation of necessary sequence. To put this relation
into terms of morals, the rich are the robbers, since
they are at least sharers in the proceeds of robbery;
and the poor are the robbed. This is the reason, I take
it, why Christ, Who was not really a man of such
reckless speech as some Christians deem Him to have
been, always expressed sympathy with the poor and
repugnance of the rich. In His philosophy it was better
even to be robbed than to rob. In the kingdom of right
doing which He preached, rich and poor would be
impossible, because rich and poor in the true sense are
the results of wrong-doing. And when He said, "It is
easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle
than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven," He
simply put in the emphatic form of Eastern metaphor a
statement of fact as coldly true as the statement that
two parallel lines can never meet. Injustice
cannot live where justice rules, and even if the man
himself might get through, his riches — his power
of compelling service without rendering service —
must of necessity be left behind. If there can be no
poor in the kingdom of heaven, clearly there can be no
rich. And so it is utterly impossible in this, or in
any other conceivable world, to abolish unjust poverty,
without at the same time abolishing unjust
possessions. This is a hard word to the softly
amiable philanthropists, who, to speak metaphorically,
would like to get on the good side of God without
angering the devil. But it is a true word nevertheless.
— The Science of Political Economy
unabridged: Book II, Chapter 19, The Nature of Wealth:
Moral Confusions as to Wealth • abridged:
Part II, Chapter 15, The Nature of Wealth: Moral
Confusions as to Wealth
THE law of human progress, what is it but the moral
law? Just as social adjustments promote justice, just
as they acknowledge the equality of right between man
and man, just as they insure to each the perfect
liberty which is bounded only by the equal liberty of
every other, must civilization advance. Just as they
fail in this, must advancing civilization come to a
halt and recede. Political economy and social science
cannot teach any lessons that are not embraced in the
simple truths that were taught to poor fishermen and
Jewish peasants by One who eighteen hundred years ago
was crucified — the simple truths which, beneath
the warpings of selfishness and the distortions of
superstition, seem to underlie every religion that has
ever striven to formulate the spiritual yearnings of
man. —
Progress & Poverty
— Book X, Chapter 3, The Law of Human
Progress
THE poverty which in the midst of abundance pinches
and embrutes men, and all the manifold evils which flow
from it, spring from a denial of justice. In permitting
the monopolization of the opportunities which nature
freely offers to all, we have ignored the fundamental
law of justice — for, so far as we can see, when
we view things upon a large scale, justice seems to be
the supreme law of the universe. But by sweeping away
this injustice and asserting the rights of all men to
natural opportunities, we shall conform ourselves to
the law — we shall remove the great cause of
unnatural inequality in the distribution of wealth and
power; we shall abolish poverty; tame the ruthless
passions of greed; dry up the springs of vice and
misery; light in dark places the lamp of knowledge;
give new vigor to invention and a fresh impulse to
discovery; substitute political strength for political
weakness; and make tyranny and anarchy
impossible. —
Progress & Poverty
— Book X, Chapter 5, The Law of Human Progress:
The Central Truth
... go to "Gems
from George"
Louis Post: Outlines of Louis F. Post's
Lectures, with Illustrative Notes and Charts
(1894)
IV.
CONCLUSION
In "Progress and Poverty," after reaching his
conclusion that command of the land which is necessary
for labor is command of all the fruits of labor save
enough to enable labor to exist, Henry George says:
So simple and so clear is this truth that to fully
see it once is always to recognize it. There are
pictures which, though looked at again and again,
present only a confused labyrinth of lines or
scroll-work — a landscape, trees, or something
of the kind — until once attention is called to
the fact that these things make up a face or a
figure. This relation once recognized is always
afterward clear. 111 It is so in this case. In the
light of this truth all social facts group themselves
in an orderly relation, and the most diverse
phenomena are seen to spring from one great
principle.
111. This idea of the concealed picture
was graphically illustrated with a story by
Congressman James G. Maguire, at that time a Judge of
the Superior Court of San Francisco, in a speech at
the Academy of Music, New York City, in 1887. In
substance he said:
"I was one day walking along Kearney
Street in San Francisco, when I noticed a crowd
around the show window of a store, looking at
something inside. I took a glance myself and saw only
a very poor picture of a very uninteresting
landscape. But as I was turning away my eye caught
the words underneath the picture, 'Do you see the
cat?' I looked again and more closely, but saw no cat
in the picture. Then I spoke to the crowd.
"'Gentlemen,' I said, 'I see no cat in
that picture. Is there a cat there?'
