Talk:Exploitation theory

Fair use rationale for Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg

Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

...Exploitation theory; i was reading an article not of wikipedia, though through a texas style S.A., it had Questions from Parliament to Mr. Franklin giving Answers.

About half way down through the S.A. it was stated to Benjamin Franklin.

 ..Que..The Colonies have always submitted to external taxes, and object to the Right of Parliament only in laying internal taxes; now can you show that there is any kind of difference between the two taxes to the Colony in which they may be laid?

 ..Ans..Benjamin Franklin : I think the difference is very great. An external tax is a duty laid on Commodities imported; that duty is added to the first cost and other charges on the commodity, and when it is offered for sale, makes a part of the price. If the people do not like it at that price, they refuse it, they are not obliged to pay it. But an Internal tax is forced from the people without their consent if not laid by their own representatives. The stamp act says we shall have no commerce, make no exchange of property with each other, neither purchase nor grant, nor recover debts; we shall neither marry nor make our wills, unless we pay such and such sums; and thus it is intended to extort our money from us or ruin us by the consequence of refusing to pay it.

 ..Que..But supposing the external tax or duty to be laid on the necessities of life imported into your Colony; will not that be the same thing in its effects as an internal tax?

Seems Mr. Franklin insisted that the colonies had no representatives in Parliament, this could mean that the suggestion was not to or he nor to know of the Quality of the Men in the Colonies attached to Parliament.

/12:01 A.M. E.S.T. D.G.DeL-Dorchester Mass\ Here are some of the men Whom were related to others of the same names; and had property in the American Colonies Perhaps Sheridan didn't at this time Pulteney~Murray~Pitt the Elder~North~Fox~Burke~Pitt the Younger~Samuel Seabury~John Jay~Joseph Galloway, Sir William Johnson Pulteney whom a fifth Baronet got Land from Colonel Robert Troup an agent of western new York land Inquiries, and supported Parliament for what was exhumed through the talents of 1754 and the necessity of making money and trooping efforts with the Indians. Land was a great trade and dealing about exploiting commerce, though through a simple veto power exerted through James DeLancey through Mr. Franklin's First Constitution which was before 1760 when DeLancey and King George the second passed on. Franklin may of had a bit of exploiting there after towards the grievances of how the colonies did not correspond with the money making scheme.12:15A.M. E.S.T. David George DeLancey (talk) 05:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)