Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> There are rigorous ways to look at correlations and to ask questions
> precisely that decrease the chance at false correlations.
Yes.
> But, before I apply the toolbox of techniques I've learned such techniques
> to analyzing your and my hypotheses, I'd like to know if it would mean
> anything to you. Are you convincible by numbers?
Of course, but you do not seem to have understood what I wrote. There are
dozens of important variables that could be relevant, and you have only a
few years of data points during FDR. Are you seriously suggesting that you can
prove that 1 or 2 variables are responsible for the majority of the change in
GDP over a period of a few years? If you can achieve that, you surely missed
your calling as an economist.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