Some one in the crowd replied:
"'Naw, there ain't no cat there. Here's
a crank who says he sees the cat, but nobody else can
see it.'
Then the crank spoke up:
'I tell you there is a cat there, too.
It's all cat. What you fellows take for a landscape
is just nothing more than the outlines of a cat. And
you needn't call a man a crank either, because he can
see more with his eyes than you can.'
"Well," the judge continued, "I looked
very closely at the picture, and then I said to the
man they called a crank:
"'Really, sir, I cannot make out a cat.
I can see nothing but a poor picture of a
landscape.'
"'Why, judge,' he exclaimed, 'just look
at that bird in the air. That's the cat's ear.'
I looked, but was obliged to say:
'I am sorry to be so stupid, but I
can't make a cat's ear of that bird. It is a poor
bird, but not a cat's ear.'
"'Well, then,' the crank urged, 'look
at that twig twirled around in a circle. That's the
cat's eye.'
But I couldn't make an eye of it.
'Oh, then,' said the crank a little
impatiently, 'look at those sprouts at the foot of
the tree, and the grass. They make the cat's
claws.'
"After another deliberate examination,
I reported that they did look a little like a claw,
but I couldn't connect them with a cat.
"Once more the crank came back at me.
'Don't you see that limb off there? and that other
limb under it? and that white space between? Well,
that white space is the cat's tail.'
"I looked again and was just on the
point of replying that there was no cat there so far
as I could see, when suddenly the whole cat burst
upon me. There it was, sure enough, just as the crank
had said; and the only reason that the rest of us
couldn't see it was that we hadn't got the right
point of view. But now that I saw it I could see
nothing else in the picture. The landscape had
disappeared and a cat had taken its place. And, do
you know, I was never afterward able, upon looking at
that picture, to see anything in it but the cat!"
From this story as told by Judge
Maguire, has come the slang of the single tax
agitation. To "see the cat " is to understand the
single tax.
Many events subsequent to his writing have gone to
prove that Henry George was right. Each new phase of
the social problem makes it still more clear that the
disorderly development of our civilization is
explained, not by pressure of population, nor by the
superficial relations of employers and employed, nor by
scarcity of money, nor by the drinking habits of the
poor, nor by individual differences in ability to
produce wealth, nor by an incompetent or malevolent
Creator, but, as he has said, by "inequality in the
ownership of land." And each new phase makes it equally
clear that the remedy for poverty is not to be found in
famine and disease and war, nor in strikes which are
akin to war, nor in the suppression of strikes by force
of arms, nor in the coinage of money, nor in
prohibition or high license, nor in technical
education, nor in anything else short of approximate
equality in the ownership of land. This alone secures
equal opportunities to produce, and full ownership by
each producer of his own product. This is justice, this
is order. And unless our civilization have it for a
foundation, new forms of slavery will assuredly lead us
into new forms of barbarism.112
112. "Our primary social adjustment is
a denial of justice. In allowing one man to own the
land on which and from which other men must live, we
have made them his bondsmen in a degree which
increases as material progress goes on. This is the
subtile alchemy that in ways they do not realize is
extracting from the masses in every civilized country
the fruits of their weary toil; that is instituting a
harder and more hopeless slavery in place of that
which has been destroyed; that is bringing political
despotism out of political freedom, and must soon
transmute democratic institutions into anarchy.
"It is this that turns the blessings of
material progress into a curse. It is this that
crowds human beings into noisome cellars and squalid
tenement houses; that fills prisons and brothels;
that goads men with want and consumes them with
greed; that robs women of the grace and beauty of
perfect womanhood; that takes from little children
the joy and innocence of life's morning.
"Civilization so based cannot continue.
The eternal laws of the universe forbid it. Ruins of
dead empires testify, and the witness that is in
every soul answers, that it cannot be. It is
something grander than Benevolence, something more
august than Charity — it is justice herself
that demands of us to right this wrong. justice that
will not be denied; that cannot be put off —
justice that with the scales carries the sword."
— Progress and Poverty, book x, ch. v.
...
Q25. What good would the single tax do to the
poor? and how?
A. By constantly keeping the demand for labor above
the supply it would enable them to abolish their
poverty.
... read the
book
Bill Batt: The
Compatibility of Georgist Economics and Ecological
Economics
The Georgist main agenda, as earlier noted, is
economic justice. If one searches the term
“economic justice” online, the first site
that will appear is the Georgist website, progress.org. The
starting point is that people are entitled to what they
earn, but only to what they earn.50 The fruits of the commons
generated in rent might also be distributed to citizens
equally if not used to finance the general services of
government. In practice this means the abolition of
those taxes that represent an unjust capture of
one’s personal property — taxes such as
income, sales, and other nuisance taxes. It accepts, to
be sure, the need to collect user fees, Pigouvian
taxes, and perhaps sumptuary (sin) taxes. It argues
aggressively for the collection of economic rent in
support of government and, for any remaining surplus,
its distribution as a citizens’ dividend.
