Nope, I don't know how you made that up, I guess you have a pretty wild imagination and give a whole new meaning to the words of the english language OR you have absolutely no idea of economics so I guess you are kind of forgiven.
Which part of: "The idea that Sweden fought in Germany to a substantialy degree on French money and was, in that sense, France's mercenary, is perfectly correct."- makes you think that Sweden's campaign in germany was self-funded? Btw have you also missed the part that says: "...and an even larger porportion of the specifically military section of the budget"- so let's fairly say 1/3rd of it and in reality almost half of the budget..
I'm not going to argue anymore, you either have problems understanding english or you (most probably) deliberately trying to defend a lost argument. I'll leave the decision to the fellow forumites.
With respect, Prussia.
Starting a discussion and then storming out when a disagreement happens is pretty lame. And you are surprisingly confident in your source considering you have most likely not even read the book. Personally I trust the info the devs have already posted in the thread more than the book you are referring to. Further more, I've been reading up on the treaty of Bärwalde that initiated the French subsidises to Sweden. 400 000 thaler every year for five years. Sweden's time in the war lasted for 17 years. So the numbers of the book may very well be true, but they seem to focus on only the first stages of the war.
And don't sign your posts "with respect", you are clearly not respectful.