No actually it doesn't. The South rebelled, not because slavery was such a terrible burden, but because they saw the election of a Republican president as a threat to their ability to expand slavery into the territories. So slavery was a very real issue to them because it was so important to their economy and their society. Tariffs were not.
It has yet to be established that the Southern burden of tariffs was a "small percentage" of it. Where do you get this notion?
Because they paid so little of it. And because so small a percentage of imported goods were delivered to Southern ports.
Walter Williams says they paid 75% of the costs. By all rights, with them having a quarter of the population, they should have only paid a quarter of the costs.
Which is the percentage that Alexander Stephens quoted in a speech to the Georgia Secession Convention in January 1861. At that I still think he was still inflating the figures a bit.
I don't think William's claim has yet been successfully debunked.
Williams's claim has been debunked by people far more knowledgeable on the topic than me. Williams said Southern ports paid 75% of the tariffs. In other words they collected that total. In fact, as has been shown over and over again, Southern ports collected around 5% of all tariff revenue.
I know what the South was exporting to Europe, I don't know what the North was exporting to Europe. Do you
And as for what the North was exporting I explained it earlier. The South was selling cotton, tobacco, and sugar but it was mainly Northern businessmen who were buying it. And they were selling it to Northern manufacturers and foreign customers. And buying all those imports that the South had little use for.
And where do you get this notion from? By tariffs collected? Not a good measure. Very bad, in fact.
If 75% of exports were Southern agriculture products, it would seem that 75% of imports must be in payment of those products in one form or another.
That is an equation that must balance. Fake or misleading history does not suspend the laws of economics.
In other words they collected that total.
No. The one thing does not mean the same as the other. The end user pays the tariffs, even if the tariff is collected in New York.
In fact, as has been shown over and over again, Southern ports collected around 5% of all tariff revenue.
Which ought to be an immediate head scratching moment for anyone contemplating that 75% of the exports were Southern Agriculture products.
Are you suggesting they are shipping out 75%, but collecting only 5% of the total goods and services in return?
Show me your math, cause this I gotta see.