{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01870748299319728, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.718446601941747, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comment on the response from Graham Wright.

In the short space of a response to Mr Wright’s letter, it is impossible to do justice to the raft of issues that he raises. At the outset, his opening remarks give cause for concern. He appears to believe that all analysts start from a position of either opposition to, or support for, private health insurance subsidies. I would describe such positions as end points rather than starting points, with constructive debate concentrating upon the differences in value judgements and empirical evidence that lead to these different end points.