I can answer the question, but that answer is a whole hell of a lot more complicated than the simply issue of how the South produced 72% of all Federal revenue.
Since you aren't trying to understand that, why would I want to add another even more complicated topic to the discussion?
Tell us how the South paid 75% of the federal taxes. Show us the data.
See? This is what I mean. If you can't understand that the region which *PRODUCED* 72% of the government's revenue through their product exchange with Europe, how can you possibly understand a more complex topic?
But I think your problem is not that you can't understand, it's that you won't understand.
Diogenes is apparently thinking that the tariff was some sort of income tax and that the South “earned” foreign money for the country and was taxed on that income. That’s not true. The tax was on imports.
Southern plantation owners didn’t have stacks of pounds, marks and francs lying around. That foreign currency stayed with the bankers. Northerners were earning enough US money to buy foreign goods with that foreign currency. There weren’t enough planters to buy 72% of what the US imported.
Also, there’s no point in being cynical and skeptical about politicians if you naively believe everything Southern radical politicians said to promote secession.
There it is. You won’t explain it to me because I’m not smart enough to understand it. Try it. Maybe I’ll get a sudden burst of IQ. Exactly how did the South produce 72% of the governments revenue. You keep claiming it. You wouldn’t do that with no data to back you up, would you?