engine of souls | forum 3

mre · Senior Member

Assignment #1: Pre-Revolution Debate (AFF/British)

michaella · Member

Solvent: To decrease debt we can tax the colonists little by little, instead of hitting them with it all at once.

Savanna · Veteran Member

If we tax them little by little, what should we tax them on specifically, where would we make the most money, and should we avoid taxing certain things?

PatriciaC · Member

If we start taxing them on things they don't use as much, rather than taxing things like tobacco, molasses, sugar, etc., they won't get as mad. And as time goes on start to tax those kinds of things but not all at once. Give them time to adjust to the new taxes.

PatriciaC · Member

Solvent: After the French & Indian War the colonist were mad they couldn't move into the new territory we just gained. We should let them move into Florida, so we give them some more land but not enough to cause major problems with the Indians, or whoever else is in that area.

Savanna · Veteran Member

I agree with Patricia, we can slowly get out of debt buy taxing things that the colonists are not buying as much such as furniture maybe or kitchen wares. Then as time goes on we can start to tax other necessities (i.e sugar, rum, tobacco...).

Andrew · Newbie

I disagree with Savana and Pratrica. I beleive that we should tax all items equal but at a lower tax rate . I feel that if we taxed only materials that the colonies do not use as often, and later on we taxed rum, sugar, tabacco etc. we would end up in the same conflict that we are in now.

P.s= Here is a website i found that might help us out with the debate.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/British_Empire.aspx

Adam · Member

I agree completely with Andrew.
If we taxed those things (tobacco, molasses, etc.) later on, we'd just be delaying the revolution, not preventing it.

Adam · Member

Need: Change is needed in taxes like the Townshend Acts which, according to our textbooks, actually increased the debt of the British.
The British spent 700,000 compared to the 20,000 it raised.

PatriciaC · Member

yess but if we start by taxing things they don't buy as often then they won't get mad as easily, then eventually we will start taxing things like molasses and tobacco slowly they'll have time to take in what we are doing. And we'll make money just not as much as fast, we need to take time, the more time this process takes the more the colonist have to feel into the process the more we keep them happy, and not break out into riots.

PatriciaC · Member

were not going to do the same thing Britain did, & it's not that were just delaying the items like tobacco and molasses, were not going to put such a big tax on these items we'll put a smaller tax on more items such as molasses, sugar, stamps, tobacco, furniture, house supplies, farming suppilies, etc. & hopefully this won't cause a revolution.

Aubriee Braultt · Member

i have to say Patricia may be hitting a good point as far as taxation would go, i think it is the only other profitble and indirect enforcement the mother country could make that the colonists would allow

Adam · Member

Ok, that makes much more sense!
So what you're saying is that by dividing the taxes up between the goods, we'd create less of an impact?

p.s. in my earlier post, i meant 700,000 pounds.

PatriciaC · Member

Yes! that was my point. I also think we should make deals with Spain France & the Indians so that we make cheap trades with them if they make really expensive trades with the colonies. This makes the colonies want to buy our products and not anyone elses. So this would be us giving them the right to trade with anyone but they'll want to trade with us cause even though we just taxed things its still cheaper than to trade with Spain France or the Indians. What do you think ?

Adam · Member

That sounds kind of complicated...
What about changing the townshend acts which put britain in even more debt?

theaa · Veteran Member

i know that i am in the need group, but i cant help thinking of solutions!
but what about if for a change if we have us (britain) share part of our revenues with the colonies? we could tax the items that are more commonly sold and give them part of the money for military or something so it wont cause uprise and theyll feel apart of our decisons.

Aubriee Braultt · Member

theaaaaaaaa :] check out our thread!

theaa · Veteran Member

how do i do that?
hah

richie_richh · Member

you guys need to think harder about trying to takeover or colioneis cuz the things yous are talkin about just aint gunna work... just face it nothing you try to do is gunna work we will use everything and anything nessary to stop you

richie_richh · Member

A blockkkk all dayyy

Brina Lemrise · Newbie

Well if you tax us on things that we dont buy what would it do If we are not buying it it would do nothingg at all

Savanna · Veteran Member

I agree on letting the colonists being under the impression that they have control, but should we really meddle with the currency? What if we just let them print their own currency and we tax them on that?

theaa · Veteran Member

ok so, we're pointing out problems the colonists have internally, and support why and how the ruling of the mother country would benefit the colonists...?

here are some reasons and points that are hopefully relevent to our part in this,

* British presence in the colonies would help with the settlement of the large influx of Irish and German immigrants coming into New England after the Treaty of Paris in 1763 ... these immigrants caused stress in the colonists because they were taking away a variety of jobs which were a safety net of security in the new world; there were many quarrels among the two peoples because money was earned from these jobs, money bought land, and land bought power and a political voice.

