Henry George and Europe: Ireland, the First Target of His Efforts to Spread His Doctrines Internationally, Disappointed Him

Abstract . Henry George made several crusading forays into the British Empire at the time of its zenith. But the first, to Ireland, proved a disappointment. George saw Ireland as an object lesson in the land question and at first It was uppermost in the minds of the 600,000 tenant farmers. But the 20,000 landlords agreed to an amelioration, and for decades, republicanism replaced land reform in Irish social history. George misread the temper of the times; he saw Ireland's political future better served by becoming a self-governing unit of a league of British nations. “Integration” was the trend of the times, the American social philosopher insisted. Ireland (with the exception of Ulster) became a dominion in 1921 but it withdrew from the British Commonwealth in 1949 to become a sovereign republic. George was not wholly wrong in emphasizing economics over politics. In 1955 Ireland, now Eire, entered the United Nations where it wielded influence all out of proportion to its resources and economic development became its over-riding issue.     

John Dewey and Henry George: The Socialization of Land as a Prerequisite for a Democratic Public

John Dewey frequently praised Henry George, author of a plan to confiscate land values with a “single tax.” Scholars have failed to account for Dewey's support of George. Some have argued that it should not be taken seriously because it is at odds with their interpretation of Dewey's philosophy. This article demonstrates that Dewey perceived the socialization of land values as an essential step toward creating a true democracy. Furthermore, Dewey's interest in George was not an aberration; it was exemplary of his faith in ideology, theory, and transformative social policy. Despite contentions to the contrary, pragmatists of the early 20^th century never emphasized skepticism, moderation, or rote empiricism. In fact, Dewey embraced the philosophy of Henry George as a general theory of history of society. During the Great Depression, Dewey attacked the piecemeal reformism of the New Deal in favor of the comprehensive vision of Henry George.     

Public Choice and Land Tax Fairness

Land value taxation (LVT) as desirable U.S. tax policy was brilliantly set forth by the American publicist and economist, Henry George, in the book Progress and Poverty, published 100 years ago. Economists concerned with state and local taxation have generally accepted the basic elements of George's analysis. The absence of substantial LVT legislation despite the economic efficiency and ethical strengths of land as a tax base arises from two sources. First, the public perception of land has not separated land's attributes from those possessed by other property. Second, land ownership data have not been gathered and publicized. Groups favoring taxes that promote economic justice and efficiency should support efforts to develop land ownership data. It would be an important first step toward fully utilizing the potential of LVT.     

Henry George and the Institution of Private Property in Land: A Property Rights Approach

Abstract . Conflicting statements concerning whether the implementation of Henry George's single tax proposal would destroy the institution of private property in land have appeared in the literatures of economics and other disciplines. A number of writers have implied that the taxation of Ricardian rent is equivalent to land nationalization. In the main, followers of George have denied that the single tax would abolish private property in land. Their claim is based on the fact that land titles would remain in private hands under the single tax. Since the whole question of private property is beset with ideological difficulties, a property rights approach is applied to this issue in an attempt to resolve the controversy. The conclusions are that the actual implementation of George's system would not destroy private property in land and that it is incorrect to equate the single tax with land nationalization.     

Henry George and the Classical Scientific Research Program: The Economics of Republican Millennialism

Abstract . Henry George's classicism was evident in his acceptance of “hard core” assumptions inherent in classical economic analysis, notably that rational self-interested behavior exercise in competitive markets maximized economic welfare. However, George's “stage theory,” the “Law of Human Progress,” led him to reject the classical nexus between social and economic welfare. The emergence of an exchange economy improved efficiency and economic welfare, but institutional changes lagged behind, particularly the redefinition of property rights. Consequently, economic growth based on land as a private rather than public good widened the gap between economic efficiency and social welfare. Hence George's paradox of poverty amidst progress. George resolved the equity efficiency conflict by treating land as a public good. Then, the sale of monopoly rights to land through the “single tax” on land rents captured the difference between the private and social costs of land use.     

