Replies

Let's look at real numbers. Then we can tell if they and you're dealing with 'real GDP'.

Sounds good. The chart I posted didn't say if it was adjusted for inflation or not.

And furthermore, your own economagic web site's absolute numbers disproved you.

No it didn't.

So it is clear that real production was at best static, or more likely declined outright after adjusting for inflation...ie..making the numbers 'real', and as a percentage of GDP...if it was, in fact, "stable" there...the conclusion is profoundly more credible that the GDP numbers are not 'real' either.

Great, now all you need is a reputable source that agrees.

784 posted on 01/07/2006 8:01:41 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (How much for the large slurpee?)

To: Toddsterpatriot

No it didn't.

Yes it did. Read the site's assumptions.

786 posted on 01/07/2006 8:09:12 AM PST by Paul Ross (My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple...It is this, 'We win and they lose.')

To: Toddsterpatriot

...all you need is a reputable source that agrees.

You're the one trying to make the point. It's your burden of proof.

But if you want to do some research on 'reputable sources' why not try Deutsche Bank Research which 'agrees.'

787 posted on 01/07/2006 8:15:59 AM PST by Paul Ross (My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple...It is this, 'We win and they lose.')

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794