This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Thomas Paine (1737-1809) and Thomas Spence (1750-1814) on land ownership, land taxes and the provision of citizens' dividend

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
John Marangos

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Purpose – The aim of this paper is to outline and compare the land ownership, land taxes and citizens' dividend proposals by Thomas Paine and Thomas Spence. Design/methodology/approach – Paine wrote “Agrarian justice” in which he argued that every proprietor of cultivated land owes to the society a ground-rent for the land which the person holds because it is common property. This ground rent would take the form of a tax per year of 10 per cent on inheritances. It is this ground-rent that would fund the payments made to every person based on some age restrictions. In response, Spence wrote “The rights of infants” in which he went a step further as he recommended the abolition of aristocracy. As a result, there would have been common ownership of land and revenue derived from land would be administered by the parishes and distributed to everyone equally. Findings – In assessing the two proposals using the citizens' dividend criterion, each proposal has consistent and inconsistent elements. Practical implications – It can be argued that the two proposals are primitive versions of citizens' dividend as espoused today. Originality/value – The paper contributes to knowledge regarding the debate at the time. During that period, public opinion associated classical political economy with a resolute denial of the right to subsistence to the poor and vigorous opposition to the English Poor Law based on the ideas of Malthus. Students of social economics would benefit from this paper in placing on equal footnoting in the historical debate the counter-proposals to the dominant position at the time.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do;jsessionid=A647198CCCAC8C7DFA56044E5D646651?contentType=Article&contentId=1718483
File Format: text/html
File Function:
Download Restriction: Cannot be freely downloaded

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Article provided by Emerald Group Publishing in its journal International Journal of Social Economics.

Volume (Year): 35 (2008)
Issue (Month): 5 (May)
Pages: 313-325
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:eme:ijsepp:v:35:y:2008:i:5:p:313-325

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com

Order Information:
Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK
Email:
Web: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ijse.htm

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Rebecca Forster).

Related research
Keywords: Economic history; Land; Taxes;

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You can use convenient plug-ins to search directly IDEAS from your browser.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-2.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.