No its not. Its merely where the distribution channel into the country starts. Long Beach is a massive port. That doesn't mean all the customers are in Southern California. It services a huge area.
besides, the customers weren't the ones eating the vast majority of the cost. The owners of the goods were. Northern manufacturers could - when tariff rates were particularly high - raise their own prices and still undercut foreign goods in the market. The importers could not simply raise their own prices by the amount of the tariff.
DoodleDawg said: Once again I present facts and you present opinions. Lincoln gave the revenue resulting from tariffs in his 1864 message to Congress - over $103 million rather than over $110 million, my error. How was that possible if the claims of you and DiogenesLamp are correct?
I have presented you with reams of facts, quotes and sources which all show it was the Southern states that were doing most of the importing and exporting. The Northeast was servicing those goods but it was the Southern states which were producing them....and exchanging them for foreign manufactured goods. How is it all those various sources said exactly what I said?
DoodleDawg said: What the Navigation Act said was that foreign ships could not bring goods from one U.S. port to another. It did not say that foreign ships, or American ships for that matter, could not bring those foreign goods to Charleston or New Orleans if that was where the demand for those goods was. But if New York wanted to monopolize imports through the port why didn't they want to monopolize exports as well?
It required that American goods be carried by American ships. I understand the initial reasons for it (make sure the fledgling nation have a shipping industry so that it would have the basis for a navy in time of war) but what tended to happen over time is this consolidated the shipping industry to a much greater degree in the region that specialized in shipping - the Northeast.
DoodleDawg said: But it is an indication of where the demand for those goods was.
Not necessarily AND this says nothing about who was bearing the cost of the tariff. Importers could not simply pass off all or even the majority of the costs onto customers.
I see. So when those goods were landed in New York they loaded them on wagons, sent them down I-95 to their ultimate destination down south?
Good went to the port closest to their intended customers. If the majority went to New York and Boston and Philadelphia then that's where the consumers were.
I have presented you with reams of facts, quotes and sources which all show it was the Southern states that were doing most of the importing and exporting.
You have presented reams of opinion. Lincoln quoted government figures; what do your sources quote? Adams claims the south paid the lions share of tariffs yet in his book he doesn't provide a source for that claim. But what do you think? If the Union could only buy imports because the had Southern exports then how did the revenue climb so dramatically when those exports were cut off?
It required that American goods be carried by American ships.
Well if that's true then foreign shippers should be able to take their goods to any port they wanted since they weren't American goods. Were they?
...but what tended to happen over time is this consolidated the shipping industry to a much greater degree in the region that specialized in shipping - the Northeast.
I agree that the Northeast specialized in shipping. But what prevented U.S. shippers from bringing goods from London to Charleston, or London to New Orleans, if that was where the demand for those goods were?
Not necessarily AND this says nothing about who was bearing the cost of the tariff.
I think we've determined that. The tariff is paid by whoever ordered the goods and it's paid when those goods are landed. Tariffs have the effect of artificially inflating the cost of goods that consumers buy. All consumers, North and South. But what does that have to do with Southern demand for imports?
Much more readable, thanks.