Search results

Texas aside - I imagine non-agri immigration. With the CSA as a separate country I'd imagine that industry expands faster and on larger scale than in OTL. Some goods previously "imported" from the North will be replaced by British imports, some by local product - be it for pricing or patriotic...

1 - Me wrong - I thought the pre-ACW Army was closer to 12K and not the mighty host of of 16K :) 2 - "4th most industrialised" - I remember this from another thread on the subject, that the CSA would had ranked behind the UK, USA and France, more or less Belgium level (and ahead of Prussia)...

I was looking at the economic i.e. financial aspect of maintaining the military, hence I counted the entire population. 6M whites can easily divert 1-2% to the military, i.e. 60-120K. Also - immigration. IMO this is irrelevant up to the 1890s, i.e. nothing changes in the situation of the slaves...

We will never know :) To put things in perspective - pre-war US Armyx4 is ... drum roll ... 50K men. Even alongside a non-insignificant navy maintaining such an army (even if 100K and Regulars) - for the 4th most industrialised country in the world, with population pushing 10M - should be...

Their wishes when dreaming of a country of their own and the realities of having one may very well be quite different :) If import tariffs are necessary to generate the tax revenue needed to maintain a military which keeps the evul! slave-stealing abolitionists away - then having tariffs simply...

So "promoting industrialization" does not go onto the label. Same as the already mentioned Constitutional ban on subsidising railroad construction for the betterment of commerce - yet subsidising railroad construction the "better defense of These American States" is OK :)

Wonderful quotes. So, around OTL WWI the CSA would be a (slightly) richer France or A-H (at least in GDP - France was a big exporter of capital, something which I do not expect the CSA to be) and comparable in population (slightly smaller?). As the CSA has to be subtracted from OTL USA's total...

No. 1 - Supply. The import of slaves had banned since 1808 (there was a smuggled trickle up to 1860, but AFAIK it was marginal). The US slave population was growing through natural increase. The USA was not the Carribean/Brasil. 2 - Demand. The CSA will not experience any surge in demand as -...

You wrote To cite from it some: I don't see anything past the ":" I know that there is something there as I can mark it - but even copying and pasting it somewhere else does not reveal what is there :)

1 - certain politicians in the South could get misty eyed and ramble about expansion into the Carribean to their heart's content when they were part of the USA. Whose policy up to 1861 was more often then not run by Southrons in the South's interest. An independent CSA, weaker than the USA, with...

Fantastic post! Thank you for giving facts and figures to what I suspected, i.e. that the CSA Constitutional ban on "facilitate commerce" improvements being possibly circumvented with the (BTW IMO legit) defence concerns. Interesting and totally new was the scale of the CSA's "war economy". The...

With all due respect your post is delusional. 1 - An intervention by either Britain or France curbstomps the Union. And not due to putting boots on the ground, but by ending blockade of CSA and blockading the US in turn. No exports, no money, no imports, purchases of weapons (most US rifles were...