Moonbox

Well you've made that abundantly clear. Gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme. That's an interesting attitude considering how many winters you've spent on EI on the RoC's dime over the years. 🙄

...which in this case, is the RoC. Probably not, but I'm an equal-opportunity critic of subsidizing non-viable business/communities. The government just gave $10B to build a battery plant an hour and a half away from me, and we'll likely never recover that investment. Much like the Ontario government did with solar subsidies over a decade ago, that industry only existed because of subsidies, and it disappeared when they ended. It's dumb.

The gem that keeps delivering. 🤡 You say that right after commenting on mine. 🙄 If you don't want people calling out your incel lifestyle, try going outside sometime. Emoji spam ranting all day, every day, is not how you break that cycle.

Most of what Putin says publicly is bluster and balogna. The problem is that he's been so public and adamant on his demands and his ability to achieve them, that falling short will be a humiliation. The problem for Russia is that the war was a disaster to start. Short of a quick, clean victory, there's no scenario where Russia is better off than before Feb 2022. Their consumer economy is devastated, and their "growth" is entirely based on unsustainable, deficit-financed military spending that adds no value. The worst part about all of this is that whatever territory they do take, they've devastated and can't afford to rebuild. The whole thing has been a fiasco for them. At this point I start to wonder if a stalemate is the goal. Putin can't afford to lose the war, but I'm not sure he can afford to win it either. It was a joke. Even the Kremlin is calling it a war now. The one thing I definitely underestimated when the Russian army faceplanted was the cowed servility of the average Russian peasant. To go two years insisting that this was just "a special military operation" when everyone knew better was a joke in and of itself, but the Russians just sort of went along with it anyway.

Neither can Putin, insisting on Ukraine capitulating territory that Russia doesn't even control (fully or otherwise). Europe will support them, even if Trump does not. I have my doubts about how willing/able Trump would be to cut and run as well, given how most of the Republican Party is firmly on board with aid to Ukraine. It's not a war. It's a special military operation. 😐

Losing at what? 🤣 I saw you uselessly ranting (again) and made fun of you, and that triggered you into more useless emoji spam ranting. There was no debate. You're literally too dumb to debate. Funny, coming from the website's pre-eminent incel. I hope your ant farm keeps you good company. 👍

🥱

"The best way to convince people that you're not butthurt, is spiral out into emoji spam and insist the other guy is getting butthurt. " -CdnFox You weren't making any points, smooth-brain. You were just ranting. 🥱

Me tribe GOOOD. You tribe BAAAAD. -CdnFox

It's funny how often he seems to find/come across these articles from Druthers.ca... That's one way to spend your advertising dollars...I guess. 🤣

Pork barrel politics and subsidies are always appreciated by those getting the money, aren't they? Not sure what you're talking about here, but are we pretending the fishing industry hasn't been heavily subsidized for decades?

You could say that's in spite of, rather than because of. That is, of course, unless you're saying that where you live gets a lot of government money on account of the indigenous pandering. In that case, good for you I guess. It's not so grand for the RoC.

They both keep saying they're open to talks. The conditions they place on those talks (particularly Putin) make that a laugh. It's already disastrous for Russia. Half a million more casualties and two more years of debt-financed military economy for a country that was already spiraling into demographic decline is going to be bad bad bad.

Treaties do? 🤔

No. I'm not putting any more effort into this than you did, copypasting this balogna rant.

🥱 We should probably throw more money at it and try more things that we absolutely know do not work and cannot work.

No doubt something like that - a total sweetheart deal where the money is lent to them for nothing, to buy something we financed, where they'll pay off the loan at guaranteed rates and zero risk of loss. Sounds about right.

Always funny to see you crying foul on this forum. Karen's gonna Karen. 🤷‍♂️

Where's the money coming from? How are these indigenous groups going to come up with the +$10B this 30% stake would be worth? Are we supposing that they have that squirreled away somewhere? 🙄

Yes, but if you're going to quote the IMF's data, why would you dismiss their write-up? The analysis and context they provide is more meaningful than the single data point pulled by a history grad writing for the National Post, wouldn't you think? The actual economists (both at the IMF and domestically) are aware that a single economic data point is meaningless, and they're painfully clear that this is a matter of population growth and immigration, rather than economic outperformance.

I do understand all of that, and I don't even disagree with what you're saying. That doesn't make the article you quote any less of a useless stream-of-consciousness rant in the opinion section of a rag newspaper. The article offers nothing but angry conjecture, supposition and retarded conclusions - chicken soup for the ignorant. Of course you posted it here. 🥱

I use to subscribe to the National Post...10+ years ago. That was back when it did some semblance of journalism and wasn't just a depository of useless, ranting opinion pieces.

Speaking of narratives... "The Canadian economy appears to have achieved a soft landing: inflation has come down almost to target, while a recession has been avoided, with GDP growth cushioned by surging immigration even as per capita income has shrunk." https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2024/07/16/pr24276-canada-imf-exec-board-concludes-2024-art-iv-consult "Fastest growing economy in the G7" sounds great, but the IMF didn't say that. Their economists know to dig a bit deeper and put those numbers in context.

Where did I admit that? 🤔 I'm just acknowledging your expertise, and how 7-10 years of formal study in medicine etc pales in comparison to your rigorous interweb research.

Ser, I think you need to leave this sort of data analysis to our qualified experts. There are 84 pages of rigorously reviewed data here, from the finest graduates of Facebook School of Medicine. Do you even do your own research?