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.
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.
If only a few people out of hundred respond, the results are essentially meaningless. If any or all of the questions are also poorly defined, then the results are even less meaningful. One may as well do a survey of the homeless on their opinions regarding the state of the American economy.