The New Barbarians: The Continuing Relevance of Henry George*

Abstract . The world's peoples are demanding: who should be the Lords of the Land or—should anyone be? By what right does anyone acquire the privilege of monopolizing that which should be the heritage of all? A century ago Henry George saw the nature of this question, the land question, outlined the solution and foresaw the consequences if we failed to address it. The rioting in the slums, the looting and other crime in the cities and rural areas, the tension of our time, the rising fears, paranoia and greed bear testimony to the legacy George foresaw. Against monopoly and privilege, George raised the banner of Justice and Liberty, achievable only by taxing the land and untaxing labor and its products. The failure to act upon the land question is at the bottom of the threat of a new barbarism. But the Intellectual Revolution fostered by the new computer technology promises to undermine myths that have enslaved the human mind.     

Henry George's Impact at Home and Abroad: He Won the Workers of Marx's Adopted Country But Through Leninism Marxism Has Won Half the World

Abstract . Henry George, the American economist and social philosopher, considered it an anomoly that, under modern industrial conditions, progress and poverty should march together. He recognized that the juxtaposition of wealth and want was a worldwide phenomenon and traced its cause to monopoly, particularly the monopoly of land and natural resources. Realizing that current taxes on consumption and production were disincentives to capital and labor, he proposed that governments tax the only true surplus, economic rent, through land value taxation. This would enable the people to reassert their common title to the land—the earth. His message was accorded a more favorable reception abroad than at home. Karl Marx wrote Das Kapital in England but it was George, not Marx, who appealed to the British workers. Yet it was Marxism that swept half the world into State socialism, conquering by political power and bayonet-Leninism while George's followers pursued the democratic approach of public education.     

Henry George and British Socialism

Abstract . Henrys George, the American social reformer and Single Tax advocate, had a decisive impact on native British socialism considered apart from the Marxist and revolutionary types imported from the continent. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels were hostile critics but the typically English Fabian Society was influenced by George's seminal ideas. The Fabians were especially attracted to two notions: the conception that George gave to the thought of his time, that poverty was an evil preventable by political intervention—by State action; and that the disparity in incomes could be explained by the theory of unearned increment. In turn Sydney Olivier, George Bernard Shaw, Sidney Webb, Annie Besant, H. G. Wells and E, R. Pease came under the influence of George. Soon to affect the Fabians, however, was the development of the economist, P. H. Wicksteed, beyond George to Jenons and Marginalism. Key figures in the Parliamentary and Independent Labour parties almost achieved land value taxation.     

Henry George and Europe: As Dissident Economist and Path-breaking Philosopher, He was a Catalyst for British Social Reform

Abstract . Henry George's influence was greater in the United Kingdom than in the United States. The 80s and 90s there were particularly favorable for the reception of his revolutionary ideas. Though, thanks to such thinkers as Alfred Russell Wallace and James and John Stuart Mill, a land reform movement already existed, its sudden rise to national significance was due to George. George's writing and speaking skills and his dedication moved many serious citizens into the political Left and heavily influenced men and women who became leaders of British non-Marxian socialism, at the formation and consolidation of their movement. While George's followers broke with both the Wallace and socialist movements, George's rhetorical talents awakened the broad circles of thinking people to a consciousness of the full range of the social question.     

Henry George the Classical Model and Technological Change:*The Ignored Alternative to the Single Tax in Progress and Poverty

Abstract . Henry George's vision of land monopolization as the source of growing rentier income was compatible with all elements in the predominant Ricardian-Millian classical distribution model except the rent-reducing effects of technological change and Malthusian population growth as the catalyst underlying income distribution. Since George also rejected Malthusianism on ethical and philosophical grounds, his analysis focused on the autonomous nature of rent income with respect to population and technological change. George analyzed the distributive consequences of both increasing technology with constant population, and constant technology with increasing population. In the latter case, George, in an ultimate rejection of Malthusianism, demonstrated an optimistic increasing returns to scale of population growth. However, although capable, George never considered a logical extension of his analysis, namely, the dynamic case of changing population, technology, and increasing returns. This analysis would have contradicted his predictions of the trend in relative income shares and the uniqueness of the single tax as the solution to social and economic distress.     