* The lower class citezens were beginning to voice their opinions and demanding more authority, as a result the knowledgeable elite's voices were no longer heard of. The voice of such well-rounded individuals is key to a process where experience and knowledge is needed; the process of keeping a new settlement afloat. British influence could have helped to keep the voice of those elites heard, and so more quarrels solved and brighter ideas could surfaced with much less concequences than those after the war.

* As local protesting and rebellions continued to cause an atmosphere of chaos boycotts began as well. The colonists put themselves into an economical depression when they stopped trade with Britain. Keeping a friendly and open trade with the strongest empire of the world during the time would have excellent benefits and an infuencing title of authority.

... i have more :] i'll out them up tmrw

theaa · Veteran Member

so im just going to identify probelms now,
1. ***huge debt***
-big enough to demand change since england is trying to make money after the huge debt they have and one of the reasons is from the french and indian war, which helped out the colonists. too many colonists are objecting the taxing and uprising against the government and revolting. we need to find a solution so we can make colonists happy and still make money.
2. uprising in colonists / respect for britain and vise versa.
-if england is going to continue represtenting the colonies, they need the respect from colonists to get new laws and regulations out and see majority of public respionse and not the rash behavior of a few groups like the sons of liberty. Britain also needs to gain more respect for the colonies and put themselves in their positions so they can think of possible solutions to many of their problems.
3. housing for soldiers
-this causes many uproars since the colonists belive they are paying for them just so they can protect them from native americans and the also have to house them. if we found a soution to the housing, revolts would decrease. (possible solution: create stations for soldiers where they train colonists to become soldiers, maybe theyll pay a certain tax to enlist and getbenefits to draw people in?)
4. better represtenation for the colonies to britain
-big enough to demand change since the colonists disagree with majority of britain's actions so they need a person / group of people to represent the common colonists' views. doing so would get their views and opinions on how to make the colonies more stable.
6. land territories
-soldiers are in the colonies to prevent colonists from going over the appalaian moutain line even though colonists end up doing so. if we found a more effective way to keep colonists from branching into territories that dont belong to britain, maybe the number of soldiers in the colonies would decrease, therefore less taxes for them to stay there and less hosing also.

anyone else think of any other reasons change is needed?

Savanna · Veteran Member

The British mainly started taxing the colonies to A: pay for the past war they fought (Seven Years War) because it put them deep in debt. Parliament passed the Molasses Act and that just made smuggling even more of a problem than before. We want to decrease smuggling and tax the colonists in a way that won't seem unreasonable to them, but will benefit us and allow us to have control.

Arthur · Veteran Member

Social Control:
Britain could recruit colonists into the British Army. The colonists in the army would ultimately be led by a British army official. In doing this, the colonists' allegiances would be pledged to Britain and colonists could ultimately protect themselves. In paying for the protection, the taxes colonists pay would go back into the pockets of the colonists, therefore changing the colonists views on paying taxes.
Westward expansion would also be a possibility because colonists could protect themselves because they ARE the army.
The Quartering Act would also be nullified because the colonists already have their own homes in the colonies.

(^^From Cara and Arthur^^)

Aubriee Braultt · Member

(*neeed*) Four major factors for keeping British rule:

~ Friendly alliance for consistantly peaceful and smooth trade.

~ Protection, especially against Natives; or from the possibilty of France returning and uniting to fight with indians and/or large number of slaves.

~ Internal rebellions - constant chaos

Aubriee Braultt · Member

f.y.i the first post by thea is mine, just saying... idk if it counts as class credit; but thank you thea for putting it up :]

Aubriee Braultt · Member

*ooops i meant the second, starting with "ok so...."

Cara · Veteran Member

I'll move the rest of the workability thread over here tomorrow and continue the discussion here but I was going through the DBQ documents and found that Document 3 would help support our argument that colonists would want to serve in the British Army...

Arthur · Veteran Member

If we tax them on things that they don't really need, then they might stop buying those products just because they have an external English tax. What I'm trying to say is that it will be an easier product to boycott because it isn't vital.

comment on patricia's post about taxing good with less value to the colonists

-- Edited by Arthur on Sunday 20th of September 2009 06:24:35 AM

Melanie · Newbie

Solvent for housing the soldiers- If we tax the colonists a little at a time, some of the money they raise should be used for housing the soldiers. Instead of the colonists supplying houses for them, some of the money that they pay in taxes can go to stations for the soldiers.

mre · Senior Member

Good posts so far. Remember to post your evidence when stating a position. State your evidence clearly and don't just post a link, ok?

