stop mixing everything in one pot. I just disproved your objections about sampling size. I suggested you redo your hypothesis test given at least 30% instead of the stated 47% of respondents stated they would be in financial trouble with a 400% cash outlay. Now you suddenly blabber about the quality of the sample size. Are you suggesting Fed went into some inner city welfare housing complex and asked people? I have no inclination to further debate this with you because I pointed you to your statistical misunderstanding yet you just move on to some other irrelevant topic.
Actually you didn't disprove anything because you don't know what the sampling size was (see previous reference to the methodology). If you'd rather not find out, that's your choice.
the sampling size is indicated in the article. So, you did not know about the sampling size and yet put up all sorts of accusations about the quality of the survey? Hilarious to say the least.
Volpunter, maybe your survey was done in Africa or India. If 47% of American citizen "need to sell something" to buy a 400 dollars product (ie iphone and friends), rather than working for example, you would not be there to discuss about economy and survey but rather asking what would be your tomorrow. And don't believe the Fed. Neither Goldman (they are the same). CM
The sampling size is relevant only in relation to the universe of potential respondents. If only two respondents out a hundred participate, what level of confidence can one have in the result?
you're logic is that of a woman who says to her her husband who is complaining that the soup is cold says do you want the soup hot. not being part of the 47% does not make you well off. volpunter is an anti-semite who probably was rejected by a Jewish woman who laughed at his appendage.