RS> The dishonesty was trying to suggest that the more sensible numbers
RS> was purely to clarify the proposition, when in fact you were faking
RS> away like mad from a totally silly scenario to one which was atleast
RS> possible in an investment sense and trying to pretend you were just
RS> clarifying the story, when in fact you were faking away like mad.

Rod, I changed the numbers back to the original, and then worked
through them slowly, so that you could see the 1/3 vs 1/2 I was
talking about originally, with the original numbers.  YOU'RE the
one trying to smokescreen like mad, because you know damn well that
the calculations I did on the original numbers were just as valid
as the calculations I did on the revised numbers.  Try harder, boy.
BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---