[Sherman Logan]

And here I thought the whole deal had more to do with taxation without representation - the South was paying a huge burden compared to the North.

Exactly how were they unrepresented? The South dominated the national government right up to 1860.

The total budget of the federal government in 1860 was $60M. That's less than $2 per capita for the country, less than $7 per capita if paid entirely by the slave states, and less than $12 per capita if paid entirely by white southerners. And of course the taxes were almost entirely tariffs on imports, so the final purchaser of the imported item paid it, whether he did so in New Orleans or Chicago.

The fact is that federal taxes were a miniscule burden for anybody in 1860, and could entirely be avoided if desired simply by not purchasing tariffed items.

Do you seriously contend that this tiny taxation burden, one of the lowest of any nation in history, justified a war that cost over 600k men their lives and devastated a section of the country?

[MrChips]

No, it did not justify the war cost. Lincoln should not have gone to war.

P.S. Kep in mind, as well, that $1 was worth something back then.

[MrChips]

No, it did not justify the war cost. Lincoln should not have gone to war.

P.S. Keep in mind, as well, that $1 was worth something back then.

[myself6]

silly F’ers always wanna turn this into an argument about the civil war. its emotionally charged and tied with slavery, its how they end discussion of the subject...

Screw the civil war... Doesnt mean a damn thing today.

If People no longer want to suffer the influence of the stupid M’er F’ers who want to subject everyone to the tyranny of a forced collective. They have the basic human right to break those ties of association, and if enough people in an area (or state) feel the same way they can choose to do the same and setup something more compatible with freedom and liberty.

What exactly happened with the loyalists after the colonies seceded from England?