The main one, as pointed out above, is the GDP / GDP per capita distinction, which is obviously too sophisticated for the people over there...

The second one is that there is a real difference between 1993-2003 (which my critic quotes) and 1994-2004 (which I use) as a period because 1993 was a bad recession in France, as was 2003. So if you take the period with the two recessions, the comparison becomes skewed. (US recessions were in 1991 and 2001, French ones in 1993 and 2003. So for meaningful comparisons you need to cover a full cycle in both countries).

statistics are very easy to manipulate, you just need to know exactly what you are - and what you are not - talking about...

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes