Size of what?

The growth rate?

You need to get a Pell Grant and larn you some math.

Trying to run and hide from math groups ain't a game plan.

Bret Cahill

On Jun 27, 2:32 pm, BretCah...@peoplepc.com wrote:

Bret, if you would leave the attributions I could ask this clown "what
*is* the relationship of economic growth rates to size?". But now I
don't know if it is the same clown that dodged the question earlier.
He mumbled something about free speech not applying to economics
discussions....

-tg

BretCahill@peoplepc.com wrote in news:c4667af9-0554-4fd6-a3f8-737a97979af1
@r37g2000prm.googlegroups.com:

Of what you're measuring. Under the same economic conditions, it's easier
for a small operation to have a higher growth rate than for a larger one.
Why don't you understand this? It's been explained to you.

Yeah, that's it, legal eagle. I'm hiding out in misc.legal.

Which is?

You can "cascade" your dodges like the looneytarians but you just look
silly.

How can the economic conditions be the same if the growth rates are
different?

You are contradicting the premise.

Kind of a negative economy of scale?

Intriguing.

This theory is so unique you might want to copyright it.

Someday you might win the Nobel Prize in Economics for it.

On Jun 27, 5:49 pm, Deadrat b.com> wrote:

But what does "same economic conditions" mean?

-tg

Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote in
news:8f5d81e3-1879-43c4-82ba-8d11ec4aedfd@p25g2000pri.googlegroups.com:

"Calculated?"

It should be in the world fact book.

Bret Cahill

tg earthlink.net> wrote in
news:2d0dc4fc-7303-40ed-8bff-f3f5dbce9a4c@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote in news:36a32870-83b2-4b3e-9535-
3fd19f7a9a65@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

OK, I'll settle for your looking up someone else's calculations. Have you
looked up the correlation in the "world fact book"?

I didn't think so.

On Jun 27, 5:31 pm, Deadrat b.com> wrote: