It screwed over everybody that lived in the south, including slaves. That's all bullshit, actually. Egyptian cotton was far more expensive than US cotton, the only reason the British had to switch was because of Union blockades during the civil war and the absence of southern cotton exports. They ditched Egyptian cotton after the war and went back to US and Indian cotton. How any of that is relevant to the harm felt on the southern economy by tariffs is beyond me.
To sell a product that you make to WalMart, they beat you down so hard on price that most, if not all, companies are forced to offshore their manufacturing to 3rd world shit holes like China - where they pay pennies on the dollar compared to US wage earners. So, WalMart has accelerated the demise of US-based manufacturing, and allowed the Chinese to in turn purchase purchase so much US debt.
Most southern leaders had already admitted that slavery was a doomed institution--the world opinion alone would have ended it within a generation. The tariffs that were emplaced by Northern monopoly-owned legislators (gee, Congressmen in the pockets of big business, sound familiar?)were there to prevent the south from gaining any industry of their own. Egyptian cotton was considerably more expensive than American cotton before the 100% tariffs were emplaced. Those tariffs are one of the reasons why it's still often referred to as the War of Northern Aggression down here--the other reason being the massive burned swaths like in Georgia, and the problems caused by the North bleeding the South during Reconstruction. Ironically, if Lincoln had survived his plan for reconstruction would have been much less damaging to the South.
You realize that the Khedive of Egypt owed massive amounts of money to the Rothschilds/European contries? If the British could were owed money by a country that produced higher quality cotton, it would only make sense for them to trade with Egypt. By the way, since there is so much speculation, would you have opted to stay an agrarian economy as Jefferson intended. Jefferson had some brilliant points, but he lost on some major points, which included the industrializarion of the US.
It screwed over southern WHITE people. it'll take a lot to convince me that blacks were downgraded from being owned by whites and forced to do manual labor for which they got nothing.
Makes sense, but that's not what happened. I do have a romantic view of agrarian society, but of course I would support industrialization. I don't know much about Jefferson's views towards industrialization, but I doubt he would oppose it in hindsight. UHh no. It screwed over everybody, including black and white slaves. The costs were passed down to them in via poorer working conditions. Yes, there were white slaves. And black slaveholders. But that goes against the narrative that slavery was a purely racist concept so you can ignore it.
We were talking about the Hamilton Tariff, enacted in 1789. It hampered economic conditions in the south which in turn hampered the living conditions of everyone in the south. Freeing the slaves is irrelevant.
In addition to the fallacies aaronman pointed out (and I will agree that there were white slaves and black slaveowners), you're also forgetting about the free black tradesmen; these were skilled workers who earned a very good wage. Their trades included blacksmith, farrier, and cooper. These trades also happened to be the middle-class incomes of the day. These folks were also hurt by the Norther monopolies' tariffs.
I didn't read any of this thread, but just FYI we do not have a free market environment in this country. Our problems are caused by the socialistic intervention of the market by our government. Our problems are NOT caused in any way by free market capitalism, because we don't have that at all.
I dont think slaves would really feel much of a difference either way, when you in a pile of shit that deep more shit wouldnt be too much noticable. Your right though there where a large amount of Irish and Scottish slaves who where treated worse than black slaves a majority of the time.
Dude, what I'm getting at is that the British were venturing out elsewhere, and they probably would have left Southern cotton. Also, Jefferson's early economic policies were written assuming that the US would stay an agrarian nation (Jefferson deeply mistrusted city-folk). He predicted that there would be class warfare if the US became a fully industrial country. In fact, in
Dude, what I'm getting at is that the British were venturing out elsewhere, and they probably would have left Southern cotton. Also, Jefferson's early economic policies were written assuming that the US would stay an agrarian nation (Jefferson deeply mistrusted city-folk). He predicted that there would be class warfare if the US became a fully industrial country. In fact, in a letter to Thaddeus Kosciusko, Jefferson proposed an income tax if the whole industrial thing got out of hand.
Or American workers just demand more than they are worth and when they don't get it they refuse to work and cry out for government to give them extensions to benefits and welfare programs. Thus accelerating the demise of US-based manufacturing.
The british funded the confederates for the first part of the war until they realized the south was losing.
Yeah, when they realized that they could get it from India, who they just took over, and other colonies.
Well, the past two summers, I've worked at a large, multi-national corporation and a small Ma & Pa shop. I HATED WORKING AT THE MA & PA SHOP!!! So, what I'm trying to say, is, fuck ma & pa shops.
If/when we get a free-market and there is still this wealth gap, then we'll talk. The corrupt system we have now, courtesy of a huge federal government and federal reserve is what favors a privileged few and wipes out the middle class, savers, those on fixed incomes, and the poor.