Replies

The 72% of the total revenue for the government came from the South. Now you can jump through hoops pretending the North paid some of that, but the reality is that that money came out of the South's pocket, not the North's.

Nope. You allege it does.

Your numbers do not add up.

Just because the South had more exports does not mean they paid more in tariffs.

Reality does not support what you say.

As I recall, you claim, for example, that exports of gold and silver are not exports.

Just because you claim the South paid more does not mean it really did pay more.

I am not sure of the sort of mercantalist economic model you are using. It seems a way to make an economic argument which does not exist in fact.

Just because the South had more exports does not mean they paid more in tariffs.

It means exactly that.

When discussing this concept, I like to mention the movie "Kidco." It is about a bunch of kids that sold horse manure from their father's stables. It became quite a business.

The bad guy was a government official who was trying to fine them for not paying sales tax.

The climax of the movie was a court room scene where the Kid asked the man who sold feed to his father if he paid sales tax on the feed. The man said "yes."

So the kid pointed out that the poop coming out of the Horse is the same feed that went into the horse, and sales tax had already been paid on it when his father bought the feed.

"Your Honor, the state wants to tax both ends of the horse!"

Trade is exactly like that. Whether you put the tax on the front of the horse (exports) or the rear of the horse (imports) it is the exact same stuff getting taxed.

Money earned from exports has no value until it pays for imports. It is the exact same money being taxed whether you tax it before it gets to Europe, or after it has come back in trade goods from Europe.

One would think it unnecessary to have to explain basic trade economics to people on a conservative forum.