Skip to main content

How did the British and the colonists differ on the issue of taxes?

I assume you are asking about the difference between the colonists and the British government.  If so, the basic difference is that the British government believed that it had the right to tax the colonists under almost any circumstances.  By contrast, the colonists felt that the British government had the right to tax them only in very limited circumstances (and perhaps not at all).


The American colonists felt that the British government only had the right to tax them in very limited circumstances.  They (of course, this is just a generalization as not everyone felt this way) believed the government had the right to tax imports and exports which were things that were external to the colonies.  However, they believed the government did not have the right to tax them on internal things (like the Stamp Tax did).  Some colonists even believed that the British government did not have the right to tax them at all because they were not represented in Parliament.


By contrast, the British government claimed the right to tax the colonists in all circumstances.  The government believed that, because the colonies were part of the United Kingdom, it had the right to tax them even on internal goods.  The British government believed that the colonists were represented in Parliament through the idea of “virtual representation.”  This idea held that the members of Parliament would represent the colonists because they represented everyone in the empire. 


In these ways, the colonists (or at least many of the colonists) and the British government had very different ideas about taxation.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.