Ed Huntress wrote:
"phil scott" wrote in message
...

snip

Ed, this has to end our conversation.. it seems that others on the ng
have you identified as a crank and now it is apparent to me... my
final remark on the
48% number is that it cannot possibly be accurate, no stats are, its
just one of the more common approximations...and there is much
published on that you can surely find and read for yourself

Yes, I can read it, Phil, and I have, for several decades now. And I've
written about it, and I have over 350 published articles and chapters of
three books, mostly on machining and the business of manufacturing,
including world trade, taxation, and related subjects.

What I know is that your number is baloney. That's not unusual here,
especially when, as I notice now, this message is cross-posted. You can't
provide a source for your number because it's a crock. We could have
discussed it and you would see *why* it's baloney, but you apparently would
rather believe your fantasies than find out what the truth of it is.

That's pretty interesting, coming from someone who doesn't know the
difference between markup and margin.

Phil, hang around, you obviously have some knowledge to share, and do so
in a respectful manner. Ed pontificates at great length, but if you call
him on his "facts". he rolls out his resume and resorts to personal
attacks pretty quickly.
Just skip over Ed's posts and this NG is a lot more useful.