248 Years Later: Why the Fight Over Tea Still Matters Today

248 Years Ago, Americans Started a Revolution Over a 3% Tariff on Tea. What Happened?

In 1776, the Boston Tea Party wasn’t just about tea — it was about fairness. The colonists revolted over a 3% tariff, standing against a system they felt exploited them. Fast forward to today, and Americans are facing a different kind of economic burden: rising costs on everything from groceries to gas. But this time, there’s no revolution — just frustration, and many are supporting suggested tariffs at 25% or more. Why?

The 2024 campaign was riding on the cost of gas and groceries and promises to make prices go down. But are lower prices truly possible, and if so, what would it take?

Inflation was not evident on November 29th. This year, Black Friday shoppers spent a record-breaking $10.8 billion online — 10% more than last year and double the amount from 2017. While many of us are concerned about rising costs, this level of spending tells companies that consumers are still willing to pay. This disconnect between consumer frustration and spending behavior is one reason prices won’t come down. Businesses follow the signals we send. If we continue to accept higher prices, they have no reason to lower them.

It’s not just greed — it’s about how our economy is structured. Most large companies are publicly traded, meaning they must prioritize their stockholders’ financial returns. Here’s how this dynamic plays out:

Profit Comes First: Businesses need to show constant growth to keep stockholders happy. This often means raising prices, even if production costs remain steady.

Cost-Cutting Pressures: To maximize profits, companies often cut wages or outsource labor to countries with cheaper production costs.

Consumer Behavior Matters: If we keep paying, companies keep charging.

Take PG&E as an example. As a public utility company, its primary mission should be providing affordable energy. But because it’s publicly traded, PG&E must also satisfy investors, often by raising rates. This creates a tension between public need and corporate profit.

For those advocating a return to U.S.-based manufacturing, and using tariffs as a threat, it’s not that simple. Companies want higher profit margins, not just cheaper options for consumers. Producing goods in countries with fewer environmental laws, lower wages, and minimal workplace regulations allows businesses to cut costs and increase profits. Even when tariffs are imposed on imported goods, companies rarely absorb those costs. Instead, they pass them on to consumers. We’ve seen this with minimum wage increases — rather than taking a hit to profits, businesses raise prices. Several corporations have openly stated that they’ll continue to charge more to offset tariffs and other expenses, rather than shifting production back to the U.S.

Think back to the Boston Tea Party. It wasn’t the merchants who bore the burden of the tea tax — it was the consumers. Today, history repeats itself: whenever costs increase, we’re the ones who pay.

The U.S. economy is built on free-market capitalism, which values competition and innovation. This system has its strengths, but it also means businesses are driven by profitability, not charity.

At the same time, many Americans are tied to this system through 401(k)s and pension plans, which rely on stock market growth. For decades, we’ve been encouraged to invest for retirement, linking our financial futures to the pressures of corporate profit margins. This creates a paradox: while we benefit from market growth, we also bear its costs through higher prices and stagnant wages.

Let’s be clear — this isn’t about dismantling capitalism. It’s about making the system fairer and more sustainable. Here are a few steps we can take:

Encourage Local Spending: Supporting small businesses keeps more money in the local economy, creating jobs and fostering community growth.

Promote Fair Business Practices: Advocate for policies that balance profitability with fair wages and local manufacturing.

Reassess Public Utility Models: For essential services like electricity or water, explore models that prioritize affordability over profits.

These solutions aren’t about drastic changes — they’re about balance. Ensuring that the market works not just for stockholders but for everyone who participates in it.

Capitalism comes with trade-offs. On one hand, it gives us innovation and creates opportunities for growth. On the other, it can lead to higher costs when companies focus on profits above all else.

American companies’ pursuit of higher profit margins — whether through outsourcing, cutting costs, or raising prices — shows that the problem isn’t just consumer demand. It’s a systemic issue tied to how our economy is structured.

If we want to see prices stabilize, it requires a collective effort — both from businesses and consumers. By understanding how the market works and where we can make small changes, we can create an economy that serves more people without compromising the values we hold.

So, as we reflect on the Boston Tea Party and its lessons, one thing is clear: the fight for fairness in our economic system is far from over. But through informed choices and collective action, change is possible. But it is not going to come from our politicians, it will come from us.