jeffersondem:
" I began to wonder if there was a new economic model to learn - one where producers continuously make and deliver products without recovering their costs." Speaking of economic models, I'd like to mention something key to this whole conversation: 1860 Deep South wealth.
This comes from James Huston's 2003 book, "Calculating the Value of the Union: Slavery, Property Rights and the Economic Origins of the Civil War"
His more interesting statistics include: while 1860 average Southern incomes were only slightly higher than average Northern incomes, that counts everybody.
But if you look at just Deep Cotton South white wealth compared to average Northern wealth, the disparity is striking.
Including the value of their slaves, average Deep South whites had three times the wealth of average Northerners in states like Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey.
So when our FRiends DiogenesLamp and jeffersondem argue that Civil War was all about economics, there are such numbers to point at.
But I don't think they make the case for an "oppressed South" that Lost Causers wish us to believe.
His more interesting statistics include: while 1860 average Southern incomes were only slightly higher than average Northern incomes, that counts everybody. But if you look at just Deep Cotton South white wealth compared to average Northern wealth, the disparity is striking. Including the value of their slaves, average Deep South whites had three times the wealth of average Northerners in states like Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey. That I completely believe. That makes perfect sense and dovetails with my understanding of the era. The only thing surprising is that they are only 3 times more wealthy. I would have thought it would have been much more than that.
Yes, the Southern plantation owners viewed themselves as a wealthy "Aristocracy", and they tended to act like it too. (Arrogant)
So when our FRiends DiogenesLamp and jeffersondem argue that Civil War was all about economics, there are such numbers to point at.
How do these numbers rebut my point? The North stood to lose the bulk of European trade to an Independent South. This means the direct loss of the existing trade (something like 250 million dollars per year) and potential economic competition with the South in supplying the Midwestern states with goods and services.
The potential losses to the North were huge, and that doesn't speak to the other threat of additional states being lured into the Confederacy by economic benefits derived from association with it.
“But if you look at just Deep Cotton South white wealth compared to average Northern wealth, the disparity is striking. Including the value of their slaves, average Deep South whites had three times the wealth of average Northerners in states like Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey.”
Have not read the book so can't comment except to say it looks interesting.
The summary was striking: some classes of people had three times the wealth of other classes before the South was destroyed. THREE TIMES! ! !
Couple that with the fact that Southerner George Washington was the Father of Our Country. And Southerner James Madison was the Father of the Constitution. And Southerner George Mason was the Father of the Bill of Rights. And Southerner Thomas Jefferson was the author of the Declaration of Independence.
You start to see the basis of sectional jealousy and, perhaps, the reason Cain decided to slay Able.
Unrelated, does anyone know the wealth multiple of today's top elite class compared to lower economic classes in the U.S.?
Does the economic class of Forrest Mars, Phil Knight, Sheldon Anderson, Christy Walton, Sergey Brin, Michael Bloomberg, David Koch, Jeff Bezos and Larry Ellison have a wealth multiple of three times the lower economic classes, or more than three times?
And no, I'm not suggesting that anyone in the highest economic class has ever exploited overseas sweatshop labor. Nor am I suggesting that any of us consumers have ever benefited from buying Red Chinese goods made with sweatshop labor.
And I'm not pointing a finger at Bill Gates and his reported net worth of 79 billion dollars. He has worked many long, hard hours for his money - perhaps 16 hours a day for 40 years. If my math is correct, he has earned just $338,000 per hour all those years.
What I find striking is that at times in history, some classes of people have had THREE TIMES as much as others.