Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HistorianDorisKearnsGoodwad
You continue to flood the thread with your non-sequiturs and misdirectives...

Why not call it what it is? A vain attempt to find some sort of logic in your posts.

Given the choice between 18% and 32%, shippers would be foolish to send their goods through New York. Hello Charleston and New Orleans. Hello direct trade up the Mississippi. Goodbye Erie Canal.

That would depend on where the customers are, wouldn't it? If the customer is in New York then the goods are going to go to New York regardless of what the New York tariff is and regardless of what the confederate tariff is.

With secession, it was the Northern manufacturing that was screwed.

Well no, they weren't. Northern manufacturers could still sell to southern consumers. But the southern consumer had the same 14% tacked on regardless of where the goods came from. Bristol or Boston, didn't matter. So the Northern manufacturer, with lower shipping rates, could compete with Europe without problem.

No they weren't. Protected US products were generally inferior in quality.

And you base that on what?

Actually, the "small amount" of foreign trade that you refer to was about 1/3 of the entire import picture.

Stephens put it at 25% but regardless, it was a fraction of the Northern demand for imports.

That was a very large amount of trade that would go to the lowest priced products. Those could be from any place in the world. The loss of dependency of the South on the Northern manufacturing was the major factor in trade direction changes coming from secession.

Those European goods would be taxed at the same 14% rate the Northern goods were. Their transportation costs would be higher. There is no reason at all why the North couldn't compete for southern consumers in terms of price. Especially to keep their markets. After all, they had the U.S. tariff to protect their domestic and to subsidize their export market.

Why ship through Northern ports and pay high tariffs?

And goods entering the U.S. would pay the U.S. tariff, regardless of where it is landed. I don't understand how you can believe that goods landed in the confederacy and then shipped to U.S. consumers would avoid paying tariff. Perhaps you can explain how that would work?

Then why did New York threaten to secede?

New York didn't threaten to secede. Fernando Wood wanted to secede and suggested it to the New York City Common Council. His plan proved so bizarre that the council didn't bother voting on it, and Wood was unceremoniously dumped from office in 1862.

You are blowing smoke again, Dearie.

Now there's the pot calling the kettle black!

469 posted on 11/30/2006 1:37:33 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 466 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson