No; just because there is a correlation does not prove causation.
The correlation says that as the amount of rainfall increases, the amount of oranges produced increases as well. It does not state what causes it.
<em>Look</em><em> </em><em>at</em><em> </em><em>the</em><em> </em><em>attached</em><em> </em><em>picture</em><em>⤴</em>
<em>Hope</em><em> </em><em>this</em><em> </em><em>will</em><em> </em><em>help</em><em> </em><em>u</em><em>.</em><em>.</em><em>.</em>
He makes it up by 1/3=.333%=$75*1.333=$99.98
he then discounts it by 20%=1/5=99.98/5=$19.99
If the original profit is $99.98-$75=$24.98
and then discounted by $19.99
it would be $24.98-$19.99
=
$4.99