Actually yes it does. "Causation" is merely very strong and reliable correlation, induction is invalid and thus nothing can ever be proven to be a strict cause of anything else.: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume/#CauIndInfNegPha Besides, I also gave a priori reasons why freedom delivers prosperity, or you can just study some econ 101 - silly me to assume someone who started arguing in an economics forum thead actually understood the basics of the subject. In any case, even if you take the sceptic view and reject the overwhelming preponderance of evidence I just put posted up, where on earth does that leave your hypothesis? Or do you even have one to propose? Whatever alternative hypothesis you are promoting, does it have even a fraction of the evidence to support it as the one that I'm putting forward? No it doesn't. Like I said - you do not have any serious point to make. You are not supporting your views with any evidence. You are simply trying to sling mud to defend your ego after your view on this subject has been comprehensively demolished by a barrage of facts and evidence. If you were debating honestly, you'd at least have the integrity to put up some facts and figures to support your own hypothesis - but your brief replies don't contain anything of the sort. Go home now with your tail between your legs, and in future don't start slagging off a debate participant where you haven't done even the most basic research into the subject.