Henry George and the Classical Scientific Research Program: George's Modification of It and His Real Significance for Future Generations

Abstract . Henry George's revision of classical economics was based on a new “hard core” assumption linking efficiency, equity, and social welfare to a revised concept of property rights in land. However, rather than create new core supporting “protective belt” theories, George either accepted or, when necessary, modified existing classical theories especially those which threatened his new hard core, for example, classical “wages-fund” theory. Consequently, George's adaptation of the Ricardian “stationary state” model was less accurate than mainstream classical economics in its predictions concerning the behavior of the distributive shares of income over time, and the effects of technological change on economic growth and economic welfare. Without its own protective belt, George's classicism became a special case of classical economics whose value, nevertheless, existed in its effective criticism of classical property rights theory.     

Louis F. Post and the Single Tax Movement, 1872–98

Abstract . The career of Louis F. Post (1849–1928), upon his return to New York following a stint as a Carpetbagger in South Carolina, became, for a time, that of publicist. Post first attempted to break into regular Republican politics, then turned to Journalism on the staff of the New York Truth, and finally was converted to the Single Tax philosophy of Henry George in the early 1880s. Thereafter, Post became George's closest confidante and labored hard as a writer, lecturer, and political organizer to elect George and others to make the Single Tax a reality (1). The author's sources include Post's unpublished autobiography, the files of The Public, The Standard and the Cleveland Recorder, as well as material from the Henry George Collection in the New York Public Library.     

Henry George and Jane Jacobs on the Sources of Economic Growth

Henry George and Jane Jacobs shared a remarkably similar vision of the economic functioning of cities and of the sources of the economic growth of cities, despite having differing primary objectives. George wrote Progress and Poverty and subsequent works to persuade the public of the equity and efficiency of public capture of economic rents of land and other natural resources and elimination of taxes on labor and capital. Jacobs acquired fame for The Death and Life of Great American Cities in which she challenged the prevailing orthodoxy of the urban planning profession. Both saw the density and diversity of economic and cultural activities in cities as a facilitator of innovation and entrepreneurship in all aspects of civilization. Both also recognized the power of the price system in coordinating the activities of independent decision makers and the importance of trade for economic growth.     

In Perpetuity: Some Reflections on Literary Views of Land and Other Forms of Property

Some of civilization's finest minds have focused on societal problems and reported the result in literary works. Literary sensitivity and sensibility ought to provide insight on the value consequences and normative dimensions of social science theorizing. These hypotheses are tested against some of the ideas on property, particularly property in land, in great works of literature, contrasted with some analogous ideas from economic theory. No sweeping generalizations or policy conclusions were sought or found; insights were obtained as aids or guides for economic inquiry. But, interestingly, many of the literary views were in substantial accord with views on land and property espoused by Henry George, views which, as he noted, have a history extending into ancient and possibly prehistoric times.     

Henry George's Theory of State's Agenda: The Origins of His Ideas on Economic Policy in Adam Smith's Moral Theory

Abstract . The tension between Henry George's reformism and his laissezfaire liberalism was resolved through a system of natural liberty George derived from the relation between Adam Smith's ethics and economics. Crucial for George's nonutilitarian philosophy of government was the interdependence between the moral sense (sympathy) and the prevailing socioeconomic order. In the appropriate institutional environment, the role of the government was diminished since the pervasive moral sense insured justice by monitoring the individual's pursuit of economic self-interest. In contrast, a defective socio economic order required government intervention. For example, land monopoly and the maldistribution of income undermined the role of sympathy, promoted excessive self interest and the breakdown of the system of natural liberty. Government action through the single tax eliminated the “fear of want,” restored an operative moral sense and guaranteed justice in society. Under these conditions, government can provide additional services for a growing society without being susceptible to “corrupt and tyrannous” behavior.     

