Most of the scatter plots in the link look literally like scatter, as if someone dropped a jar of pennies on the floor. “he data appear to support notion that” there is little to no causation between the two, though there is some barely significant correlation, possibly due to a multitude of various other factors that are poorly understood and partially mentioned but not investigated in the linked article.
Though I agree, they do a decent job pointing out that whatever “statistics” the Fraser institute puts out is largely ideologically motivated. Duh, like they were ever hiding it.
Though I agree, they do a decent job pointing out that whatever “statistics” the Fraser institute puts out is largely ideologically motivated. Duh, like they were ever hiding it.
As are those that the article substitutes. They choose a different measure of “size of government” and get a conclusion that they prefer. Would they have stuck with that measure if it had gone the other way?
Most of the scatter plots in the link look literally like scatter, as if someone dropped a jar of pennies on the floor. “he data appear to support notion that” there is little to no causation between the two, though there is some barely significant correlation, possibly due to a multitude of various other factors that are poorly understood and partially mentioned but not investigated in the linked article.
Though I agree, they do a decent job pointing out that whatever “statistics” the Fraser institute puts out is largely ideologically motivated. Duh, like they were ever hiding it.
As are those that the article substitutes. They choose a different measure of “size of government” and get a conclusion that they prefer. Would they have stuck with that measure if it had gone the other way?