--
At 06:05 PM 3/3/2001 -0500, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> Also the fact that economists generally still appear to give the
> QWERTY story credence may indicate ignorance or may simply mean that
> they reject the L-M hypothesis.
I am unaware that economists continue to give the QWERTY story credence,
and do not believe it.
--digsig
James A. Donald
6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
jEdFKNNSvCn94ugjqvbbemGK+xdjNf6v3oM++hRg
4QeDuOI+UPftf4COJUcvz0W4VS2Ww0dCYmA2eTF4H
- Independent Institute Response To Phillip Hallam-Bake... Matthew Gaylor
- Re: Independent Institute Response To Phillip Ha... Paul Spirito
- Re: Independent Institute Response To Philli... lizard
- Re: Independent Institute Response To Ph... Paul Spirito
- RE: Independent Institute Response To Philli... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Independent Institute Response To Ph... Declan McCullagh
- RE: Independent Institute Response T... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Independent Institute Respo... Declan McCullagh
- RE: Independent Institute Respo... James A. Donald
- RE: Independent Institute R... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Why Not debate "ne... Matthew Gaylor
- RE: Why Not debate &quo... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- RE: Why Not debate &quo... Jim Choate
- RE: Why Not debate &quo... David Theroux
- RE: Why Not debate &quo... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- RE: Why Not debate &quo... James A. Donald
- RE: Why Not debate &quo... Jim Warren
- RE: Why Not debate &quo... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: CDR: RE: Why Not de... Jim Choate
