[harpseal]

Second, all their numbers are all footnoted on their policy papers. If you don't have copies you can obtain them. If that's not easy enough for you, oh well. It doesn't mean they are lying, it means you are lazy.

Here is a link to the Cato institute's web site CATO please show where the footnote is on the economic article linked on the Front page for the following quote American companies invest less than $2 billion a year in China, and far less in India

I reiterate all their numbers are all footnoted on their policy papaers. Here we have a link from their homepage which contains no footnotes. Now I further note there is no distinction made about policy papers on theiur home page. Yes I have been in their refernce area and some of that data is good schalarship but the problem is when good schalarship that happens to support an agenda is included with some unrefernced works and some of that schlorship when one traces down the footnmates leads to an unreferenced work. I have presented a link that makes a claim on numbers that contains no refernce from the Cato institute website. i will clearly state not all teh scholarship presented on their wevbsite is bad. Clearly they have some good schalarship that is totally supportive of their stand but that does not imply that because a number comes from teh Cato institute taht it should be trusted.

[Protagoras]

I need no link to the Cato and I am not in the business of defending the Cato Institute or anyone else. I get policy papers from them every month and ALL of them are footnoted. If you contend that the Institute uses cooked numbers take it up with them.

But here is a more important question; if their numbers were correct, would opponents change their mind about all this? I think we both know the answer to that.

Which is why some take the easy way, attack the veracity of the numbers. Because if the numbers are correct, they have a philosophical problem with their postiton.