New blog entry...

[GeoffC]

Originally Posted by Halk

Moreover, they contended, the distance between America and Britain precluded American representation in Parliament."

Excuses , excuses ......

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

It is not the taxes but the lack of representation that was at issue. Don't you vote?

Dale

Presumably then, on the basis that "no taxation without representation" is a valid argument, the inhabitants of the District of Columbia pay no taxes, since they have no representation in Congress?

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Presumably then, on the basis that "no taxation without representation" is a valid argument, the inhabitants of the District of Columbia pay no taxes, since they have no representation in Congress?

Oh that the congresscritters had to labor under the same rules as they impose on us peons!

Derek

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Presumably then, on the basis that "no taxation without representation" is a valid argument, the inhabitants of the District of Columbia pay no taxes, since they have no representation in Congress?

Actually a few years ago they actually got some representation but not in the senate. They are similar to Puerto Rico. Originally the founding fathers thought that no one would live there permanently but we all know that is not the case. It took a long time to correct the issue I must admit and still congress likes to interfere with mayor.

Dale

[JWLaRue]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Presumably then, on the basis that "no taxation without representation" is a valid argument, the inhabitants of the District of Columbia pay no taxes, since they have no representation in Congress?

To that valid point, the District changed their vehicle license tags to have the phrase "Taxation Without Representation" along the bottom.

...and they do pay taxes, which is why it's an ongoing issue.

-Jeff