Danny · Member

if britain started recruiing colonists why would we pay tax. its like working and having to pay for it. thats why most soldiers get paid for fighting. also if colonists were being trained and being put in english armies why should we pay for protection. its like we are protecting ourselves.

mre · Senior Member

Cara

Newbie

Posts: 3
Date: 3 days ago
IP: 209.80.229.198

AFF Workability (No negatives allowed!)

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

Historical Debate - Resolved: That the British government should establish a foreign policy to increase political, economic and social control of the American colonies.

Group Assignment: WORKABILITY [Explain how your plan is going to work. Describe what it is specifically that the British government is going to do in order to increase political, economic and social control of the American colonies. Explain how the British government will enforce its policies.]

Political Control: Sub-branch of Parliment will be created that deals only with affairs of the colonies and how they relate to the motherland. This committee will consist of elected colonists as well as British officials. The British officials will serve as mediators between the colonial parliment and the British government. This will allow the colonists to think they are govening themselves (to try to avoid any revolutionary efforts) while allowing Britain still have political control over the colonies.

Econmic Control: The Brittish will tax all imported and exported goods, though will allow the colonists to sell a fraction (50%) of their goods to where ever they want while the rest was sold to Britain at a price determined my Parliement.
(How should we deal with currency?)

Social Control:

-Make laws governing interations with Indians?

-Any ideas?

(Arthur, Military control?)

michaella
Newbie

Posts: 4
Date: 3 days ago
IP: 71.232.243.217

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

To deal with currency we could let the colonists have their own currency, so the British will not have to keep giving them money. This will allow the colonists to think that they have some control, & will allow us not to go further into debt.

Savanna

Member

Posts: 7
Date: 3 days ago
IP: 76.118.89.22

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

I agree on letting the colonists being under the impression that they have control, but should we really meddle with the currency? What if we just let them print their own currency and we tax them on that?

tony
Newbie

Posts: 1
Date: 3 days ago
IP: 76.19.205.142

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

I think we can use that commission/board for the colonies to set up their own mini-government. The British can set a yearly quota for taxes and it is up to the colonists themselves to determine what would be taxed, how much, etc.

Btw, what was homework?

Savanna

Member

Posts: 7
Date: 3 days ago
IP: 76.118.89.22

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

reading and whatnot, and to post stuff for the debate. We have a quiz tomorrow

Savanna

Member

Posts: 7
Date: 3 days ago
IP: 76.118.89.22

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

The British mainly started taxing the colonies to A: pay for the past war they fought (Seven Years War) because it put them deep in debt. Parliament passed the Molasses Act and that just made smuggling even more of a problem than before. We want to decrease smuggling and tax the colonists in a way that won't seem unreasonable to them, but will benefit us and allow us to have control.

michaella
Newbie

Posts: 4
Date: 2 days ago
IP: 71.232.243.217

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

That would work, & would still let us increase our control on them.

Cara

Newbie

Posts: 3
Date: 2 days ago
IP: 76.19.24.100

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

Savanna, to add to you reasons why colonists revolted, "the colonists percieved British policies as a systematic attack on the fundamental and natural rights of British citizens in north America." (I found this quote in the conclusion last night and figured we could use it to proovr that if our changes are reasonable, the colonists won't revolt.)

michaella
Newbie

Posts: 4
Date: 2 days ago
IP: 209.80.229.198

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

I think we should put the colonists at our fts. so this way we still control them& not have to pay tax on them.

Korey
Newbie

Posts: 1
Date: yesterday
IP: 76.19.27.162

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

KP IN THE HIZZ-HOUSE! It took me forever & a day to sign up for these. My bizzle, fo' shizzle.

Anyway!

I say we let them control their own military, because at least it gives them their own sense of responsibility and pride in their country. I think ultimately, Britain shouldn't even need to worry about their military.

Also, I think Parliament should set a base tax, and then let their committees decide if they want to up it, or let it stay the same. For example: if Parliament decides that they want to increase tax by 2% and the colonists are like... well we need money, can we increase it to 3%? Parliament still gets their 2% and Colonial America will get their 1%. Ultimately making money for both sides.

I don't think colonists would have a problem paying taxes so long as it was benefiting them directly, and they could see that.

