Please bear with me, as I am trying to illustrate a point


Let us say that there are 10,000 ford mustangs in the U.S. Of those 10,000, let us say that of their drivers 500 got speeding tickets last year.
Let us also say that there are 3,000 Porsche Boxsters in the U.S. And let us say that of those 3,000, 300 of the drivers got speeding tickets last year.  No one but the owners of the vehicles drove the cars in the period for which data was collected, and they owned no other cars, and drove only the cars they owned.


Which of the following statements are true.
1) Last year, more Mustang owners got speeding tickets than Boxster owners.
2) Last year, a Boxster owner was more likely to get a speeding ticket than a Mustang owner.

I am going to try and post a poll, but in the event that it doesn't work....
given the above data is correct:

A) Both 1 and 2 are true statements.
B) 1 is correct, but 2 is incorrect.
C) 2 is correct, but 1 is incorrect.
d) neither 1 or 2 is correct.

Both are true, sort of.  

First statement is true based on raw absolute numbers--if you do a nose count, more Mustangers got tagged than Boxsters.

Second statement is true based on per capita ratios.  Given that 50 of every 1000 Mustang owners got a ticket (makes it a 5% chance a Mustang owner will get busted), and 100 of every 1000 Boxster owners got tagged (that's a 10% chance), then (and here's the sort of), all other things being equal (state/province of ticket, etc), then yes, a Boxster owner is more likely to pay into the general fund.

I think I know where you are going.

Whites commit more crimes but a black is more likely to commit a crime based on population percentage.

Incomplete.

Your state that the automobiles in question "got speeding tickets."

Automobiles cannot get speeding tickets.  Only the drivers of said automobiles can.

Furthermore, your statements...

Now, based on that data, BOTH of the following sentences are true.
1) Last year, more Mustang owners got speeding tickets than Boxster owners.
2) Last year, a Boxster owner was more likely to get a speeding ticket than a Mustang owner.

...are under false presumptions.  We dont know that all of the drivers, in your hypothetical sample, I presume, of the Mustangs or the Boxters owned the vehicles they were driving.  There may be a highly disproportionate number of rental or borrowed vehicles of either type which could skew the data significantly.  Such borrowers/renters could be driving said vehicles in a manner which would be quite different than if they actually owned it.

We also dont know what other vehicles these drivers might own.  It is entirely possible that they were issued speeding tickets while driving another automobile that they own.  Or rented.  Or borrowed.

FURTHERMORE....

I reiterate...you state...

Now, based on that data, BOTH of the following sentences are true.

Yet, you ask again...in your poll forthcoming..

given the above data is correct:

A) Both 1 and 2 are true statements.
B) 1 is correct, but 2 is incorrect.
C) 2 is correct, but 1 is incorrect.
d) neither 1 or 2 is correct.

Based on your criteria, that both of your sentences are true...on a superficial level the obvious answer is A) Both 1 and 2 are true statements.  But this is only because you TOLD US THE CORRECT ANSWER already.

However, I have pointed out that it is easily possible that neither one of your two sentences are correct...and therefore the answer is d) neither 1 or 2 is correct.


EDITED TO ADD:

I dont know what you are trying to get at here...but this is the worst poll I've ever seen.  A poll where it is told what the "correct" answer is.  Isn't a poll about opinions?

Well, unfortunately it was an excerpt from another thread.  and no, it's not about race.  I should have edited it better when I cut & pasted it.  But, thank you for explaining away at least one of the "d" votes.

And I made corrections to eliminate some if not all of your issues.

All things being equal, statement 1 is correct.  Statement 2 is false because the probability is the same. (All things being equal)...

Assuming the owner is the driver...

How many miles does the average Mustang owner drive compared to the average Boxter driver?

How many miles does the average ticketted Mustang owner drive compared to the average ticketted Boxter driver?

Perhaps it could have been worded differently, as in to say "next year a boxster owner is more likely to get a ticket", but it's not really "false".  Insurance companies use data just like this all the time.

Guys, don't overanalyze this.  I know the name of this site should be changed to www.smartass.com, but if something in the data isn't stated, assume it's identical for both cars & their drivers.  So for mileage, assume they both drive.... let's say 12,000 miles a year.  They both live in the same neighborhood, work at the same place, take the same route to and from work every day, don't drive at all on the weekends, take lunch in the company cafeteria, etc.  all identical.

Both are true, given the unit of measurement inherent in each. They are in a certain sense apples and oranges.

No, they use trend data.  If they see the trend increase over time they may raise rates, but the probability remains the same.  You do not have enough information to draw a complete conclusion for the population.  You have to make assumptions.  For the vehicles, the probability is the same.  For the drivers it is different.  Most Mustang owners are younger than Porsche owners.  Younger drivers are more likely to speed.  These factors affect the “odds” of getting a ticket.  What is your null hypothesis for question 2?

Then 1 is true and 2 is false.

As I said, assume everything is identical if it's not stated otherwise.
I am well aware of all the crap that you and the other guys pointed out, I just didn't feel like rambling on for two pages of clarification.  It's an extremely simplistic example, yes.  Thank you.  It's supposed to be.  the point of this was not to get out a graphing calculator and start doing equations.

Jesus Normy, then I guess 1 is true and 2 is false.

Seemed simple to me. Without dissecting every word and inserting a bunch it could be viewed this way, but wait, no it could mean this, I voted [b]A[/b].

But what do I know?

Both statements are factually true!

However, statement 1 is a bit misleading.  It leads the reader to believe that the number of Boxter and Mustang drivers is the same.  This is how marketing works.  Four out of five dentists recomend...

Nope, "more likely" is probability and Normy said all things are equal so they have the same probability.

Two would be true if you said:  Last year, Boxster owners had a higher frequency of receiving speeding tickets in relation to Mustang owners.

Let's say 50% of the total population is white and 20% is black.

Let's say 40% of the total *prison* population is white and 40% is black.

What would that "say?"

Colors? What about color?

[Cliff Claven]

It's a well-known fact that there are far more red boxters produced than red mustangs in any given year.

And since red cars in general (and red sports cars in particular) are stopped and cited far more often for speeding than any other color car then it's not surprising that boxter drivers have a higher chance that they'll get ticketted for speeding simply due to the color of their car!

[/Cliff Claven]