DiogenesLamp:
"The Southern production is established by the official records.
Yes, the South did produce 72+ % of the total trade value with Europe in 1860." Sadly, DiogenesLamp's "72+%" is a lie, only potentially true if by "the South" you mean every state "South" of New York, and if by "total trade value with Europe" you delete the values of California gold and Nevada silver exported to balance-up our trade deficits.
But by more honest accounting, Confederate states' cotton in 1860 made up ~50% of total US exports, no more.
Other products like tobacco would add ~7%, but they were mainly grown in Union states & regions -- i.e., Kentucky, Maryland & Pennsylvania, not in the Confederacy.
And even the legitimate $200 million in Confederate state cotton exports of 1860 are exaggerated in saying they "paid for" 50% of Federal tariff revenues.
We know this because in 1861, when Confederate cotton was deleted from US exports, Federal tariff revenues fell only ~15%, not 50%, much less 72%.
So DiogenesLamp's 72% number is pure Democrat Confederate propaganda, of no value in explaining anything, but still used by propagandists from that time to ours. ![]()
and if by "total trade value with Europe" you delete the values of California gold and Nevada silver exported to balance-up our trade deficits. Been over this with you before. *SPECIE* is not trade. No nation willingly continues to use specie to purchase imports because it drains their wealth over the long term.
Indeed, years ago you posted all the trade balances from something like 1800 to the 1870s or so, and I went through it and showed how you were deliberately misconstruing the data to support what you wanted to believe.
Specie is a separate category and it is not the equivalent of trade.
But by more honest accounting, Confederate states' cotton in 1860 made up ~50% of total US exports, no more.
I have got you to admit it was as much as 60%, but it would be difficult to show you your post where you admitted this without days of tedious searching through your commentary and mine.
I said at the time, "I've got you up to 60%, so perhaps I will eventually be able to get you up to the actual number of 72%".
But this is just splitting hairs. Even at your unreasonably low value of 50% of the trade, you have 1/4th of the Citizens producing 50% of the total revenue for the nation, while the other 3/4ths are shirking their duty to pay their fair share of the taxes.
The taxation clearly fell excessively on the Southern citizens, and this was by your own admission of 50% of the trade coming from them.
We know this because in 1861, when Confederate cotton was deleted from US exports, Federal tariff revenues fell only ~15%, not 50%, much less 72%.
You claim the value was 50%, yet the loss of tariff revenues only declined 15%?
Well that does not make any sense, because 15 does not equal 50, so now that you make this claim, you need to explain how you can believe it was 50% of the total, and suddenly it was only 15% of the total?
Clearly some sort of "magic" is occurring here, and so you need to explain how you can believe two contradictory things at the same time.