[Rei Murasame]

Is there a list of reasons you can cite?

In the very next paragraph I gave the reason!

How, exactly, was this cost of living going to be implemented?

That is some odd english, but assuming I'm interpreting this question correctly, it means I answered that already. The cost of living of the Southern States was increased by the fact that government, Abraham Lincoln's government, would not allow them to trade freely with the British, Spanish, or French Empire, and this resulted in their lives becoming harder.

Meanwhile they were subsidising the factories and the lifestyle of the Northern States.

The details of exactly how that ended up for the South should be obvious, since you claim to be an Austrian School adherent, you would know exactly why the Cost of Living for the people in the Southern States went up.

For the sake of argument, that may be true. But it's the RESULTS after the war that I measure.

What, that Abraham Lincoln went to war in order to prevent the Southern States from trading with certain people?

[DanDaMan]

That is some odd english, but assuming I'm interpreting this question correctly, it means I answered that already. The cost of living of the Southern States was increased by the fact that government, Abraham Lincoln's government, would not allow them to trade freely with the British, Spanish, or French Empire, and this resulted in their lives becoming harder.

Meanwhile they were subsidising the factories and the lifestyle of the Northern States.

When a country is in the wrong do we not place sanctions on them to change? Yes.
That was what the North was doing... limiting trade because the Southerners owned slaves.
I would guess whoever taught you history was a closet racist since they perverted reality.

[Rei Murasame]

That was what the North was doing... limiting trade because the Southerners owned slaves.

No, it was never about slaves, the North also owned slaves!

I would guess whoever taught you history was a closet racist since they perverted reality.

No, you're just pulling a typical American tactic of invoking the charge of 'racism' every 3.5 seconds, to cover over actual historical fact, which was that the North really didn't care one bit about slaves until it became convenient.

Lincoln is such an American icon that when you look at Lincoln historiography, you find that it's not really an explanation of what happened, it's more like excuse-making for Lincoln's behaviour. Here's an example of that phenomenon: http://books.google.com/books?id=oQaJlu ... #v=onepage

[DanDaMan]

Wiki... left leaning to begin with... paints a different picture...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_C ... _secession
The American Civil War (1861–1865), also known as the War Between the States as well as several other names, was a civil war in the United States of America. Eleven Southern slave states declared their secession from the United States and formed the Confederate States of America (the Confederacy). Led by Jefferson Davis, they fought against the United States (the Union), which was supported by all the free states and the five border slave states.

[Rei Murasame]

The reason wiki paints a different picture is precisely because it leans Left of me and idolises Lincoln.

Wait a second, you still haven't actually defined the "Libertarian Values" that you spoke of earlier, is this Lincoln debate a distraction you're pursuing in order to delay answering that?