Sadly you are correct about their way of thinking! If I were one of them and found myself reduced to spouting the nonsense non-seq asserts, I would be embarrassed for the ignorance of that position. He evidently is not embarrassed because either (a) he has no moral reservations against pushing propaganda and nonsense to win an argument or (b) he is simply clueless about how the economy works.
The truly sad thing is that non-seq's economically laughable way of thinking is pervasive among northern historians and academics. Look at "Noam" McPherson's "analysis" of the pre-war economy for the perfect example. McPherson observes nothing more than that the north's economy is strong when weighed against its own strenghts, as if this is some sort of profound revelation!
Even more amazing, he then proceeds to judge the southern economy by those same obvious strengths of the northern economy. The part about northern weaknesses compared to the south are neglected to a minimal role if at all. You know...little economic things like the fact that some 3/4ths of the entire nation's exports came from the south. These yankee types avoid real economic analysis at all costs because including it means realizing a blemish in the self proclaimed infallability of their position. So they write their own rules for the given situation and stock them with woefully inadequite numbers instead.
Yet you have nothing to show that I'm wrong except for your own bombastic opinions. And you call me laughable.