Yglesias cowers in fear, refuses to take on Ydiot.net...

You may remember yesterday's trenchant observation that our hero has a rather funny way with percents. Well, that post did not go unnoticed:

In response to yesterday’s contention that “Insofar as [Chinese real estate] prices soared 68 period in one year, 60 percent decline doesn’t sound like much of a worst-case scenario” commenters both here and at Marginal Revolution seem to think I’ve made some kind of mathematical error. Their point is that if you start at $100 then soar to $168 and then decline 60 percent you get all the way to about $68.

Of course, the link goes to Marginal Revolution, not Ydiot.net. Now, our criticism was more expansive and was posted 47% earlier than the same at Marginal Revolution. Yet they get the link.

The reason? you might ask. Pure, unadulterated cowardice. Why alert others to the presence of a site that brutally dissects your every word, when you can use hapless STATE SCHOOL professor Tyler Cowen as a decoy? Matthew Yglesias, I see what you did there.

Post Script:

Yntern checking in here with a bit of a broader point about the abuse of the term "volatility" in some circles when discussing economics and financial markets. Yes, the word has meaning. But it is not a magical balm that makes all wounds heal.

No one went to this football game and went home saying "the score was highly volatile":