3 ms·
That could be the most I've ever seen someone confuse correlation and causation in one article. He doesn't even understand the difference between the amount of
by mattmaroon 18y ago
That could be the most I've ever seen someone confuse correlation and causation in one article. He doesn't even understand the difference between the amount of money you have, and the amount of satisfaction you have with your financial situation. I know poor people who rarely think of money and rich people who worry about it all the time.
I have to stop clicking these links, they're always among the dumbest here.
- tsally 18y agoI don't think people take advantage of the flag option as much as they should. In my opinion it's something to be used liberally. Then garbage like this (as well formatted as it is) wouldn't get through.
- nielshoven 18y agoAll valid criticisms. You're right, if it were an academic article I'd never get away with it, but I decided to take a little more leeway with my blog post. I hoped my readers would be astute enough to take my implication of an obviously false causality as tongue in cheek and just appreciate the very cool correlations. You obviously feel differently - I'll try to be more responsible in my future posts. On the topic of financial satisfaction != amount of money, that's very true, and opens the door to all kinds of alternative theories about what causes the correlations. Unfortunately, the salary data included with the GSS isn't very good, so if you want to argue that maybe financially dissatisfied young people are having more sex because of a different confounding variable (they tend to be risk-taking maximizers or something like that), there's not much I can say to argue with you.