Of Tea and Taxes
Alan Bisbort was on target in last week's column ("Brew Ha Ha," April 23.) His points resonate deeply when we understand that the 1773 mob action was not about tax burdens, but was all about who was in control of taxation. "No taxation without representation" was the battle cry. A tax of a penny a pound for tea in 1773 was miniscule compared to the six-pence-a-pound that Massachusetts citizens voted to tax themselves 20 years earlier to cover the cost of building a warship to protect New England's shipping industry. The folks in 1773 were upset that Britain's Parliament, not the legislature in Boston, was behind the penny tax.
In the 1773 action, the drowned East India Company tea actually cost far less than locally-supplied tea. But these 1773 people were sensitive to the political and social cost of buying the cheaper priced foreign-supplied product from one of the largest multinational firms of the day. Citizens not only refused to buy it—they destroyed it! I doubt that many of the people at this month's "Tea Bag" protest would hesitate to buy the lower-priced Wal-Mart product from China and elsewhere rather than supporting local producers and manufacturers. If these same folks could find themselves on the Boston docks in 1773, I suspect they would, similarly, run to the East India Company's warehouses to fill their tea caddies, pay the small tax—and mock the town's commoners for being unhappy with the state of affairs.
Rich Colton
Montague
*
Cynically Satisfied
It has been nearly two years since I founded Vermonters for Economic Health and began a series of "Town Meeting Forums" throughout Vermont. Many of the economic statistics, challenges and warnings— found at www.vteh.org—outlined at these "Town Meeting Forums" have come home to roost. The sense of urgency and concern that propelled my efforts has faded into a kind of cynical satisfaction, as I witness the flailing among Vermont's political class and its enabling media. Having laid down its markers in a decade-long spending, taxing and regulatory spree, Vermont's legislature is poised to double down on these bets, proposing further increases in spending, taxation and regulations. More should be demanded from our public officials than the rearranging of deck chairs.
Political and human collectivism are not compatible with economic freedom and property rights. The latter two are necessary components of job creation and economic growth. It is the incompatibility of these tensions that drives Vermont's current state of confusion. Meaningful progress will require Vermont to bridge this gap.
Tom Licata
Burlington
