Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Count how many times slavery is mentioned in these articles of secession vs tariffs and taxes.
I see a common theme here. The word “slavery” easily throws people off. That’s like saying the Revolutionary War was about taxes. Good enough for high school I guess.
Slavery was always legal in the US until half way through the Civil War. Obviously the South had an interest in it, but why secede in 1860 and not 1854 or 1800? Why would the North care either way? Why would the North go to war killing 1 million of their own citizens to prevent secession? Slavery is the “PC” answer, but not the real answer.
I think the point is that while the South seceded because of the perceived threat to slavery, the North fought to retain the Union because it wanted to keep a locked-in market for its manufactured goods and to continue collecting tariffs, which were the main source of federal revenue at the time. I have never before heard the 88% figure for the proportion of tariffs collected at slave state ports, and would like a link.
Tariffs were on the decline in the years leading up to the Civil War.
The only reason the Morrill Tariff passed is because many of the Southern politicians resigned after secession.
Both the Walker Tariff and Tariff of 1857 were highly favorable to the South and kept tariffs comparably low to the rest of the world.
Besides that fact, take a look at how much goods flowed through the Port of New York. Nearly 65% of all goods imported passed through a northern port in 1860. So the idea that the taxes were paid for by the south is completely false.
The port of New York alone accounted for almost 64% in federal revenue in 1859.
The notion that the South fought over taxes is nothing more than internet hyperbole that started floating around a few years back because of modern politics and fear of big gov't.
And in case anyone needs more reason to see why the taxation claim is nonsense, tariffs are paid by the importers. They are not paid by the state. Does it seem reasonable that the South, an agrarian economy with less than 1/3 of the nation's population, was importing and consuming 80% of the goods subject to tariffs? And that the industrialized North only consumed 20%?
Last edited by Pyramidsurf; 05-20-2019 at 03:17 PM..
Tariffs were on the decline in the years leading up to the Civil War.
The only reason the Morrill Tariff passed is because many of the Southern politicians resigned after secession.
Both the Walker Tariff and Tariff of 1857 were highly favorable to the South and kept tariffs comparably low to the rest of the world.
Besides that fact, take a look at how much goods flowed through the Port of New York. Nearly 65% of all goods imported passed through a northern port in 1860. So the idea that the taxes were paid for by the south is completely false.
The port of New York alone accounted for almost 64% in federal revenue in 1859.
The notion that the South fought over taxes is nothing more than internet hyperbole that started floating around a few years back because of modern politics and fear of big gov't.
And in case anyone needs more reason to see why the taxation claim is nonsense, tariffs are paid by the importers. They are not paid by the state. Does it seem reasonable that the South, an agrarian economy with less than 1/3 of the nation's population, was importing and consuming 80% of the goods subject to tariffs? And that the industrialized North only consumed 20%?
I'm guessing the tired old argument the previous poster posted came from this article.
Quote from the article:
Quote:
Throughout most of our history, the only sources of federal revenue were excise taxes and tariffs. During the 1850s, tariffs amounted to 90 percent of federal revenue. Southern ports paid 75 percent of tariffs in 1859. What "responsible" politician would let that much revenue go?
The argument that the south paid the majority of tariffs is a complete fabrication.
What argument are you making for exports? Yes, it did raise the cost for southern industries. But the argument the South was being overtaxed to support the North is not backed by facts.
I see a common theme here. The word “slavery” easily throws people off. That’s like saying the Revolutionary War was about taxes. Good enough for high school I guess.
Slavery was always legal in the US until half way through the Civil War. Obviously the South had an interest in it, but why secede in 1860 and not 1854 or 1800? Why would the North care either way? Why would the North go to war killing 1 million of their own citizens to prevent secession? Slavery is the “PC” answer, but not the real answer.
The Republican party was founded on the principles to stop the expansion of slavery. The election of Lincoln and the Republicans was the reason the south succeeded in 1860-1.
I'm guessing the tired old argument the previous poster posted came from this article.
Quote from the article:
The argument that the south paid the majority of tariffs is a complete fabrication.
What argument are you making for exports? Yes, it did raise the cost for southern industries. But the argument the South was being overtaxed to support the North is not backed by facts.
Your previous link indicates New York City imported a lot of stuff; nothing more. It says nothing about tariff revenue. It doesn’t prove nor disprove anything, you’ll have to post another link if you want to make your point.
Your previous link indicates New York City imported a lot of stuff; nothing more. It says nothing about tariff revenue. It doesn’t prove nor disprove anything, you’ll have to post another link if you want to make your point.
Did you bother to actually look at it? Page 10 of the report explicitly states the Tariff revenue and how the Port of NY paid more than all the other ports combined. So yes, it proves the idea that the South paid more in taxes is completely false.
And what does cotton's value as an export have to do with taxes paid? Remember, the previous poster claimed the war was over taxes because the south was paying more than its fair share.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
