Aristotle-to-Ricardo-to-Hayek turn the double play way better than Plato-to-Rousseau-to-Rawls
Well, a) You're correct, indeed -- the proper numbers are as the article says, 1.09/1.03 and 1.05/1.01, for which the former is about 2% greater... which leads us to:b) He doesn't understand how growth rates compound. Let me say that again: He doesn't understand Compound Interest. Gee, a bloviating libtard who doesn't grasp basic business concepts. Whoodathunkit?c) See "b" above. He's writing about business. And clearly he doesn't know JACK about it. I mean, the next thing you're gonna tell me, there's gonna be some liberal twit politician bloviating on the climate or something... And the news media are going to take their halfwit bloviations seriously.:^PWhy does the American economy continue to wag the dog so clearly, even with crap like the recent credit collapse?Hockey moms and capital marketsI think that piece says why.
That's a good article; thanks.
Post a Comment