The justification for the collection of rent has
several grounds:
- the first is to preclude the entitlement of
windfall gains to those who have unfairly captured
monopoly control of parts of what are rightfully the
public commons.
- A second reason is to enhance the efficiency
of economic productivity which the failure to collect
rent prevents. It is not just that monopoly control of
commons sites drives less attractive and less valuable
land into production because the primary choices are
unavailable; it is also that the use of alternative
taxes leads to a deadweight loss in the economy which
reduces the wealth of every citizen except the monopoly
titleholder.The proper collection of land rent leads to
increases in economic efficiency in a way that wages
are not artificially depressed and more opportunities
arise in the labor market.
The result of these factors leads to a greater
equality in the income of each person.... read the whole
article
Clarence Darrow: How to Abolish
Unfair Taxation (1913)
Everybody nowadays is anxious to help do something for
the poor, especially they who are on the backs of the
poor; they will do anything that is not fundamental.
Nobody ever dreams of giving the poor a chance to help
themselves. The reformers in this state have passed a
law prohibiting women from working more than eight
hours in one day in certain industries — so much
do women love to work that they must be stopped by law.
If any benevolent heathen see fit to come here and do
work, we send them to gaol or send them back where they
came from.
All these prohibitory laws are froth. You can only cure
effects by curing the cause. Every sin and every wrong
that exists in the world is the product of law, and you
cannot cure it without curing the cause. Lawyers, as a
class, are very stupid. What would you think of a
doctor, who, finding a case of malaria, instead of
draining the swamp, would send the patient to gaol, and
leave the swamp where it is? We are seeking to improve
conditions of life by improving symptoms.
Land Basic
No man created the earth, but to a large extent all
take from the earth a portion of it and mould it into
useful things for the use of man. Without land man
cannot live; without access to it man cannot labor.
First of all, he must have the earth, and this he
cannot have access to until the single tax is applied.
It has been proven by the history of the human race
that the single tax does work, and that it will work as
its advocates claim. For instance, man turned from
Europe, filled with a population of the poor, and
discovered the great continent of America. Here, when
he could not get profitable employment, he went on the
free land and worked for himself, and in those early
days there were no problems of poverty, no wonderfully
rich and no extremely poor — because there was
cheap land. Men could go to work for themselves, and
thus take the surplus off the labor market. There were
no beggars in the early days. It was only when the
landlord got in his work — when the earth
monopoly was complete — that the great mass of
men had to look to a boss for a job.
All the remedial laws on earth can scarcely help the
poor when the earth is monopolized. Men must live from
the earth, they must till the soil, dig the coal and
iron and cut down the forest. Wise men know it, and
cunning men know it, and so a few have reached out
their hands and grasped the earth; and they say, "These
mines of coal and iron, which it took nature ages and
ages to store, belong to me; and no man can touch them
until he sees fit to pay the tribute I demand." ...
read the
whole speech
I know of a woman — I have never had the
pleasure of making her acquaintance, because she lives
in a lunatic asylum, which does not happen to be on my
visiting list. This woman has been mentally incompetent
from birth. She is well taken care of, because her
father left her when he died the income of a large farm
on the outskirts of a city. The city has since grown
and the land is now worth, at conservative estimate,
about twenty million dollars. It is covered with office
buildings, and the greater part of the income, which
cannot be spent by the woman, is piling up at compound
interest. The woman enjoys good health, so she may be
worth a hundred million dollars before she dies.
I choose this case because it is one about which
there can be no disputing; this woman has never been
able to do anything to earn that twenty million
dollars. And if a visitor from Mars should come down to
study the situation, which would he think was most
insane, the unfortunate woman, or the society which
compels thousands of people to wear themselves to death
in order to pay her the income of twenty million
dollars?
The fact that this woman is insane makes it easy to
see that she is not entitled to the "unearned
increment" of the land she owns. But how about all the
other people who have bought up and are holding for
speculation the most desirable land? The value of this
land increases, not because of anything these owners do
— not because of any useful service they render
to the community — but purely because the
community as a whole is crowding into that neighborhood
and must have use of the land.