__________________
--Korey

PatriciaC
Member

Posts: 6
Date: yesterday
IP: 71.184.40.105

Reply Quote More

Edit Post

Delete Post

Printer Friendly

Ban IP

Report Spam

oh wow korey your too much ! (:

Danny · Member

Hey just throwing this out there - Britian at this time period is on the edge. If we revolted we could find allies in france, spain, netherlands, and maybe some indian tribes. So if we colonists couldn't find a way to settle with britain we would not have a hard time finding friends. Britian knows this, so i suspect britian to be a little more flexible with dealing with the colonies.

so since the colonies are ultimatley pointed towards unification anything that would further seperate us would cause massive harm to our relationship to the british. this means that not allowing our leaders to meet, not allowing us to expand, and not allowing us to control ourselves would cause us to break away from britain.

so the onlythng they have left to do is tax us - which most colonists are ticked off about already.

tony · Member

Ultimately pointed towards unification? Hardly. The states were rag tag groups of people all with differing interests. First, there's the economic differences between the North and South, sustenance farming vs large plantations; second, each state was constantly on the lookout to expand its own territory. Due to the fact that British lands were confined to the west of the Mississippi, there wasn't enough land for all. And of course, they would never think of sharing.

Perhaps we could use taxes to favor one area over another, so that while resentment increases towards the British, the states would turn on each other as well. It took all the colonies combined plus other allies to defeat the British, so if they weren't so cooperative, there wouldn't be much chance of revolution.

Cara · Veteran Member

ALL THE WORKABILITY!

Political Control: Sub-branch of Parliament will be created that deals only with affairs of the colonies and how they relate to the motherland. This committee will consist of elected colonists as well as British officials. The British officials will serve as mediators between the colonial parliament and the British government. This will allow the colonists to think they are governing themselves (to try to avoid any revolutionary efforts) while allowing Britain still has political control over the colonies. This will work because there will be no taxation without representation. Also, Edmund Burke declared before parliament that the reason Americas would rebel is because they discovered, “that we (the British) mean to oppress them…” This plan does not mean to oppress them so there will be no rebellion. Also, this will prevent the laying, “of the basis of alienation which will never be healed.” (A quote from a New England clergyman of the time)

Economic Control: The British will tax all imported and exported goods, though will allow the colonists to sell a fraction (50%) of their goods to where ever they want while the rest was sold to Britain at a price determined my Parliament. This will be moving away from the system of Mercantilism which will prevent a colonial revolt but also still increase British control and profits concerning the colonies.

Social Control:
Britain could recruit colonists into the British Army. A British army official would ultimately lead the colonists in the army. In doing this, the colonists' allegiances would be pledged to Britain and colonists could ultimately protect themselves. In paying for the protection, the taxes colonists’ pay would go back into the pockets of the colonists, therefore changing the colonists’ views on paying taxes.
Westward expansion would also be a possibility because colonists could protect themselves because they ARE the army.
The Quartering Act would also be nullified because the colonists already have their own homes in the colonies.

Extra quotes

”The colonists perceived British policies as a systematic attack on the fundamental and natural rights of British citizens in north America."

This quote talks about why the colonists revolted, because our plan is not “systematically attacking” their rights, thy will not revolt.

Charlene · Veteran Member

theaa wrote:

3. housing for soldiers
-this causes many uproars since the colonists belive they are paying for them just so they can protect them from native americans and the also have to house them. if we found a soution to the housing, revolts would decrease. (possible solution: create stations for soldiers where they train colonists to become soldiers, maybe theyll pay a certain tax to enlist and getbenefits to draw people in?)
-

I think the Quartering Act is practical. You have troops stationed within the perimeter in case of an attack. What happens if the colonies were to endure a surprise ambush from the Native Americans? The British can't help if their troops are solely stationed in somewhere on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. Who would you prefer to protect the country: poorly-trained militias or the world's most powerful army?
The Quartering Act was made to cut costs. If we were to create stations, we'll be burdened with even more costs. Also, how can we pay American enlistees when we are having trouble paying our own men or veterans from the previous war? We would have to resort to slapping on even more taxes.
And colonists always go ballistic over taxes. They should pay a fee-for-service.

-- Edited by Charlene on Thursday 1st of October 2009 07:03:35 PM

David · Member

I completely agree with andrew we need to tax every thing but keep the taxes low which will allow us to earn money but not got the colonist angry, by doing this the colonist will stay royal to the crown because the yare not being treated unfair and they will still be able to afford the necssary things in life. by doing this the risk of the revolution will greatlt decrease.

mre · Senior Member

Grades Updated 10/4/09

Charlene · Veteran Member

Are we suppose to compile the entire plan together and post it in the actual debate topic by now?

-- Edited by Charlene on Monday 5th of October 2009 04:37:24 PM

Sarah · Newbie

If we have a british general go there and train their troops we won't need to have any more British soldiers there.

Also they could be able to take care of themselves against the Indians and wouldn't need our protection anymore.

BritanyR · Member

even if we don't tax for the colonies they will still have a problem with the fact that we are taxing them when our mother country of Great Britian also benefited from the war as well. i suggest that if we tax the colonies we tax our mother country as well because that way the colonies will see it fair but then again we'll have to convince the people that live in Great Brtiain that the tax will be somehow benefit them.