Grizzly_Biscuit

That's...good?

That would have been such a great answer. Unfortunately my previous statement was just taken too literally and I got referred to ebt 🙃

It was a metaphorical starving Jake, we're not really being punished for the time our grandparents went to a buffet. Thank you for your sincerity though god bless.

I'm curious what's at the other end of your analogous remark, go on.

"Money doesn't buy happiness" was first coined when people could afford a house with an average income. We're starving and that one time our grandparents over-ate at a buffet is being shoved down our throats.

Ah, gotcha. Going forward I'll refrain from joking about a different perspective, even if I actually fully agree with the original post. This place rules.

I do, not monthly but enough to say that my own anecdotal experience would agree with yours and this article's perspective. That doesn't stop me from taking a jokingly objective stance. First comment I made was just the reverse angle of the same data set.

I mean with the way the data is presented it definitely is agreeable that the rise in complaints is directly tied to the quality/performance of the flight industry.

But, on principle alone I refuse to openly accept correlation as a causation for two data sets, and always leave room for expansion and more dots to connect. Without that in play, it's easy to convince anyone that all spurious correlations have a cause/effect relationship.

I thought it was funny and I stand firmly by that.

Oh...to be honest I think I read the prompt backwards. As a rule of thumb, anecdotes should always be taken with a grain of salt when presented with contradictory empirical evidence.

Empirical VS anecdotal evidence.