The Tea Act angered the colonist the most because for one they took action and threw over tea into the Boston harbor, and because it’s the India company that’s getting all the money, they have the monopoly. Also, the Boston Tea Party (which was what happened because of Tea Act) lead to the British passing the Coercive act which shut down the Boston harbor from importing or exporting. The Sugar Act is the one that angered them the least because it was the first tax the colonies had gotten, they would have been okay with it because at this time they still liked Britain. Also, it only taxed sugar and molasses and the Tea Act hadn’t been passed yet so they could still have their tea but the sugar would have been just a bit more expensive than
The Tea Act was passed on May 10, 1773, and really didn’t implement any new tax. The tax on tea had existed since the 1767 Townshend Revenue Act, in which glass, lead, paint, paper, and oil were also taxed. Because of the numerous protests and boycotts, all the taxes were repealed, except for the one on tea. That tax was kept to prove a point that Parliament still held the right to tax the American colonies. The passing of the Tea Act angered the colonists; the act granted the British East India Company a monopoly on tea sales.
In “House Passes Tax Bill, as Does Senate Panel” by Thomas Kaplan and Alan Rapperport, both belong to the upper class and are affected by the newly passed bill, suggest that the tax bill passed by Republicans is negatively affecting individuals that are already in the lower class. Kaplan and Rapperport develops their claim by first stating the cause and effect of this bill that, “...actually raises taxes on low-income Americans within a few years”(Kaplan, Rapperport). Secondly, quoting the Senator of Maryland, “You’ve targeted the relief to help the wealthy, and the middle-income families are going to get stuck with it” (Cardin). Kaplan and Rapperport's purpose is to reveal the consequences of the bill in order to explain how it changes the
Dear Mr. Gaylord Bigmoney: Thank you for contacting me to review your investments and for advice on whether or not to purchase additional state and municipal bonds. Mr. Rich Broker has given you a couple recommendations about your investment portfolio. First, Mr. Broker has recommended that you take the cash presently invested in the Certificates of Deposits and purchase more state and municipal bonds. Second, Mr. Broker has recommended that you borrow an additional $800,000 on one of the unencumbered apartment houses, which would require you to give a Deed of Trust for security on the loan, and use the loan proceeds to purchase more state and municipal bonds. When Mr. Broker gave you these recommendations the rates were as follows: present
The Intolerable Acts were meant to punish the colonists for the Boston Tea Party. The main Intolerable Acts were the Boston Port Bill, the Administration of Justice,The and Massachusetts Government Act, and The Quebec Act. The objectives of these acts were to get the colonist’s to pay for the 10,000 euros paid for. It was also meant to bring the colonies under the submission of the king. What these main acts did was Boston Port Bill closed the Port of Boston until the the tea was paid for.
The tea act was passed by parliament on may 10, 1773 it would launch the final spark to the revolutionary movement in boston(us history.org:thomas kindig).Tea act was created because to prop up the east india company which was floundering The tea act was passed by parliament on may 10, 1773 it would launch the final spark to the revolutionary movement in boston(us history.org:thomas kindig).Tea act was created because to prop up the east india company which was floundering financially and burdened with eighteen million pounds of unsold tea (ushistory.org) After the tea act was passed came in the boston tea party in december 16 ,1773. The boston tea party was in 1773 the british east india company was suffering because of colonial boycotts. They had a warehouse of unsold tea. for example during the boston tea party on the eve of december 16,1773 boston rebels dressed themselves to throw in the sea
The EconGuy Video entitled What liberals and Conservatives Both Get Wrong about Taxes was particularly interesting to me. As a person who rejects the two party/ideology system, I felt a slight sense of vindication in hearing that both were wrong. It was nice to here him explain why both conservatives and liberals were wrong. The Conservative position being that taxes hurt the economy in that the taxes collected from the individual is money that cannot be spent. This is wrong, as EconGuy explains, because it assumes that the money simply disappears, but in reality, the money is spread around, among other things, to pay the salaries of government workers who can therefore put the money back into the economy.
