THE UNEARNED INCREMENT.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2553, 20 November 1888, Page 2

THE UNEARNED INCREMENT.

TO THE EDITOR. Sin,—l posted you a letter this forenoon in reply to "Elector." I had so little time. to catch the mail that now when I have more fully studied his letter I find I have omitted to answer some of his given reasons in favour of the State having the Unearned Increment. I wish " Elector '" to bear in mind that what I want, and very possibly your readers alsn, is information. As far as I am individually and personally concerned, good or bad government, good or bad ideas as to political questions can be nething to me. All the same I would bo a contemptible skunk if I did not feel an interest in what would be Rood for my fellow creatures. I think this doctrine, that the State should have the unearned increment is not for the stood of the people. The money qnestion, that is the State having the profit, is a very small part of the question, for even allowing there wouH be a profit, and I do not think there would, for though individuals do get unearned increment from city property, not for one moment do I think the State would. However, to me that is a very small psrt of the question. Mr Editor, behind this doctrine of the State having the unearned increment there lies a big question and it is a tremendously big one. That question: is the individual ownership of property, I can never understand, if the State is to own the lands, how it is not to own everything else. You cannot separate the State ownership of land from the State ownership of everything else. Will " Ejector" show me, and also your readers upon what grovnds the one ownership is separable from the other ? It may be in a thousand years there will be wonderful advances held and acted upon on these great communist problems, but they are so far beyond bur time that if acted upon, before their time the result would be a great burst up of all the bonds which hold sttciety together, and the terrible effect would be so great that our small minde could have no idea of the disasters which would , follow. " Elector " has given me the names of great men who hold that the State should have the unearned increment. One of these names upon no consideration will I admit to be a great man's. However, we will let that slide. I will only say that J. S. Mill and the other great men mentioned are, from the very greatnes3 of their intellects, not safe men for the guidance of men in the real practical carrying on of the world. These great men in the greatness of their great minds form thoughts which, in the abstract, are right, but which are far in advance of the times and are quite unsuitable and not practicable for the times : they are far ahead and beyond their times. No doubt in the carryiug on of the world they have their allotted part and a great part it is; but the Conservative who also holds back has his allotted part and a great part his is ; for of the two evils, progress held back or progress too soon, I think by far the greater evil is progress before its time, I have often put myself to sleep trying to solve the problem of whether Radicals by their progress,, or Tories by their holding back have done most good. Somehow, I always catM to the conclusion that the Tories wP us from some great smash, and that , the liberty we now enjoy, to the Tories'and "the Radicals we are indebted for the same liberty, but it always ended in my thinking that to the Tories most of all are we indebted. I suppose the bumps of my head incline me that way. Mr Editor, I begin my letter with one subject, and before I have onded I rdn away to another, butVou must just take me asl am. As I wish " Elector " to get this letter along with my other I will put myself to the tremble of having jt posted outside ot our place, so that he will have them both together. I don't know who "Elector" i 3, but I think when he gets quit of the docks and sorrel that are in him, the good wheat that is left in him would make him a good member for tho Waipa. Upon no consideration must he go in for doing away with the individual ownership of property, the world is not riue fur that yet, and perhaps never will bo. —Yours truly, Habapipi,