Page:David Atkins - The Economics of Freedom (1924).pdf/207



We are now so stunted mentally by economic ritual that any proposal looking toward basic readjustment results in the flinging of epithets; and “Single-Tax” is a very convenient reproach to hurl at anyone who suggests that land-area is a factor mathematically involved in the measurement of the control of economic value and the corresponding responsibility. While it is contended that, under any rational conception of economic value, taxation should be as compound as the value itself and should be based on the occupancy-value of area, per unit of time, nevertheless it is well worth while making a very careful examination of the proposals of Henry George to ascertain, if possible, why Single-Tax has become so effective an epithet.

In the field of political economy, as in that of theology, there has been, for a long time past, a danger of the layman becoming confused and wearied by endless expert controversy over irrelevant detail. This arises partly from the fact that some of the most vital words in our language are tinctured with misconceptions, or conceptions which have been repudiated, and other focal points lack final definition; so that any statement, at the best, is inexact and subject to valid criticism, the intensity of which obscures more important basic considerations. Controversy also arises from the fact that while we have dispersed and apportioned political power, the disposition of economic power has largely been a matter of catch-as-catch-can; and we have not apportioned the corresponding responsibility. Under these circumstances it is not strange that such words “freedom,” “responsibility,”