Prolonged
Adolescence 
  Have you thought about the implications of it being harder and harder, decade
      by decade, for our young people to get a start in life? In families where
      there is sufficient income, they continue to live with their parents well
      into their
      20s, returning home after college, and their families of origin may keep
      homes large enough to house them and their spouses and children, just in
      case careers
      fail.
      Parents may help with down payments on homes, or help pay their rent.  
  In
        families
        where
        money is scarce, one's opportunities are very different, and one's hopes
      may be a good deal lower. 
  What is it we say about living in a nation dedicated to the proposition
    that all are created equal? How can we make that real in the world of the
    21st century?
      I submit that we must start with Henry George's Remedy: make land common
    property. Yes, I
      know what Clarence Darrow said: “The “single tax” is
      so simple, so fundamental, and so easy to carry into effect that I have
      no doubt that it
      will be about the last reform the world will ever get. People in this world
      are not often logical.”  
  What kind of society do we want to leave our children and grandchildren? Do
    we love them enough to work to create it? 
 
 
        William Ogilvie: An Essay on the Right
          of Property in Land (Scotland, 1782) 
  What is it that in England restrains the early marriages of the poor
      and industrious classes of men? Alas! not the Marriage Act but a system
      of institutions more difficult to be reformed; establishing in a few hands
      that monopoly of land by which the improvable as well as the improved value
      of the soil is engrossed. It is this which chiefly occasions the difficulty
      of their finding early and comfortable settlements in life, and so prevents
      the consent of parents from being given before the legal age. It is this
      difficulty which even after that age is passed still withholds the consent
      of parents, restrains the inclinations of the parties themselves, and keeps
      so great a number of the lower classes unmarried to their thirtieth or
      fortieth years, perhaps for their whole lives. ... Read the entire essay 
 
H.G. Brown: Significant
    Paragraphs from Henry George's Progress & Poverty:
    12. Effect of Remedy Upon Various Economic Classes (in the unabridged P&P: Part
    IX: Effects of the Remedy — Chapter 3. Of the effect upon individuals
    and classes) 
  When it is first proposed to put all taxes upon the value of land, all landholders
      are likely to take the alarm, and there will not be wanting appeals to
    the fears of small farm and homestead owners, who will be told that this
    is a proposition
      to rob them of their hard-earned property. But a moment's reflection will
    show that this proposition should commend itself to all whose interests as
    landholders
      do not largely exceed their interests as laborers or capitalists, or both.
      And further consideration will show that though the large landholders may
    lose relatively, yet even in their case there will be an absolute gain. For,
    the
      increase in production will be so great that labor and capital will gain
    very much more than will be lost to private landownership, while in these
    gains,
      and in the greater ones involved in a more healthy social condition, the
    whole community, including the landowners themselves, will share. 
  
    -  It is manifest, of course, that the change I propose will greatly benefit
          all those who live by wages, whether of hand or of head -- laborers,
      operatives, mechanics, clerks, professional men of all sorts.
 
    -  It is manifest, also, that it will benefit all those who live partly
      by wages and partly by the earnings of their capital -- storekeepers, merchants,
          manufacturers, employing or undertaking producers and exchangers of
      all sorts
          from the peddler or drayman to the railroad or steamship owner -- and
 
    -  it is likewise manifest that it will increase the incomes of those whose
          incomes are drawn from the earnings of capital.
 
   
  Take, now, the case of the homestead owner -- the mechanic, storekeeper, or
      professional man who has secured himself a house and lot, where he lives, and
      which he contemplates with satisfaction as a place from which his family cannot
      be ejected in case of his death. He will not be injured; on the contrary, he
      will be the gainer. The selling value of his lot will diminish -- theoretically
      it will entirely disappear. But its usefulness to him will not disappear. It
      will serve his purpose as well as ever. While, as the value of all other lots
      will diminish or disappear in the same ratio, he retains the same security
      of always having a lot that he had before. That is to say, he is a loser only
      as the man who has bought himself a pair of boots may be said to be a loser
      by a subsequent fall in the price of boots. His boots will be just as useful
      to him, and the next pair of boots he can get cheaper. So, to the homestead
      owner, his lot will be as useful, and should he look forward to getting a larger
      lot, or having his children, as they grow up, get homesteads of their own,
      he will, even in the matter of lots, be the gainer. And in the
      present, other things considered, he will be much the gainer. For though
      he will have
      more
      taxes to pay upon his land, he will be released from taxes upon his house
      and improvements, upon his furniture and personal property, upon all that
      he and
      his family eat, drink and wear, while his earnings will be largely increased
      by the rise of wages, the constant employment, and the increased briskness
      of trade. His only loss will be, if he wants to sell his lot without getting
      another, and this will be a small loss compared with the great gain. ... read the whole chapter 
 
William F. Buckley, Jr.: Home
  Dear Home 
  The real estate boom is a familiar phenomenon. Most people are predicting
    that it will, if not burst, at least wilt. But the basic components aren't
    going to change, not unless we have a catastrophe of sorts, something economists
  don't feel obliged to integrate into their speculations. 
  The components are: 
  
    -  a relatively wealthy community;
 
    -  the hard desire to own one's own house, along with the ambition to make
      it more and more comfortable and pleasing;
 
    -  the dependence of building sites on immediate amenities (sewage, power);
      and
 
    -  strategic sources of nourishment (jobs).
 
   
  The convenience of infinitely available land faded as urbanization brought
    on heavy dependence on elements that weren't always available to homes on
    the range. Schools and hospitals are not only useful for educating children
    and curing the infirm. They are necessary to attract affluent home buyers. 
  Jon Gertner, writing for The New York Times Magazine, gives a useful
    account of the home-building industry. Here are some basic indices.  
  
    - We have 34 million rented apartments at this point and 74 million owner-occupied
      homes. 
 
    - The pool is being fed
        
          - by immigrants seeking houses, 
 
          - by children growing and seeking their own homes, and 
 
          - by the elderly wanting a second house in which to vacation or retire. 
 
         
     
    - The home-building industry has constructed about 13.5 million single-family
      homes since the mid-1990s.
 
   
  So why is the cost of housing so high? 
  We learn that the average new house nationwide now sells for nearly $300,000.
    The writer tells us, "I asked (a builder) what our children -- my kids
    are both under 8, I told him -- would be paying when they're ready to buy. 
  "'They're going to live with us until they're 40,' (the builder) said
    matter-of-factly. 'And when they have their second kid, then we'll finally
    kick them out and make them pay for the house that we paid for. And that
    house will cost them 45 to 50 percent of their income.'" ... 
  Henry George, the eminent social philosopher of a century ago, turned the
    attention of planners and economists, however briefly, to the indefeasible
    factor of land scarcity. Capital and labor can increase; land cannot. 
  Accordingly, George was the apostle of the single tax. It aimed most directly
    at land speculators. ... read the whole
      column 
    
        
 
 | 
    
      
        
          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: 
           | 
       
      |