How big of a loss were the Colonies for the British?

File: sWXZ1eIZQTaNVw6oyryL.jpg (2MB, 5616x2160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5616x2160px

>>3163305
From a geopolitic point of view, not much - British rule of the seas was hardly affected and India was gradually becoming the "Jewel in the Crown anyways". It was like the Eastern Roman Empire being disconnected from its Western half - the wealth was in the East anyways.

From a romantic nationalist point of view, it was the greatest racial tragedy of all time - a nation of Englishmen cleaved apart for a fucking tea tax.

>>3163305
Not much, the markets were small at the time. Fur trade may have taken a hit but I don't know. The sugar cash-cropping ventures in the Carribean were much more valuable to the markets and merchant-banking houses in London.

>>3163377
Tobacco trade may have been disrupted for a time too.

I don't think the impact was even that major from an economic point of view. Didn't the Jay Treaty pretty much re-establish all trade between the US and Britain?

>>3163305
Not a huge loss, the american colonies didnt produce much in the way of revenue or manpower that could be used elsewhere

The Caribbean and India produced all the wealth

That said the 13 colonies contained about 1/3 of all the ethnic english in the world so that was a bit of a blow

>>3163366
Tea tax was just a de jure cassus
there's much more underlying issues surrounding the American rebelling,chiefly the feeling of disconnect between them and the crown and lack of representation

>>3163305
Very little. The real wealth in the Americas at that time was in the Caribbean, i.e. the sugar plantations.

>>3163366
>It was like the Eastern Roman Empire being disconnected from its Western half - the wealth was in the East anyways.

More like the Empire abandoning Britain because it was worthless and difficult to keep.