Was George a Dreamer or a Realist?

Abstract . The republication of Steven Cord's Henry George: Dreamer or Realist? makes available once more a work which dealt with insight and depth of analysis with the misconceptions, factual inaccuracies and offhand dismissals of the American economist and social philosopher's theories. Although he alienated many in the academic community, George attracted many leading scholars in it to significant research on basic problems of our times.     

Henry George and the Ethics of Economics

Abstract . Henry George's Progress and Poverty (1879) is a great ethical masterpiece. Its moral tone distinguishes the book. More than an economics test, it is a philosophic quest for justice, an impassioned declaration of the rule of natural law. Indignantly attacking the contention that economics has no place for natural law or ethics, George exclaims: “She [economics] has been degraded and shackled; her truths dislocated; her harmonies ignored.” On the contrary, George stresses, political economy (economics) is a science, and like all sciences, is governed by natural law. Furthermore, it is basically “moral.” Science must, of necessity, always lead to ethics. Natural law must, of necessity, always lead to morality, or justice.“The law of human progress, what is it but the moral law?” George asks. “Unless its foundation be laid in justice the social structure cannot stand.” The social ill that perpetuates poverty and the manifold evils it causes is private ownership of land and the private privilege of collecting its rent. “The fundamental law of nature, that the enjoyment by man shall be consequent upon his exertion, is thus violated.”     

The Single Tax Movement and Progressivism, 1880-1920*

Abstract . Henry George's Single Tax movement and the Progressive movement in the United States were inter-related. After the publication of Progress and Poverty a political movement developed around George. It failed, partly because George was a poor politician although he had proved a master-publicist, partly because he aroused a formidable opposition. Nevertheless the single taxers did contribute to progressive reform a specific plan for manipulating the environment in a Social Darwinistic way. George's philosophy also rejected socialism in favor of a reformed and purified capitalism—perhaps the most important theme in 20th century reform thought in America. Moreover, the Single Tax movement contributed to the democratic reform movement such leaders as Tom L. Johnson, Brand Whitlock, Louis F. Post, Frederic C. Howe, George L. Record, Newton D. Baker and Franklin K. Lane.     

How Much Revenue Would a Full Land Value Tax Yield?In the United States in 1981, Census and Federal Reserve Data Indicate It Would Nearly Equal All Taxes

Abstract . Most urban economists and particularly specialists in urban public finance consider the land value tax, because of its economic effects and its influence toward rational development, the tax of choice. But could it replace, in whole or in large part, taxes which now burden labor and capital and distort efficient allocation of resources? How important would a full land rent tax's yield be? The U.S. Bureau of the Census provides data which, adjusted for errors and omissions, indicates that the annual land rent for 1981 was $721 billion. Federal Reserve Board data, similarly adjusted, indicates annual land rent for that year was $590.38 billion Hence we may say that a full land rent tax would yield something around $658 billion in 1981, or 28 percent of the 1981 national income. This is nearly two thirds of all taxes levied by all levels of government in 1981, and, with user charges and similar fees continued, it is probably equal or nearly equal to burdensome taxes.     

Henry George and the Contemporary Debate over Industrial Protectionism

Abstract . The central question of Henry George's 1886 book. Protection or Free Trade, commemorated now after a century, was: do protectionist policies help or hinder the working man Have George's concerns in 1886 since become outdated or anachronistic? If not, what are some historic trends toward protectionism since that time? Some of the formal arguments for and against protectionism are examined. George contended that protectionism threatens labor unions and reduces workers’wages. An apparent counterexample is provided by the International Ladies’Garment Workers’Union, which now actively lobbies for protectionist legislation. Its arguments have merit when protectionism is viewed instrumentally, but one must recognize that there are substantive objections to protectionism as a comprehensive national policy. George linked protectionism to paternalism; his theory of economic value as well as his model of the rational economic man are derived from basic democratic principles which stand at sharp odds with the implicit paternalism of tariff policies.