Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (8529)	3/14/2001 6:20:05 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Many of the colonists About a 1/3. Not a majority unless you are running for president here.

To: TimF who wrote (8529)	3/14/2001 6:21:12 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

To all - I asked this during a discussion on another thread and I'd like to see what some of the people here think Is there any level of taxation that is evil or unjust no matter how fair and efficient government is or is any level of taxation that the government (or at least a democratic or perhaps a popular non democratic government) decides to impose acceptable if it does not ruin the countries economy. Are you morally or philosophically opposed to the government grabbing beyond a certain amount of the countries resources, or is any amount ok as long as it spends it well? Tim

To: TimF who wrote (8529)	3/14/2001 6:38:57 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

They thought they were not listented to or treated fairly and they had no representation in parliment. All true. And not ameliorated by the fact that nor did the colossal majority of their peers in England... at the time, as I recall, the vote was basically for landed gentry - only the men, if you please - and householders (property owners) in certain franchised boroughs. But there is an interesting 'what if'... what if the counsels of certain Whigs (one of the two British parties of the time) had been followed, and the American colonies as were had been given representation in Parliament? [the tax issue is somewhat misleading, in that the taxes which the UK sought to apply to the US were already applied at home...]. Would the War of Independence have been averted - IMO quite possibly? And, faced with a 'British US', would France have tried to keep the Louisiana territories instead of selling them (to the US) to raise funds to battle the UK? Hmmm. I'm not sure it would have been for the better, even from the British POV. <g>