“Thomas Prentice Kettell’s book was refuted by Stephen Colwell’s The Five Cotton States and New York, a pamphlet of 1861.”
First, nowhere is it stated, other than the poster, that Kettell’s work was ‘refuted’. In fact, Kettell was an economist that published reputable journals, books, and magazines. Colwell was a pamphleteer, and not an economist.
Kettell based his commentary on U.S. Treasury and census data. Colwell changed the data to serve his purposes as found on page 27 of his work where he uses the following term regarding U.S. Treasury data: “We therefore give the...sum with the addition of fifty percent” and offers his conclusion with the caveat that “It appears from this approximation...”.
Over the next several pages Colwell uses phrases such as “We shall not err greatly...”, “...which may be safely estimated...”, “the population would have...” and many more.
These are not the writings of an economist.
In fact Colwell was a socialist, writing against the free enterprise South.
Kettell's argument is akin to saying that the American economy is dependent on Saudi Arabia and exploitative -- that American wealth is the illegitimate product of Saudi oil. In fact, dependence cuts both ways. We provide goods and services to Saudi Arabia in exchange for their oil. Dependence is mutual and a country that produces a variety of goods and services are in a better position than the Saudis who have only oil.
In fact, Kettell was an economist that published reputable journals, books, and magazines. Colwell was a pamphleteer, and not an economist.
Colwell was a distinguished and respected writer on economics, as well as a successful businessman. Kettell was a journalist and editor -- a pamphleteer, in other words -- who wrote on economics. Neither man had an academic chair.
I doubt anybody would seriously say that one Kettell, the editorialist and controversialist, was a great economist and Colwell was a hack, though the opposite view might legitimately be argued. It's also worth noting that Kettell went on to write a history of the Civil War that doesn't reflect his earlier view by any means.
In fact Colwell was a socialist, writing against the free enterprise South.
Slavery is freedom?
"War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength?"
You must really loathe free markets to identify them with slavery.
Sorry, wish I could help out on this one but don't now "get" what's being discussed.
Is this still the "debate" over percentages of Deep South exports vs. total US imports?