[DiogenesLamp]

One could say that it was the South which benefited from apportionment since 60% of their slave population, which had no need for representation in Washington since they were property and not citizens, was counted when deciding congressional representation.

And so the North agreed to a term that provided absolutely no benefit whatsoever to themselves? Oh, but Wait! They wouldn't have gotten a deal otherwise, so apparently whatever benefit they received was a consequence of the Deal they made! (It was continuing independence from England. That was their benefit. )

But you make the argument that the North would have been far better off not to make such a deal, and i'm inclined to think the South certainly would have been.

[DoodleDawg]

And so the North agreed to a term that provided absolutely no benefit whatsoever to themselves?

It was a compromise, and better than counting each and every slave for purposes of congressional representation which is what the slave states were demanding.

But you make the argument that the North would have been far better off not to make such a deal, and i'm inclined to think the South certainly would have been.

And when did I make that argument?

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Oh, but Wait! They wouldn't have gotten a deal otherwise, so apparently whatever benefit they received was a consequence of the Deal they made! (It was continuing independence from England. That was their benefit. )

Which is sort of like saying that the benefit an extortion victim receives is that he gets to continue living.