I don’t want to rehash Rob’s point, but as he noted, the participants in your survey (who, I’m assuming, are all readers of this site – correct me if I’m wrong) are *highly* self-selecting.

You admit in your comment that these results “are probably skewed slightly” due to this selection bias. Maybe it’s only semantics, but I’d remove the words “probably” and “slightly.” To me that’s like saying that responses to a poll on http://www.hillary2008.com about the capability of a potential woman president “are probably skewed slightly.”

What I take further issue with is the fact that you use these admittedly skewed results to bolster your rather inflammatory claim that “the fact that nearly three out of every four of us plan on spending less money in the coming months certainly pushes the chances of a recession from somewhat realistic to a relative certainty.”

Now, I’m not claiming that the US economy won’t enter a recession soon, or even that it hasn’t already begun contracting on a macro level. I’m just saying that using inherently biased results to make such provocative statements as characterizing a recession as “a relative certainty” is both misleading and dangerous. And I realize that you’re not the only one out there doing this, but you seem like an intelligent guy, which is why I’d expect you to know better.

I have no problem with using these surveys as a piece of evidence in making predictions (even negative ones), but at least provide the appropriate disclaimers.

In spite of my objection here, I enjoy the site and appreciate your writing.

While this fact does not mean the economy isn’t in danger due to consumer reluctance to spend for gifts in the face of rising fuel prices, neither can it show that it is.

I think that, rather than “how many people were questioned” (which implies a kind of formal survey) the question is “how many readers responded?”

So…. how many readers responded?