[Non-Sequitur]

Unable to refute the source, who also happens to be a credentialed economist, you have resorted to attacking him. Needless to say, your claims remain unjustified and refuted.

A credentialed economist with an obvious bias against Abraham Lincoln, and one who has shown in the past that he is not above deliberate falsehoods to make his point? Yeah, I'm suspicious.

[GOPcapitalist]

You are arguing against economic law, non-seq. Did you not read the definition that DiLorenzo quoted in his article? He took it straight out of a widely used college level international trade textbook. Surely you cannot accuse them of being part of a giant anti-Lincoln conspiracy as well!

Here it is again, since you have now missed it twice:

"Importers pass on [most of] their costs to buyers, and industrial buyers pass those costs on in the form of higher prices. . . . Consumers, hit directly or indirectly, include the inflationary price increases in their wage and salary demands. Everybody tries to pass the tax to someone else. The only group that is powerless to pass the costs on further are the exporters, who have to sell at world prices, and swallow those costs. In essence, a tax on imports becomes a tax on exports."