
Originally Posted by
Tiaexz
That is being rather pedantic though, he is evidently meaning relative to the numbers in the United States.
Using your own source:
United States of America (1998) 11802
Now let's compare it to the quoted, lets take the highest one.
UK: 45 (1999)
11802 versus 45.
Why "zero" is incorrect, he is simply using the literary device to insinuate that it is effectively 'nothing'/'zero' in comparison to the United States to make forth his point and considering the difference, I feel there should be some fair usage. It isn't as if the United States number was 68, then that would be raising eyebrows at his use of that particular literary device.
Bookmarks