You are quite wrong if you think this. In proportion to your earnings,
you pay, even here in this country, more than I do, more than the
doctor, more than the farmer--more than almost any one, except the
parson, who is always the most heavily taxed man in proportion to his
means and his duties in the community. It is true that you don’t get
yellow papers “On His Majesty’s Service” by the post demanding this or
that sum. You don’t get polite gentlemen calling for money, and backed
up by the whole force of the British Constitution. You pay in other
ways. Take the case of a farm labourer. The farmer rents his land from
the original owner, and he makes as much as he can out of it. The
farmer has to pay the Government a proportion of every shilling he
makes. It stands to reason, therefore, that he can’t afford to pay his
labourers as much as he would were he himself less heavily taxed. And
there are other ways in which the working man pays out of all
proportion to his earnings. The working man who buys a pound of tea, a
glass of beer, or an ounce of tobacco, pays exactly the same duty on
these articles as people with ten times his income. I may buy a pound
of tea at two shillings and the working man may not be able to pay
more than a shilling. But that is merely a question of quality, and
does not affect the argument. The working man with a very small
income pays the same duty as the man with a much larger one.
The working man also pays other taxes, called rates, in his
house-rent. They are not collected direct from him, they are collected
from the landlord, who puts up the rent accordingly.
Therefore, although a superficial view would tend to show that the
working man is without many of those burdens which fall upon the
shoulders of larger earners, such a view would be utterly wrong.
I have still so much to say that I cannot go further into the economic
aspect of the question. Detailed proof, abundant and overflowing,
could be easily supplied. I have no time to do so now, I merely repeat
the indubitable fact that the working man has to pay for the
workhouses, the asylums, and the prisons; poor as he is, he must
support the Unemployables.
In the workhouses, at any rate in the London unions, he must support
them in a comparative luxury which he himself can by no means afford.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account