the varying needs of the government, always meeting the expenses of
government, but at the same time taking as little as possible from the
people. [Footnote: Some opponents of the single tax declare that the
heaviest possible tax on land would yield only a fraction of the
revenue needed to finance the government. Single taxers, however,
maintain that the tax would yield more than enough revenue to meet
public expenditures. The merits of this argument are uncertain.]

It is doubtful whether the single tax would force into productive use
land now being held by speculators. Even though a heavy tax were laid
upon such land, it would not be utilized unless there were an
immediate use to which it could profitably be put.

A last important argument against the single tax is that there is no
good reason for removing the tax burden from all except land-owners.
Land is only one form of wealth, and it is unfair not to tax
individuals who hold property in some other form. Some land value is
indeed unearned, but there are other forms of unearned wealth, as, for
example, monopoly gains and inherited property. Taxes ought to be
levied upon these forms of unearned wealth, as well as upon the
unearned income from land. It is desirable, too, to levy at least a
light tax upon the propertyless classes, in order to encourage them to
feel an interest in, and a sense of responsibility for, the conduct of
their government.

109. SERVICE RENDERED BY THE SINGLE TAX AGITATION.--Economists are
unanimous in agreeing that the single tax, as expounded by Henry
George, is too drastic and special a reform to find wide favor.
Nevertheless, the single taxers have performed a valuable service by
emphasizing the fact that in many cases the income from land is