The key phrase in what I posted is:

…looted the former states of the Confederation of the Rhine and demanded more 'support' from them than Napoleon ever had.

I believe that with all that you have posted in reply only applies to Jerome’s new Kingdom of Westphalia and the states which made up that Napoleonic creation prior to becoming part of the new state in 1807. You’ve posted nothing about the other states of the Confederation, namely Baden, Hesse-Darmstadt, and Wurttemberg, as well as Saxony. They suffered under allied occupation and Saxony’s king was arrested and imprisoned by the allies and forty percent of its territory, as well as the same percentage of her army, were seized by Prussia.

Bavaria is not included as they deserted Napoleon before Leipzig and was left virtually untouched by the allies.

And the material you posted prior to the creation of the Confederation of the Rhine is nothing more than outliers, since it is outside the parameters of the existence of the Confederation and therefore not applicable to what I posted.
I have no doubt that Hesse-Cassel, Brunswick, Paderborn, and Halberstadt were left virtually alone by the allies as the newly returned heads of state of both Hesse-Cassel and Brunswick were supporters of the allies in general and of Prussia in particular. Of note, however, is that the ruling family of Brunswick may have been a little short on manpower as they had begun a new tradition during the Napoleonic Wars of getting themselves killed.
Both Brunswick and Hesse-Cassel were opponents of the French, active or not, and the Duke of Brunswick fought for Prussia.

Further, you have posted nothing about the treaty between the minor German states and Napoleon that created the Confederation of the Rhine in July 1806. In 1805 some of the minor German states chose France over Austria, Russia, and Prussia as the lesser of two evils. Both Prussia and Austria had a habit of trying to absorb the minor German states who wished to retain their independence. That, too, would eventually vanish when Prussia took over Germany in 1866-1871. Austria would be left in the cold.

I would suggest that you look up the data which spelled out the German states’ military contribution to the Confederation of the Rhine. And then try and find out the military contribution demanded by the allies in 1813-1814. I suggest that the latter would be larger.

It seems to me that you’ve only done this type of research on Westphalia, which was not a typical Confederation state.

I also find the idea of French bookkeeping being somehow evil to be utterly amazing. The French administration used preprinted forms for a myriad of functions. For example, Thiebault included examples of them for staff work in the second, expanded version of his staff manual. It certainly enhanced record keeping and the apparent lack of that ability in Prussia, Austria, and Russia would certainly partially explain the inefficiency of their civilian and military administration.

Lastly, in any study of the type your illustrating, it might be useful, and certainly more informative, to use other sources besides German ones. The other side of the coin, the French experience, might be useful to get a better and more balanced view of the subject.

As for Westphalia, Jerome’s new kingdom was created from Hesse-Cassel, Brunswick, and parts of Hanover. The new kingdom was given a constitution, which was a reform in itself, as well as legislative power over taxation and the Civil Code applied. Feudalism was ended and equality before the law was now an established principle. There was both civil and religious liberty and the Jews were granted full citizenship. Guilds were suppressed and even peasants sat in the Standeversammlung. And the power of the Church was greatly reduced.

Jerome's ministers were mostly Germans, not Frenchmen and bureaucrats, judges, and magistrates were trained and employed.

Problem solving by legislation was introduced and most, if not all, of these needed reforms were new to the disparate territories that made up Westphalia.

The debt was not good for Westphalia, and was a huge burden on the kingdom, which is why peace was needed to consolidate the new kingdom.

But the idea that you keep repeating that Napoleon drained the Confederation states of funding, or robbed, is just not accurate. As Owen Connelly notes, 'The idea persists that the satellite kingdoms were 'robbed' for the benefit of France. One envisions wagons rolling toward Paris with coin for the imperial treasury...As to treasure wagons, few indeed came from the kingdoms to France. The states contributed largely by supporting French troops within their borders; much of the money they supplied was spent locally, either by army buyers or the troops themselves, to the benefit of native merchants and producers...the tax rate in France was always higher than in the kingdoms.'-Owen Connelly, Napoleon's Satellite Kingdoms, 341-342.

Both Owen Connelly and Brendan Simms are useful for Germany and the Confederation. Germany before 1806 is covered well in German Armies by Peter Wilson.

The bottom line is that the Confederation states were much better off being allied to France than being under the thumb and the threat of absorption by either Prussia or Austria. Austria had invaded Bavaria twice as an aggressor in 1805 and 1809, and, especially in 1809, the general response from the Confederation was outstanding and contributed greatly to Austria's defeat.