On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 11:12:00 -0600, xrongor wrote:

me again:
i never said anything about the raw numbers. if it was 106% of their goal
one year, then 96 the next year, the conclusion to be drawn is that the
percentage of their enlistment goal has gone down, hence it is falling.

Falling relative to an unknown variable, is meaningless. Can you at least
see that?

this what i said to begin with as you can see clearly in the paragraph above
as copied from my original post, and have continued to try and drum into
your head dave. i NEVER claimed the actual numbers were falling, or that
the article proved they were falling, and in fact pointed this out in the
next paragraph in my original post:

So why would you bring up McDonalds french fry sales goal performance
when the topic is Idaho farmer income? From here, it looks like you
are bringing up an irrelevant measurement to distort the issue.

do you see that dave? i said myself that the numbers are not pure and that
no further comparason can be made.

And yet you keep making it.