Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1405897, member: 26302&quot;]Yes there is, and it was even a lecture of mine I gave. Personally I think its bad business to dismiss what I wrote without asking for the details if you disagree.</p><p><br /></p><p>For those who wish to learn, fast forward this chart 50 years. When they will be labelling the axis in hundreds of trillions of dollars, this last 6 years will appear to be nothing. Go back to 1960, and you would have to relabel the axis in hundreds of millions, and it will appear parabolic just like this one does. It is the nature of these graphs to show parabolic growth inherently due to them treating dollars as static figures, and not indexing it to relative worth in the past. </p><p><br /></p><p>I GUARANTEE if you index the dollars to a relative worth you will not see a parabolic shape like this. It is completely a function on how this type of graph works, and how it is completely the wrong type of graph to use with historical cash. Anyone who ever uses a graph like this to try to &quot;understand&quot; something has &quot;sucker&quot; written on their forehead. </p><p><br /></p><p>Not trying to make you feel bad PMBug about you posting it, I am just clarifying for those who say it is useful. This applies to all graphs of this nature, always has, always will, as long as there is inflation. </p><p><br /></p><p>Chris[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in