The Boston Tea Party was carefully and thoroughly planned as the Bostonian 's were not to do anything until December 17, 1773. On that day they were to dress as Indians, equipped themselves with either a small hatchet or a tomahawk, and paint their faces with coal. As they got to Griffin’s wharf they separated into three groups and Leonard Pitt was the commander of George Hewes’ Crew. At this point Pitt orders Hewes to retrieve the keys from the captain for the hatches and candles. Next, the commanders orders them to take the tea filled chests, split them open and throw them overboard.
When explaining their lack of trust in the government tea party members often times subtly imply the reason is due to people of color receiving aid they do not deserve. As stated by Hochschild when Barack Obama white americans cultivated a feeling that, “The president is their president, not your president” (Hochschild X). Although not explicitly said the they that is being referred to is people of color. White American felt and continues to feel that the “wrong” people are being helped get ahead and those people are people of color. Correspondingly, author David Lotto’s explores the rise of racism in the political agenda, specifically that of the Tea Party.
The boston tea party Would be considered an act of terrorism by today’s standards under the patriot act. The boston tea party was an event in which colonists, angered by the high tax on tea, hijacked a british ship and dumped nearly 600,000 pounds of tea overboard into the boston harbor (Wikipedia.com). The patriot act states that the definition of terrorism can be classified by 3 things :threatening, conspiring, or attempting to commit any crime using a dangerous device or weapon for something greater than “mere personal gain”, hijack any vehicle,or hurting or killing any protected persons. On these conditions, the boston tea party could be considered an act of terrorism due to the patriot laws. These offenses were hijacking a vehicle, hurt
Bridget, I found it very interesting reading your post on the Boston Tea Party. It was interesting reading a different perspective on the same material that I wrote about. One thing that I found very unique about your letter was the distinction of screams between the screams of shock and the screams of rebellion. You also said in your post that, "There was no reason to suspect anything until groups of the rebels were suddenly running on board three british ships in the harbor. " This leads to my first question, do you think suspicion would arise in the colony as the patriots were dressed up as Indians in town?
The Tea Party began as an activist group and mainly focused on economic issues. This grassroots movement is to a large degree responsible for the Republican Party’s continued move towards the far right, and it has caused infighting amongst Congressional. Perhaps the reason so many is confused and unable to fully explain the anger seen within the Tea Party. I don't really have a clear understanding of what the Tea Party did to lose in Louisiana. But, but what I remember about the election is two things it seemed like they were fighting against their own party and that they weren't United, so it shows that they could.
Kathleen Parker’s article entitled “Tea Party has Steeped too Long for the Nation’s Good” is a admonishment of the Tea-Party for their failure (specifically through John Boehner) to raise the debt-ceiling. Parker’s motive behind this article is to convince the public of the kind of poltical dangers the Tea-Party presents and of the need to oust it from government. To do this, Parker employs blistering, cynical, admonitory tone behind her rhetoric, complaining of the Tea-Party’s hubris and incompetence, in general.
In 2010 Election, the rise of the Tea Party started to gain momentum in Washington D.C.. The Tea Party is on the more conservative side of the spectrum and are apart of the Republican Party. In the House of Representatives, the Republican Party gained 63 seats, giving them a total of 242 seats, which gives them the ability to control the House (New York Times). This started the long journey of Obama having a divided government. In hindsight, this had a long toll on Obama since he wasn’t able to get much done during his second term in office.
The Tea Party emerged in 2009 as a conservative populist, social, and political movement. Specifically, the foremost agenda of the movement was to rebel against increased taxation as well as government spending. The Tea Party Movement comprised of individuals who needed to push the government to intercede in the private sector and implement positive reforms. A fact worth noting is that the Tea Party Movement is one of the various populist movements that have emerged in the United States, especially during times of economic travails. In 2009, a business commentator referred to the Boston Tea Party of 1773 in his critique of Obama’s mortgage relief plan.
