Tax Protests and the Tea Party- Why Now?

[AlphaCrab]

It has nothing to do with facts and everything to do with perception, ratings/money, racism, a bad economy, and fear.

Yes, we will need to raise taxes in the future to pay all the bills we have been piling up at every level of government for years/decades, but that is not what the majority of these protestors are truly upset about.

You have a very competent way with words..brava.

 

[AlphaCrab]

That video supports my theory that America today has some of the dumbest citizens in the world. It is sad that we have fallen down soooooo far down.

 

[LuciferSam]

I'll just stick with the stereotyping of the tea people, because it's right on the money.

 

[Geo]

Andy, unfortunately I'm not smoking anything today. If I was I would probably be more tolerant and amused rather than annoyed.

I've read your comments on the Tea Party on the other threads. And I have said on those threads that if the Tea Party (nationally) really stood for the (just) the cornerstones you described then I would be drinking the tea as well.

My remarks weren't geared toward you personally (just like your remarks about "liberals" don't always stick on me). And save for the video I posted, the brunt of my remarks in this thread including the title refer specifically to the false perception of our current tax policy.

There are masses of pissed off citizens protesting taxes that are the lowest in 60 years who have never even considered protesting taxes before until now. This warrants the thread and our discussion. There are many answers to my question of why taxes and why now. Me skoking something doesn't explain it.

 

[GoodWitch58]

My guess is that the 50% of Americans who don't pay income taxes would protest if they had to pay taxes, too. If taxes are so good, why not have everyone paying them?

Perhaps everyone, including the Tea Party, should dust their history books and learn about the founding of our country and the Boston Tea Party.

It was the Sugar Act of 1764 which placed tariffs on sugar, coffee, wines and other imported products. That spurred "no taxation without representation.

Only a year later, Parliament tightened the screws and created the Stamp Act of 1765 which taxed most anything that was printed, eg- newspapers, legal documents (we still pay today), playing cards, etc. The people grew very upset and boycotted the stamps and all English goods. London's merchants were hit in the pocket book, and Parliament repealed the tax a year later. People in America were still pissed.

Parliament, not learning their lesson added another tax in 1767 called the Townshend Acts. Again, "Americans" boycotted, and the Brit's answer was to send in troops, flooding Boston. There was one British soldier in Boston, for every resident of Boston. The British soldiers began to competing for work with laborers in Boston, "stealing" their jobs. Tempers grew. A small group of harbor workers confronted a small group of soldiers and the soldiers opened fire, killing them all. (Ever hear of the "Boston Masacre?" That pissed off even more people in Boston. They say that more than half the population of Boston marched at the funeral procession of those 5 men. On the day of the "Boston Massacre," the the Townshend Acts were repealed.

Samuel Adams was still pissed and wanted to raise a little hell. The boycotts were lifted, and things began to settle down, and Sam Adams wanted to keep the fire "burning."
A few years later, came the Boston Tea Party, and it wasn't about taxes. It was about Parliament giving a legal monopoly to the East India Company on the sale of tea. Patriots thought if England could do this with tea, they could do it with anything and that they WOULD do it with everything, which would supress the Patriots. East India Company was nearly bankrupt and this would save them, but it would hurt many others, including John Hancock. Three ships loaded with tea came into the Boston Harbor in 1773. The Patriots refused to let the tea land. The Governor of Massachusettes stood to profit by the landing of the tea. Two months later came the dumping of the tea from those ships.

King George considered it an insult and set out for revenge by sending in a new governor and doubling sending in more troops. Colonists banned together and created the First Continental Congress and the American Revolution soon began, along with the founding of our country.

I wish all politicians had to pass a history test.

I think we should require they all pass the same test immigrants must pass to become citizens!

 

[Here4Good]

No Tea Party Protests about Wall Street

Can anyone refute this?

Cenk Uygur: Where Are the Tea Party Protests About Wall Street?

The article asks, why, if the Tea Party was formed in opposition to bailouts, are they not meeting and demonstrating about the Financial Reform Act - even to protest that Obama is doing it all wrong and that this bill provides for permanent bailouts (the current popular lie)?

How can you possibly not believe that they are being manipulated, and that those handlers don't want financial reform?

 

[Em]

There are masses of pissed off citizens protesting taxes that are the lowest in 60 years who have never even considered protesting taxes before until now. This warrants the thread and our discussion. There are many answers to my question of why taxes and why now.

That raises the question in my mind, if one was founding a new country, would it be created with all of the rules and regulations and big government which we have today? I think not. Gov't has a way of creeping up on you until it grows so large that suddenly it hits people over the head, and a revolution occurs. (I think the Tea Party is far from a revolution, but I expect one in the next 50-100 years.)

 

[Mango]

That raises the question in my mind, if one was founding a new country, would it be created with all of the rules and regulations and big government which we have today? I think not. Gov't has a way of creeping up on you until it grows so large that suddenly it hits people over the head, and a revolution occurs. (I think the Tea Party is far from a revolution, but I expect one in the next 50-100 years.)

I disagree. People stranded for life on a desert island would still have some form of government. The Skipper and Marianne would probably not draft a Constitution, but there would be unspoken rules that developed and consequences. Still governing in many respects.

I think part of the problem, and why we are seeing so many tea parties, is people do not feel sufficiently represented. In 1787, the year of the Great Compromise, the states were delegated the same proportion of Senators and Representatives we have now. 2 Senators for each state, and a certain # of Congressman based on population of the State. The census shows that there were 4 million people at that time.

Now, we still have two Senators and maximum of 435 total in Congress, and 309 million people. It's not that difficult to do the math to see that your voice is, in all likelihood, will never be heard; and I think people are feeling it now more so due to the drastic changes and decisions that are being made.

 

[Em]

I don't disagree that even the Skipper and Marianne would have some form of Government. I simply don't think you could get all the people in the USA, if we were starting today, to agree to the current rules and regulations of today's government. It wouldn't fly. We would likely have an internal war.

 

[scooterbug44]

I don't think the feeling that we are not being well represented is due to numbers, but $$$.

Obviously you cannot please everyone, but more and more it seems that the wishes of the majority of people are secondary to contributors and special interests who lobby.

I agree that there would still need to be rules and laws, but not so many and not so complicated. Though we must remember that one of the reasons we have so many is that we have been adding to them and revising them for centuries. So while you can start a new country and new rules, at some point you will be right back where you started.