If you just want to trade snark, I can do that too, but I will probably find it boring after awhile and just stop talking to you.
And this wasn’t the case in 1825, or 1850, or 1861? But a ruinous war was a boon to the economy!
This is how I can tell you don't actually read what I write. I've stated it at least twice in this thread.
"Navigation Act of 1817."
How did that act prohibit Southern shipbuilding?
I read your post. Let me be clear. No snark.
You maintain that the Southern states were unfairly prohibited from using foreign ships. So they seceded in 1860. I’m asking why Southerners, instead of choosing rebellion and the potential of subjecting their products to additional tariffs should they succeed in that, they simply didn’t build or buy their own ships. You agreed that would have created economic benefits for the region. They had nearly half a century to do something about it.
How did the Navigation Act of 1817 affect Southern shipbuilding and infrastructure investments?