LOL Well of course I was just having a laugh with my Chav stats (sorry if the humour was lost on some people), but yes all studies are dependent on what data you put in.
Garbage in = Garbage out
You can prove most things frankly, and just have to be selective what you put in. That's why studies and think tanks are generally talking crap. In fact whole 'sciences' are complete crap, take Economics. 'We asked 100 city analysts about the price of copper, they all disagreed.'. There is a proportion of students are surplus to requirements and should be getting on with something useful.
There's nothing worse that too much management, law and technology for the sake of it. In fact I'd question the whole notion of GDP.
Sometimes when its said the economy is growing, remember you are just working to replace things that were 1/2 the price 20 years ago or there's even more pointless studies, laws and technologies and jobs coming on stream to make life even more complex, unmanageable, and probably worse in some cases.
Garbage in = Garbage out
You can prove most things frankly, and just have to be selective what you put in. That's why studies and think tanks are generally talking crap. In fact whole 'sciences' are complete crap, take Economics. 'We asked 100 city analysts about the price of copper, they all disagreed.'. There is a proportion of students are surplus to requirements and should be getting on with something useful.
There's nothing worse that too much management, law and technology for the sake of it. In fact I'd question the whole notion of GDP.
Sometimes when its said the economy is growing, remember you are just working to replace things that were 1/2 the price 20 years ago or there's even more pointless studies, laws and technologies and jobs coming on stream to make life even more complex, unmanageable, and probably worse in some cases.
?
