First world prosperity

[Enrique Diaz-Alvarez]

In this list, the inescapable fact that large majorities of first world
populations enjoy a prosperous lifestyle is sometimes dismissed as the
result of imperialist plunder and exploitation of the third world. This
gives lefties a warm, fuzzy, self-righteous feeling, and it has great
value for that reason alone.

However, US imports of goods and services from the rest of the world
amount to, what, 12% of national income. Most of this trade is with the
first world. Since I am too lazy to go look up exact numbers, I'll say
that imports in goods and services from the third world amount to 5% of
national income.

Doesn't this place a rough upper bound of 5% in the amount of US
prosperity that can be explained away as imperialist plunder?

Of course, this upper bound assumes that those nations get nothing in
return for those goods and services they send our way. Now, a lot of our
exports to the third world may be in the form of F-16 and financial
consultants, but I am sure that a few Volvo trucks and Caterpillar
excavators wind up there as well. So this 5% would be further reduced.

Am I missing something?

-- 
Enrique Diaz-Alvarez            Office # (607) 255 5034	
Electrical Engineering          Home #   (607) 758 8962
112 Phillips Hall               Fax #    (607) 255 4565
Cornell University              mailto:enrique at ee.cornell.edu
Ithaca, NY 14853                http://peta.ee.cornell.edu/~enrique