Henry George was an American journalist and political economist. His book Progress and Poverty
In Progress and Poverty, George argued that labor is the source of all wealth, and unequal wealth is the result of unequal ownership of land. To eliminate poverty, he claimed, we must eliminate private ownership of land.
To extirpate poverty, to make wages what justice commands they should be, the full earnings of the labourer, we must substitute for the individual ownership of land a common ownership.
George did not call for outright confiscation of land. Instead, he proposed confiscating land rents.
George argued that land values rise as populations grow and demand increases. The rise in land value is not the result of any improvements the owner has made, but a consequence of the collective actions of the community. Therefore, the community should share in that benefit.
The tax upon land values falls upon those who receive from society a peculiar and valuable benefit, and upon them in proportion to the benefit they receive. It is the taking by the community, for the use of the community, of the value that is the creation of the community. It is the application of the common property to common uses.
George proposed that individuals could own any improvements that they make, but not the land itself. However, even this has its limits.
If I clear a forest, drain a swamp, or fill a morass, all I can justly claim is the value given by these exertions. They give me no right to the land itself, no claim other than to my equal share with every other member of the community in the value that is added to it by the growth of the community. But it will be said: There are improvements which in time become indistinguishable from the land itself! Very well. Then the title to the improvements becomes blended with the title to the land, the individual right is lost in the common right.
In short, no property would be safe under George’s proposal. Improvements made by an individual could be seized by the community or another individual at any time.
Our rights to take and possess cannot be exclusive; they must be bounded everywhere by the equal rights of others. just as the passenger in a railway carriage may spread his baggage over as many seats as he pleases, until other passengers come in, so may a settler take and use as much land as he chooses, until it is needed by others…
An individual could spend years clearing the land and improving the soil, drill a well and install an irrigation system, and if another settler needed the land, it must be surrendered. George’s proposal wasn’t unique–many others had previously called for the abolition of private property. And all of these arguments were founded on the same principle–land should be “owned” in common.
Though George’s proposal was never adopted in kind, it was adopted in principle. Zoning, preservation ordinances, and other land-use regulations treat private property as “community property.” The individual cannot use his property as he chooses, but only in accordance with the values and vision of the community.
As another example, Venezuela has all but abolished private property. The result has not been the human flourishing promised by George and his ilk, but misery and poverty.