1860 exports and motivation for the Union desire for Union.

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#1

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Joined
Nov 27, 2018
Messages
982
Location
Chattanooga, Tennessee
#4
I have a vague memory of economics from outdated curricula, basing the category of Capital gains or proceeds, and Capital assets. In businesses, the ledger keeping is most vital as these records are passed down. Now recently I was reading the history of Ledgers being dated back to Italy, and almost no change has taken place since the 1400's, but again my memory is as vague now as it was long ago. (Where was that?)Trying to keep the cotton on the cart (so to speak) and the cart in the road (not in the ditch), may I inquire what the destination of it is (where is it headed)? It is interesting especially for the value it presents to a serious researcher. Thanks, I will visit the other threads you have presented....(and maybe around the next bend, I will see).
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#5
I have a vague memory of economics from outdated curricula, basing the category of Capital gains or proceeds, and Capital assets. In businesses, the ledger keeping is most vital as these records are passed down. Now recently I was reading the history of Ledgers being dated back to Italy, and almost no change has taken place since the 1400's, but again my memory is as vague now as it was long ago. (Where was that?)Trying to keep the cotton on the cart (so to speak) and the cart in the road (not in the ditch), may I inquire what the destination of it is (where is it headed)? It is interesting especially for the value it presents to a serious researcher. Thanks, I will visit the other threads you have presented....(and maybe around the next bend, I will see).
Accrual accounting is somewhat recent along with depreciation and associating income to the period where it came. Cash accounting unchanged from the 1400s would be standard in the antebellum period. OTOH there were no legal standards so expect variations.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,963
Location
Denver, CO
#6
Cotton was a very important industry. But by 1860 it was much less important than it had been up to 1837. The US was rapidly developing as one of best consumer markets in the world. By the time the US added Texas, California and Oregon, cotton was not as important in the economy. In fact, the railroad, iron and steel industries were rapidly rising in importance. By the time the US railroad system had crossed the Alleghanies in multiple places, linked Lake Superior and Lake Huron with a canal and locks, and bridged the Mississippi with a railroad bridge, the economic conditions of 1840 no longer existed.
By 1860 the US had alternatives to tariff income if it needed them. During the Civil War, those alternatives were used.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,963
Location
Denver, CO
#7
The addition of Texas and the 1850's cotton boom sucked so much physical energy into cotton production that the momentum to diversify stalled. Those parts of the US that allowed slavery, but were not into cotton production, had little to gain by cutting themselves of from US consumers and US railroad investors.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,963
Location
Denver, CO
#8
The problem with the cotton industry is that it was too small to be dominant in the US, and too big too allow to develop as an independent military power. When the cotton industry was relatively bigger, the northern Whig party compromised. If the cotton economy had been smaller, the US would have let them go for awhile, and waited for their economy to stagnate.
The Civil War set Texas, Arkansas and Missouri on a new development path, and ruined Mississippi, So. Carolina and Virginia. After that the south was not a threat and interest in the south waned.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,963
Location
Denver, CO
#9
The wealth of both regions depended more on engineers, mechanics, immigrants with science and management background. All accounts which want to build up southern wealth ignore the fact that the south was suppressing the human potential of 40% of the population.
When the test of arms came, the south demonstrated a tremendous amount of fighting ability. However because the US had steamships and railroads, and the ability to maintain cities, it always improved its strategic position, and almost always ended the fighting in the fall by defeating the Confederates.
The wealth of both sections depended more on human beings and livestock. The free labor states had an abundance of each.
 

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
10,007
#11
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,963
Location
Denver, CO
#12
The cotton economy and the tariff income were large enough that the Confederacy could have built up a threatening military. The loss of income to the US was not crippling. During reconstruction, when cotton stagnated and the south fell behind, by 1879, the US entered a boom. But they did so not having to face any serious military threat in the western hemisphere. The Civil War was violent enough. If the Confederacy had been able to build up its armaments industry and navy, the result would have been aggravated. No one could be sure that the border areas would reject secession, and the US would recover its strength as fast as it did.
 
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,633
Location
los angeles ca
#14
The cotton economy and the tariff income were large enough that the Confederacy could have built up a threatening military. The loss of income to the US was not crippling. During reconstruction, when cotton stagnated and the south fell behind, by 1879, the US entered a boom. But they did so not having to face any serious military threat in the western hemisphere. The Civil War was violent enough. If the Confederacy had been able to build up its armaments industry and navy, the result would have been aggravated. No one could be sure that the border areas would reject secession, and the US would recover its strength as fast as it did.
That's a huge " if" the Confederacy could be self sufficient in manufacturing it's own armaments. The Confederacy was dependent on importing blue water naval craft and couldn't even supply the majority of its own sailors. Yes the Confederacy did manufacture some of it's own armaments but not nearly enough.
Even the Union as @Saphroneth showed wasn't even self sufficient in small arms production until well into 1862.
Leftyhunter
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
7,816
#15
Cotton and other Southern-produced commodities were the largest source of hard currency export income in 1860.

The "market value" of real estate in New York is irrelevant.

Posters prattling about how export income wasn't important are doing just that, "prattling." And I'll note their opinions are not backed up with sources.

Thanks to @jgoodguy for at least posting a source in his thread.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#17
Cotton and other Southern-produced commodities were the largest source of hard currency export income in 1860.

The "market value" of real estate in New York is irrelevant.

Posters prattling about how export income wasn't important are doing just that, "prattling." And I'll note their opinions are not backed up with sources.

Thanks to @jgoodguy for at least posting a source in his thread.
Thanks. Please be nice, 'prattling' might end up rattling a moderator cage and invoke unwanted attention.
 

Saphroneth

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Feb 18, 2017
Messages
4,172
#18
That's a huge " if" the Confederacy could be self sufficient in manufacturing it's own armaments. The Confederacy was dependent on importing blue water naval craft and couldn't even supply the majority of its own sailors. Yes the Confederacy did manufacture some of it's own armaments but not nearly enough.
There's one very good reason the situation is different for the Confederacy, at least as regards small arms, and it's Patrick County - the ores in this Virginia county could be rolled successfully, and were during the ACW. This allowed the CSA to construct domestic iron gun barrels, while the Union had to rely on foreign sourced iron from Marshall and Mills. (It was an ex-Marshall and Mills man who actually located the Patrick County ores.)
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#19
Part of sovereignty is tax collection, but to concentrate on it is like concentrating on the addition of young women in the South to the Union as a motivation.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#20
There's one very good reason the situation is different for the Confederacy, at least as regards small arms, and it's Patrick County - the ores in this Virginia county could be rolled successfully, and were during the ACW. This allowed the CSA to construct domestic iron gun barrels, while the Union had to rely on foreign sourced iron from Marshall and Mills. (It was an ex-Marshall and Mills man who actually located the Patrick County ores.)
Interesting idea for a different thread. But let's stick with money and value.
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top