Socialist, discussing in private the beauties of the Levy on Capital, point out that it is the sort of thing which, when once the ice has been broken, can be done again so easily.  From the Socialist point of view the Levy on Capital is, of course, a simple means of getting, by repetitions of it at regular intervals, all the means of production into the hands of the State; but would the State make a good use of them?

Another assumption about the Levy on Capital that seems to me to be the merest will o’ the wisp is the delusion that the whole saving that it would entail by reducing the debt charge would necessarily and certainly go to the relief of income tax.  On this assumption Mr Pethick Lawrence bases his most persuasive appeal to the smaller income-tax payer, by showing that he would be better off after a Levy on Capital than before it, thanks to the reduction in income tax, which is assumed as axiomatically arising in its train.  But is this certain or even likely?  Is it not much more probable that our Government, finding its post-war Budget greatly lightened by a Levy on Capital or a Compulsory Loan to redeem debt, will think itself free to indulge in extravagance, maintaining a considerable part of the war income tax and wasting it on rash experiments?  All these weaknesses, which appear to be inherent alike in the Levy on Capital or in the scheme which gilds the pill by calling it a Compulsory Loan, seem to be ignored or neglected (perhaps because they are unanswerable) by their advocates.  On the other hand, there are certain psychological arguments on the other side.  If the well-to-do, who would have to pay the Levy or subscribe to the Compulsory Loan, would prefer that system to a high income tax, there is no more to be said.  A tax that is popular with the payer, as compared with other modes of shearing his fleece, needs no further recommendation.  But, in view of the probability of the experiment, once tried, being shortly and frequently repeated, I Very much doubt whether this is so; as far as I have been able by personal inquiry to test opinion on the point I have found it almost unanimously adverse among those whom the Levy would most seriously affect.  If, as is much more likely, the imposition of a Levy created better feeling among the working classes and the returning soldiers and tended to more harmonious co-operation in after-war tasks of reconstruction, it might be worth while to face its evils and its dangers.  But here again it is quite probable that if the burden of war debt were clearly and palpably put on the shoulders best able to bear it, that is, on those who are lifted by the gifts of fortune—­either in inherited money or unusual brainpower or faculties—­by an equitably graded income tax, the effect might be just as good on the minds of those who suspect that the rich have battened throughout the war on exploitation of the poor.