Listen Mr. Clueless, ALL taxes imposed by the federal government are paid by Americans. And of the wide variety of taxation methods available, the Founding Fathers considered tariffs to be the least intrusive. That's because tariffs only applied to those who wished to remain economicly dependent on foreign goods. The vast majority of Americans were thus free to enjoy the blessings of liberty, independence and the fruits of their own labor and ingenuity in a totally TAX FREE environment: NO federal INCOME TAX, NO federal DEATH TAX, NO federal SALES TAX... etc. etc. etc. In fact, the nation's first attempt to legitimately impose an Excise Tax was met with open rebellion by freedom loving patriots (The Whiskey Rebellion).
In comparison to tariffs, ALL other methods of taxation are more oppressive of Americans' freedom and independence to enjoy the blessings of their own resourcefulness, ingenuity, hard work, creativity, industriousness and bountiful resources.
but there is no question that the North was able to vote higher tariffs on items purchased by the South in order to save northern jobs. That is wrong. We should all pay the same LOW tax.
Agreed. From the outset, wheedling special interests sought to distort the tax code for their own advantage. The resultant "targeted tariffs" were ideed "unfair". The same distortive forces exist today in excise "sin taxes" (alcohol, tobacco) and the convoluted "loopholes" or "incentives" of the incomprehensible Income Tax code.
Frankly, however, you must be unaware of the merits of a true "Revenue Tariff". Unlike "targeted tariffs", which only apply to certain items at different rates (determined by corruptive special interests in Congress), a "revenue tariff" is a uniform flat rate applied to ALL imported goods (regarless of the corrupt influence of special interests).
Over the last 140 years, our great nation has become much more economicly homogeneous. We no longer have the stark contrast between an "industrial North" and "agricultural South". A true revenue tariff would be spread much more equitably throughout our nation. And the revenues derived would permit the lowering of the more onerous forums of taxation: excise and income taxes. Americans would become more free to enjoy the fruits of their own endeavors and self-sufficiency.
Your touting of Hamilton's original tariff is pretty weak. Hamilton from the get-go did not want a "revenue" tariff but a TARGETED tariff for "protection." However, the more evidence we have about that, the more we find that these industries would have survived without the protection. But it appears that is not what you are arguing.
However, as to the notion that "revenue" tariffs served the nation well, there are two things to keep in mind. First, LAND SALES, not tariffs, were the major source of revenues for the young country. Second, the size of government was so small that the combination of land sales and tariffs generated needed revenue. However, the first time the country got in any kind of war, the tariff revenues dried up, because Britain was no longer trading with us, and more important, we found that tariff revenues NEVER came close to supplying the money needed in emergencies.