>> But your opponents here argue that all this is mere history. There
>> once was history (perhaps), but that's all over now. The timeless
>> truth of _today's_ terms of trade between center and periphery
>> is...well, self-evident - aren't markets efficient?
>
> That's not my argument, if you're referring to me.
>
> Could you specify the contribution of the periphery to the center's
> prosperity today instead of treating it as self-evident?
I recollect a conversation with the late excellent David Gordon, in which he said that if you ran current (this was some twenty years ago - but it would be even more true today) center-periphery trade balances with the relative prices of 1900 for the primary trade categories, the difference in favor of the periphery would account for the entire growth in the center.
john