244 THE LAND AND ITS PROBLEMS 



They claim that the results of nationalizing the land would 

 be:— 



1. That the community would thus be able to secure to 

 itself any increased value of the land arising from State action, 

 and so to prevent any benefit accruing to the individual from 

 an increased value brought about by the community itself. 



2. That speculation in land would be stopped. 



3. That the community would benefit socially if the land 

 were nationalized, for then it would be readily available for 

 all future development. 



4. That the proper control of cultivation would be secured. 



5. That if farmers held their land under the State, fixity of 

 tenure would be secured. 



6. That it is essential to nationalize the land before railways 

 and mines can be nationalized. 



7. That it would secure easy access to the land for the 

 largest possible number of people. 



8. That the single tax system could be introduced. 



The question is, Is it necessary to nationalize the land 

 to secure these objects ? Are there not other methods by 

 which to secure them — methods that would prove simpler, 

 and which would not entail the risk of entirely upsetting the 

 agricultural industry ? And this risk is a real one. The great 

 mass of farmers are opposed to State-ownership ; it could 

 only be carried out in the face of their strongest opposition, 

 and a lessened production over a lengthy period would be 

 the inevitable result. 



As a matter of fact, some of the aims as stated above have 

 been achieved already by methods other than that of nationali- 

 zation, and others are in process of achievement. 



I. Increment duty is in existence, and it could be so applied 

 that all increased value would go to the community wherever 

 it was not due to the activity of the owner or expenditure of 

 capital on his part. 



f" 2. Speculation will be stopped if increase in value is re- 

 moved by taxation. 



