[PeaRidge]

According to your post, I ‘shamelessly’ pass over Colwell’s economic ‘part’.....of course I did and I pointed out his quote where he says he exaggerated the census data by 50% based on undocumented ‘officials’ opinions.

I rather be shameless than advocate the ramblings of someone, who if alive, would be a guest on “Coast to Coast”.

[x]

Kettell makes use of estimates as well. It would have been hard not to. The census comes once every ten years, so estimates of current values are unavoidable if you want to be up to date.

Colwell made an estimate based on the available census data and with reference to state data. Even if his estimate was wrong -- off by half, if you like -- his basic point, that the states surrounding New York contributed more to its economy than the Deep South cotton states -- holds up, and you can see that in his figures.

Kettell's approach was based on the idea that you could trace all wealth back to agriculture or natural resources. He left out the value added by manufactures and services. It's not hard to see where he went wrong. Plenty of resource-rich countries have failed to develop because they failed to diversify and remained tied to a single crop or commodity.