The speculator who bought this land thinks that he
deserves the increase, because he guessed the fact that
the city was going to grow that way. But it seems clear
enough that his skill in guessing which way the
community was going to grow, however useful that skill
may be to himself, is not in any way useful to the
community. The man may have planted trees, or built
roads, and put in sidewalks and sewers; all that is
useful work, and for that he should be paid. But should
he be paid for guessing what the rest of us were going
to need?
Before you answer, consider the consequences of this
guessing game. The consequences of land speculation are
tenantry and debt on the farms, and slums and luxury in
the cities. A great part of the necessary land is held
out of use, and so the value of all land continually
increases, until the poor man can no longer own a home.
The value of farm land also increases; so year by year
more independent farmers are dispossessed, because they
cannot pay interest on their mortgages. So the land
becomes a place of serfdom, that land described by the
poet, "where wealth accumulates and men decay." The
great cities fill up with festering slums, and a small
class of idle parasites are provided with enormous
fortunes, which they do not have to earn, and which
they cannot intelligently spend. ...
In Philadelphia, as in all our great cities, are
enormously wealthy families, living on hereditary
incomes derived from crowded slums. Here and there
among these rich men is one who realizes that he has
not earned what he is consuming, and that it has not
brought him happiness, and is bringing still less to
his children. Such men are casting about for ways to
invest their money without breeding idleness and
parasitism. Some of them might be grateful to learn
about this enclave plan, and to visit the lovely
village of Arden, and see what its people are doing to
make possible a peaceful and joyous life, even in this
land of bootleggers and jazz orchestras. ... read the whole
article
Up to recently we have proceeded from a premise that
poverty is a consequence of multiple evils:
* lack of education restricting job
opportunities;
* poor housing which stultified home life and
suppressed initiative;
* fragile family relationships which distorted
personality development.
The logic of this approach suggested that each of
these causes be attacked one by one. Hence a housing
program to transform living conditions, improved
educational facilities to furnish tools for better job
opportunities, and family counseling to create better
personal adjustments were designed. In combination
these measures were intended to remove the causes of
poverty.
While none of these remedies in itself is unsound, all
have a fatal disadvantage. ...
We are likely to find that the problems of housing
and education, instead of preceding the elimination of
poverty, will themselves be affected if poverty is
first abolished. ...
Two conditions are indispensable if we are to ensure
that the guaranteed income operates as a consistently
progressive measure.
-
First, it must be pegged to the median income of
society, not the lowest levels of income. To
guarantee an income at the floor would simply
perpetuate welfare standards and freeze into the
society poverty conditions.
-
Second, the guaranteed income must be dynamic; it
must automatically increase as the total social
income grows. Were it permitted to remain static
under growth conditions, the recipients would suffer
a relative decline. If periodic reviews disclose that
the whole national income has risen, then the
guaranteed income would have to be adjusted upward by
the same percentage. Without these safeguards a
creeping retrogression would occur, nullifying the
gains of security and stability.
This proposal is not a "civil rights" program, in the
sense that that term is currently used. The program
would benefit all the poor, including the two-thirds of
them who are white. I hope that both Negro and white
will act in coalition to effect this change, because
their combined strength will be necessary to overcome
the fierce opposition we must realistically anticipate.
Our nation's adjustment to a new mode of thinking
will be facilitated if we realize that for nearly forty
years two groups in our society have already been
enjoying a guaranteed income. Indeed, it is a symptom
of our confused social values that these two groups
turn out to be the richest and the poorest. The wealthy
who own securities have always had an assured income;
and their polar opposite, the relief client, has been
guaranteed an income, however miniscule, through
welfare benefits.
John Kenneth Galbraith has estimated that $20 billion a
year would effect a guaranteed income, which he
describes as "not much more than we will spend the next
fiscal year to rescue freedom and democracy and
religious liberty as these are defined by 'experts' in
Vietnam."
The contemporary tendency in our society is to base
our distribution on scarcity, which has vanished, and
to compress our abundance into the overfed mouths of
the middle and upper classes until they gag with
superfluity. If democracy is to have breadth of
meaning, it is necessary to adjust this inequity. It is
not only moral, but it is also intelligent. We are
wasting and degrading human life by clinging to archaic
thinking.
The curse of poverty has no justification in our age.
It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of
cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate
each other because they had not yet learned to take
food from the soil or to consume the abundant animal
life around them. The time has come for us to civilize
ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition
of poverty. ... read the
book excerpt and whole speech
|
To share this page with a friend:
right click, choose "send," and add your
comments.
|
|
Red links have not been
visited; .
Green links are pages you've seen
|
Essential Documents pertinent
to this theme:
|
|