LOL. You demand from me a reference from a "reputable sources" and I ask you for an exhaustive list or reputable sources and you won't do that.

That is some disengenous bullshit there, Bob. If I spend hours pulling up statistics posted in source "X" your response I fully expect to be - "That doesn't count, because 'X' is not a reputable source." I've read your responses too often to waste my time doing the work only to have it discounted by your subjective definition of what is "reputable."

That you won't even try to define what are the "reputable sources" you would accept only convinces me that I was correct in my assumption of your tactic. If you provide a list of sources, and then I use one of those sources to prove my point about the shrinking US middle class, then you lose the argument.

So instead of just admitting straight up I'm correct, you make up some shit about proving a negative, which I'm not doing. I'm asking you to provide YOUR list of "reputable sources."

Again, you refuse to do this. I think (i.e. this is conjecture) that you know I'm correct - you have actually already hinted that you know I'm correct - but you can't just bring yourself to admit you've made a mistake.

I make mistakes all the time. I admit them. I did so in a comment only a week or so ago. Being able to admit when you're wrong is a sign of strength, not weakness. Of coursse if you're mostly wrong that is a sign of other problems, but it is a weak person who claims to never make a mistake, and when confronted with an error, tries to change the subject or muddy the waters.

You're right about one thing, Bob. This conversation is evidence for all to see.

This time really bye.