Moonbox

Guys...it's 2024. There are still people on this forum that don't have Wastecanman on ignore?

Yes, but throwing one strike doesn't make you a good bowler if your first 999 tries were gutter-balls.

How do I respond, without looking at it? I'd say this is one of the dumber things you've said on this forum, but unfortunately it's just you in fine form. 🫠

Because you quoted me, you clown. They're universal human principles, which are neither unique nor distinguishing features of Christian tradition. They're equally applicable to Buddhists, Taoists, Confuscians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and probably animist shamans living in deep forgotten jungles. This makes your comment banal, and your logic (as usual) utter garbage. 🤡

Your reasoning is banal. Every culture and religion has "some good ideas". The ones you brought up are universal and shared everywhere in the world, so bringing them up was a another useless thought from a useless mind. 🥱

Right. Let's check your reasoning here: Which religion or culture do you figure promotes the opposite? Are Islam or Buddhism all about disrespecting your elders, hating your neighbor and lying/murdering as much as you can? Yeesh, indeed. 🤡

It's fascinating to me how you rationalize this. Rather than it being the rejection of religious influence and control over free thinking that led to the West's rapid advancements, you've somehow determined that it was the institutions and traditions of book burning, heretic branding and enforced dogma that created this fountain of innovation.

What's even more important to understand is that this only became true after they started embracing humanism and secular intellectualism, corresponding with a steady decline in the Churches' power and influence over its people.

If you're trying to convince people you're not spazzing out, maybe don't respond to one-liners with multi-paragraph rants dragging up your past traumas on this forum. Nobody makes rope-a-dope easier than you. 🤣👌

Spazz-posting emojis and LOLCAPS, and then randomly bringing up your baggage from previous threads doesn't demonstrate the clarity of thought you seem to imagine it does. 🙃

Inarticulate, yes. If you understood what the word meant, your response wouldn't have been another multi-paragraph nothing-rant of limp insults. 🫠

As you spiral downwards and furiously pound out inarticulate rambles like the one above on your keyboard? I'd tell you to stop hitting yourself, but you'd just tell me I'm LYING. 😆👌

You insisting on me lying looks pretty dumb when what your invented argument is contrasted side-by-side with my actual argument. I'm cool leaving those quotes there. That's because you have nothing to offer as response but limp jackassing, which is your standard coping mechanism for being confronted with facts and numbers. Thanks for explicitly confirming it. 😆👌

They were. This isn't a matter of opinion. Nobody was ever even close to as bad as Trudeau...until we got another Trudeau.

Nope. That's just you making up what you want to argue against again. 🤡 I mean, I literally just said: This is probably the 4th time I've reiterated this point, and you're still insisting that I'm saying something else. That's all you're really capable of on this forum. You're too foolish and helpless to argue against anything but the things you make up in your head. Look at big boy Fox, bravely arguing with himself...AGAIN! 🤣 No, you're absolutely clueless. MILK production costs consist mostly of raising cattle, feeding cattle, milking cattle. Almost none of that is taxed, and what little that is makes up a tiny percentage of the overall cost of milk in your grocery store (things like pasteurization, bottling, transportation etc). The overwhelming majority of emissions generated by MILK production is exempted, including almost everything on the farm beyond heating the barn when it's cold. That's why the BoC has quoted the impract of carbon taxes on food prices to be negligible. That's why the economists have as well. That's why CdNFox has nothing but his usual hand-waving bologna to offer us in terms of hard numbers.

No, I mean the worst PM we ever had, until his son became PM. I mean the PM who took us from virtually no debt, to drowning in debt, and who was our worst fiscal manager ever...until his dopey son became PM.

Nobody argued it doesn't pay any carbon taxes. This is just you arguing with yourself...again. The reality, however, is that most of the industry's expenses and emissions are not taxed. Most of it is exempt and never pays a dime. Scenario 1 never happened, so it only applies in your fantasy. Considering what's actually being taxed is a tiny portion of their overall expenses, you're stacking tiny percentages on tiny percentages, to equal up to tiny percentages, which is what bears out in the present day according to any credible source. According to Fox-math, however, pleading and waving your hands around is more reliable than what published economists and the Bank of Canada are saying. 🫠

Yes, we can see what you're doing here. It's right there. You're making shit up again carrying on like a clown. and yet you're wrong, and still cluelessly bullshitting, as usual. (lifted from the power point presentation of the Canadian Agriculture Federation's annual general meeting, 2019). From the dairy farmers of Canada, in their submission to the Senate in 2018: "DFC also notes with appreciation that the government has excluded greenhouse gases of a biological nature from their pricing scheme. " Whoopsy, not true. As usual, you're just making shit up, or have no idea what you're talking about, but it's probably both.

You can tell people whatever you like, but when it's that clueless it counts for nothing. Scenario 1 doesn't really apply to anything, because it assumes there are no exemptions for farmers. The dairy industry is at least +80% exempt from carbon taxes. I've already told you that. The difference is that what I'm telling you is actually real. 🤡

What about just the "Left". OP used it 15 times.

It's a pretty good reason. Justin Trudeau is a clown, and it would be hard to name a PM who's done a worse job than him in Canada's history. The only one that might compete shares his last name.

The report was from 2018, and estimated cost impacts of carbon taxes based on two scenarios: Scenario 1 There being no exemptions whatsoever to carbon pricing. This is the scenario you chose and quoted with your number, which was 2.24% for milk. This scenario never came to be. Scenario 2 The agriculture sector was exempt, in which case food prices would only go up 0.17-0.27%. This is the scenario you ignored, and it's also the scenario closest to reality, because most agriculture activity is exempt. These are also the sorts of numbers the economists and the Bank of Canada are providing. As for bullshitting, it's hardly the report's fault. It didn't know what would happen 6 years ago. The bullshitting was all you, spinning your wheels and carrying on like a clown, quoting numbers from scenarios that you knew never came to pass (lying). 🤡

Speaking of the politicization of language...

The only thing you "corrected" me on was my not realizing the thread was (apparently) just about milk. Everything else has been your usual bullshitting and jackass distraction. The only actual numbers you provided were from a 2018 study that do more to prove you wrong (again) than anything. Scurry away little muppet. We know you don't like talking facts, cites, or numbers. Thanks for confirming it again, whether you mean to or not. 🙄

4th? Maybe by some strictly technical measure, immediately after German/Japanese disarmament and immediately before our own. I don't think it really matters. The fact is that our military has been left to rot, and whatever you want to say, there's value in having one.