Now compare this to the ICTY indictments and you have a seriously biased court.
In other words, doing the actual arithmetic. Which is your job.
That's not to say that I wouldn't happily do it for you once, or twice or even three times. But you used up that quota half a dozen posts ago, and I'm tired of first having to (re)construct your arguments from scattered data and vague insinuation before I can even begin to consider it properly.
Presenting free-floating data and claiming to have made a case is like presenting a bucket of paint and claiming that you've made a painting.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
What on earth are you talking about? This is a discussion, it's not a PhD thesis!
But when you bring numbers to the table, you either do it to make a point - in which case you need to present a plausible model to translate those numbers into a conclusion.
Or you're not - in which case the numbers are just noise that add nothing to the debate.
You're the dude making claims here. You've got to present a case if you want those claims to be taken seriously. And so far, what you have presented is not a case, any more than a disorderly pile of bricks is a house.
And if you don't want your claims to be taken seriously, then why the are we having this discussion, anyway?
