3 ms·
I did, and in explicit detail. You're misreading the text, which is about a qualitative issue, not a quantitative one. It has nothing to do with level of taxat
by torstenvl 5y ago
I did, and in explicit detail. You're misreading the text, which is about a qualitative issue, not a quantitative one. It has nothing to do with level of taxation but with enforcing an urban mercantile paradigm of taxation, one that was literally impossible to meet and for which failure to meet it resulted in execution by starvation.
- thaumasiotes 5y agoBeing taxed a certain amount of silver is just as much of an issue of levels as being taxed a certain amount of wheat. Assessed taxes were much more expensive than the farmers were able to pay. It doesn't matter what currency the taxes are assessed in. What matters is that the amount is too high. Compare what the farmers said their problem was: > A farmer identified as "Plough Jogger" summarized the situation at a meeting convened by aggrieved commoners: >> I have been greatly abused, have been obliged to do more than my part in the war, been loaded with class rates, town rates, province rates, Continental rates, and all rates ... been pulled and hauled by sheriffs, constables, and collectors, and had my cattle sold for less than they were worth ... The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers.