UNIMPROVED RATING.

Evening Star, Issue 14931, 18 July 1912, Page 4

UNIMPROVED RATING.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—ln an article in this evening’s issue, under the heading of ‘ Unimproved Rating : Facts and Figures for St. Hilda,’ Mr Arthur Withy is reported to have stated as follows Under the rating on unimproved values, however, the speculator will have to pay as much for his idle section as the other man pays on his improved section.” From what follows, Mr Withv makes it even clearer that the land only ‘is rated. Mr Withy is professedly the friend of the worker, but a little thought about the above statement makes one rather doubtful on this point. Take the case of two sections, each valued at £IOO On one of these a worker builds a house costing him £SOO, while on the other section, owned by a man who can afford considerably more, a house costing £2,000 is built. Now, according to Mr Withv the man who owns the cottage lias to pay as much in rates as the man who owns the mansion. Is this fair to the working man? I say most emphatically No it is not. lam not a resident of St. Kilda, but of North-east Valley, where a system of rating supposed to be ratu* on ‘unimproved values” was tried a few voars ago, and if I remember correctly we had to pay a larger rate on the unimproved values and a very much smaller -ate on the values of the improvements thereon. By that system, a owning a cottage paid considerably less m rates than a person owning a mansion, even although their sections were of equal value, and consequently I think this extern not only a fairer system than that advocated by Mr Withy but « the worker will see from what I have said, m „ch in hi. July 17. TO THE EDITOR. Sir.—'There is just a danger of this quea tion becoming a class one, a contingency that always excludes the possibility of an equitable Settlement. Are pioneers who acquire properlv in the ordinary way of investment, and for which they imve paid rates for years and derived little cr i benefit, entitled to no consideration? 1 here is nothing to bs gained by attempting to speak of the investor as the enemy of society and an undesirable l«rson. et. Kilda‘may bring this system of rating into force by a majority of voters, « ut •! -A ' ill not prove it just or desirable. Vnereu every possibility of our regretting the day thariwe adopt I system that ceramlyto.ds to slum conditions. Is everything to be sacrificed to the doubtful expoKency of attempting by unnatural means to force pron«rtv on the market, or bor>min b th_ building trade beyond the requirements of th lt l wous appear that while some people are endeavoring to create healthier surroundings by conserving air space, others are nullifying their efforts by taxing this necessity to the enjoyment of life. Recent legislation has been offering a, premium to penury and incompetence at the expenaeof enterprise, intelligence, and foresight. Let us always do what is best, independent of f j as --._4 am. etc., Cokservattve. ' July 18.