- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Haley declines to say slavery was cause of Civil War
Posted on 12/28/23 at 4:23 pm to Auburn1968
Posted on 12/28/23 at 4:23 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
To add insult to grievous injury, the federal budget was paid for primarily with the tariffs imposed on the South.
This is absolutely not true. Most of the federal budget came from imports that came through the Port of New York. They were not imposed on the South specifically. The group that ended up paying most of that budget was the group of New York merchants who moved goods in and out of the country.
2
Posted on 12/28/23 at 4:44 pm to rmnldr
She has already backtracked...er...clarified her statement.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 4:46 pm to rmnldr
Well yea if she wants to be historically accurate and truthful. Only thing she has said so far that took courage and honesty.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 4:48 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:Oh come on!
They were not imposed on the South specifically.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 4:51 pm to NC_Tigah
Is this going to be another thread where you don't understand what words mean?
Posted on 12/28/23 at 4:58 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
going to be another thread where you don't understand what words mean
Oh you poor imbecile, you are not doing well if that's where you're starting.
Link the other ""threads"" you're referencing. Please do take your time.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 5:05 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Oh you poor imbecile, you are not doing well if that's where you're starting.
Apparently you don't know the difference between imports and exports, and the fact that we have the ledgers which fly in the face of any argument that the South paid more into the federal budget than the rest of the country. Those are falsifiable claims.
quote:
Link the other ""threads"" you're referencing. Please do take your time.
After your recent performances in the Ukraine thread and the idiotic rhetorical corners you concocted, I'm not surprised that you would have a short memory.
For once, make an actual point with actual information or shut up.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 5:13 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
quote:
To add insult to grievous injury, the federal budget was paid for primarily with the tariffs imposed on the South.
This is absolutely not true. Most of the federal budget came from imports that came through the Port of New York. They were not imposed on the South specifically. The group that ended up paying most of that budget was the group of New York merchants who moved goods in and out of the country.
The South's economy was largely based on exports of cotton and agricultural products primarily to England and France. It and other agricultural products were the dominant export for trade and thus imports.
itok=HD9ljGPF&mtime=1470219850[/img]This post was edited on 12/28/23 at 5:17 pm
Posted on 12/28/23 at 5:25 pm to Auburn1968
But the ledgers show that the majority of the federal budget was paid through tariffs on incoming goods. And that was paid by merchants, based mainly in New York, with estimates that 60% of the federal budget was funded through the Port of New York specifically.
What?
The context of tariffs ultimately served to develop domestic industry, with most of the investment money going to the burgeoning industrialized regions of the US. While the South, as a resource producer, wanted limitations on tariffs, there is no evidence that they funded the federal budget to degrees you claimed.
quote:
It and other agricultural products were the dominant export for trade and thus imports.
What?
The context of tariffs ultimately served to develop domestic industry, with most of the investment money going to the burgeoning industrialized regions of the US. While the South, as a resource producer, wanted limitations on tariffs, there is no evidence that they funded the federal budget to degrees you claimed.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 5:58 pm to themunch
I do know the South sold more cotton overseas than in the States 1860.
And when the South left they embargoed their own cotton to leverage recognition from foreign countries.
And when the South left they embargoed their own cotton to leverage recognition from foreign countries.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 6:05 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
But the ledgers show that the majority of the federal budget was paid through tariffs on incoming goods.
The incoming goods were to a large extent trade goods in exchange for exported raw materials. That was big industry and most of it was Southern agricultural product. The volume of trade goods was extremely large.
I'm sure that there were mercantile imports as well, but what landed at the NYC or Boston port vs. Charleston doesn't mean that it was due to ladies buying French dresses or China.
BTW, the Confederate constitutions also banned import tariffs.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 6:08 pm to AUauditor
quote:
It was about economics of which slavery was a big part. Only about 5% of the population owned slaves; however, non-slaveowners had to compete for jobs with freed slaves and slaves who were able to work for themselves on Sundays and during non-peek seasons.
Many freed slaves owned slaves themselves - not because they were racists, but because that was part of the economics of the time.
Interestingly, one of the reasons that the import of African slaves became popular was that West Africans had significant immunity to yellow fever. Indentured servants from Europe often died before they became "seasoned" with acquired immunities making them a higher financial risk.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 6:59 pm to rmnldr
Shes right, the war was about Bog Gov. overeach. Same stuf as today.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 7:04 pm to will0637
quote:
Slavery. Here is South Carolina’s secession letter. The large majority of the Confederate states cited slavery.
It’s still about power and overreach.
quote:
On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States. The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy. . . .
Posted on 12/28/23 at 7:17 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Apparently you don't know the difference between imports and exports, and the fact that we have the ledgers which fly in the face of any argument that the South paid more into the federal budget than the rest of the country. Those are falsifiable claims
I don’t know the answer but I do know this. Cotton was our most expensive export and the liberals claim slavery built America. So putting two and two together that would mean the south was bringing in the money that built this nation.
Now I understand the liberals can be full of shite. But they are the most educated right?
Posted on 12/28/23 at 7:17 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
The incoming goods were to a large extent trade goods in exchange for exported raw materials.
I don't think the source documentation supports this. As in the ledgers through the Port of New York do not support this. This notion of trade is antiquated for even that time period. Merchants were privately importing and exporting goods within a political context. That context included the Corn Laws of the British, which is why the US sought tariffs on British goods in the early part of the century.
quote:
I'm sure that there were mercantile imports as well, but what landed at the NYC or Boston port vs. Charleston doesn't mean that it was due to ladies buying French dresses or China.
What? You understand that if you want to get granular, we can trace these transactions, right? As in when one importer/exporter sold a set of goods for money, with all the associated expenses. In other words, these claims are falsifiable.
quote:
BTW, the Confederate constitutions also banned import tariffs.
Coincidentally enough, tariffs were not even mentioned during the Washington Peace Conference of 1861, and were of secondary concern in the Articles of Secession of several states.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 7:27 pm to dgnx6
quote:
Cotton was our most expensive export and the liberals claim slavery built America. So putting two and two together that would mean the south was bringing in the money that built this nation.
Well, that doesn't inform where capital went and that the orientation of American industry, banking, and capital was focused on the Northeast. The 'free trade' proposed by the British, who coincidentally pursued protectionist policies when it suited them, is what drove heavy investment in American industry in the Northeast, including the American textile industry, which was started in order to compete with British industry. The American System in that context was about developing an internal trade network which was robust enough to deal with an international trade market that would occasionally be protectionist.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 7:38 pm to crazy4lsu
Has anyone ever called you a prick?
It’s a very plainly written question.
It’s a very plainly written question.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 7:41 pm to roadGator
quote:
Has anyone ever called you a prick?
Crazy4LSU is an admitted shitposter.
He literally ADMITTED to being a non-serious poster.... a troll.....a shitposter, then of course tried to deny it once he realized what he admitted...
It's all a shtick from a Med-Student, let it slide...
Page 13 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News