Moonbox

I did too, first time i read that term. It was (IIRC) from a Globeandmail article criticizing Trudeau’s nothing-speak, and it was perfect.

You made that up. They didn't say that anywhere. If they did, you could quote it. As usual, you cannot, so you won't. Repeating it in the hope that it somehow becomes real isn't how this works. b. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. "developments at the global level" only means "internal" in clownworld.

An uninformed opinion is worth less than used toilet paper, and arguing that it's "valid" is just snowflake entitled bullshit. There are lots of topics you can inform yourself on sufficiently to be able to discuss them with some casual research. At the same time, there are also lots for which you simply cannot. Having the perspective and humility to know the difference is the most important kind of open-mindedness you could have. A bored online Karen dOiNg hEr oWn reSeARch at home isn't informing herself when she decides that she knows better than the licensed doctors who spent 10+ years studying medicine when it comes to COVID or the vaccines. Her opinion is worth about as much as the fat armchair general who never left his mom's basement trying to tell you about infantry combat tactics.

I wonder what the consequences are for this. He'll lose the next election, and Freeland will go down with him, but surely it should be more than just a public recrimination and stern finger-wag... I had zero sympathy for the Truckers and their protest (particularly at the Ambassador Bridge), but it was retarded that it needed the Emergencies Act to remove them.

Except...you completely made that up. a. Around 50% of the increase in inflation observed since the end of 2019 can be ascribed to global or foreign factors. These include US inflation, commodity prices and movements in the exchange rate. b. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. It's 50 + 35 because it says it is. The report never even uses the words external or internal, and your conclusion that: Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level = exclusively internal supply issues is the sort of autistic mental alchemy you're trying to peddle to us here. 🤣

You do this - every. single. time- declare victory for yourself despite the fact that (according to you) it means that the other guy won. 🤡 No you donkey, that was your argument. I kept posting and reposting this: a. Around 50% of the increase in inflation observed since the end of 2019 can be ascribed to global or foreign factors. These include US inflation, commodity prices and movements in the exchange rate. b. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. and then I kept adding up 50 + 35 = 85% for you. If 85% of inflation is accounted for by global or foreign factors, and then another 35% is accounted for by supply challenges, then Justin can't have been responsible for over half of it, as you stupidly claimed. In summary, not only did you get caught cluelessly bullshitting, but you so thoroughly confused yourself with your mental gymnastics that you ended up disagreeing with your own point and arguing with yourself. That's magnificent.

Try what? Do what? These are bromidic marshmallows - truisms that don't mean anything. Be less lazy? Be smarter and make more intelligent choices? Who's advocating for the opposite?

When you complained it took me 5 days to respond (it was a weekend, but whatever), it evidently never crossed your mind that I left my home and was living offline. It literally was proving my point, especially the paragraph that came right after it. Anyone can scroll up and see Scotiabank's quotes and compare them to your mental gymnastics. It's not surprising why none of the actual quotes ever remotely resemble what you're saying. 😆

There's nothing tautological about it. I said you were being really vague and I asked you some specific questions, and you ignored them and responded with more vagueness. This isn't clarification. It's not precise or objective. Be specific. Give us an example of something you think needs to change, and even one suggestion of how we could improve on it.

Tell me you spend all day every day arguing on the internet without telling me. LOL. I was out and doing things this weekend. Copy-pasting quotes to point out your bullshitting and make-believe wasn't a priority. Sorry? 😆 No they didn't. You just made that up. It didn't say that anywhere in the report. This is what it said: 3. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. It doesn't say "supply chain and other issues", nor does it connect CERB or transfer payments to supply challenges anywhere in that report. If it did, you could provide a quote, but you're lying, so you won't. 🙃

Natanyahu basically said "From the River to the Sea" himself, so now he's not only fantastically unpopular at home, but Israel's allies are done with him as well. His government isn't going to survive, and even if it defies probability and does, it will have to bow to Western pressure when applied. These are the sorts of checks and balances that exist in Israel, but do not in Gaza/Palestine, where the crazies do what they please. This is absolute nonsense. A serial rapist/murderer isn't the same as a bootlegger, so this is a pretty goofy analogy. Comparing Israeli to Gazan leadership, only one of them deliberately goes out of its way to get its own people killed. Somehow that's not registering for you. 😑 "Broader conditions" is a meaningless platitude, and your view of the Palestinians is infantilizing. You imply/suggest that all of their bad choices over the years (particularly Oct 7th) have been causally determined by Israel's actions, but never the other way around. That's crap. Germany didn't really make peace with anyone though, did they? They let the worst crazies take control, then they got pounded into dust and lost most of their military-aged male population. They spent the next 50 years under military occupation. Miraculously, the next generation didn't grow up to be terrorists and they somehow learned that living by the sword means dying by the sword, and that there was a better way.

Completely made up nonsense, coming from nowhere but Fox's make-believe. 🥱 That isn't even remotely what my quote said. This is how we know that on top of being a belligerent and clueless muppet, you're also blatantly dishonest. How you warped the quote below into the quote above is...bananas. "While the impact of these programs on the output gap is large, the empirical impact of the output gap on inflation is modest, leading us to estimate that government transfers account for around 0.45 percentage points of the rise in inflation we have observed since the end of 2019."

You can disagree all you want, but "Nothing is certain except for uncertainty" is a pretty silly thing to disagree with. I don't really disagree with a lot of your thoughts and concerns, but they're vague and open-ended, so how certain are you, really? How can you say that "anyone with an objective view of reality" has to agree with you, if you're not really even being specific about your warnings? Is the US going to collapse, or just lose its global hegemony? Are we talking about Pax Americana and the West at large? Who's going to supplant them? When and how is this going to happen? If you can't answer those questions with certainty, can you not then accept there's a lot of...uncertainty?

My claim is that it means exactly what is says: 3. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. Turning that into: is a fantasy adventure. You've turned it into what you need it to mean in order to shelter yourself from the realization that you got caught bullshitting...again.

3. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. Where does this say anything about Trudeau's spending on pandemic relief? Hold on, you mention it yourself: followed by: "While the impact of these programs on the output gap is large, the empirical impact of the output gap on inflation is modest, leading us to estimate that government transfers account for around 0.45 percentage points of the rise in inflation we have observed since the end of 2019." https://www.scotiabank.com/ca/en/about/economics/economics-publications/post.other-publications.inflation-reports.causes-of-inflation--december-5--2022.html If inflation in 2022 ended up ~4.5% higher than the BoC's target rate, and government transfers only account for 0.45% of that...oof buddy. That's less than 10%. So here we go now: 50% to global factors 35% to supply challenges 10% to program spending (go ahead and blame that on Trudeau) = 95% I'm afraid Scotiabank's math makes that impossible, but Fox-believe fantasy math works different it seems. 😆

Is that what you've always known? Did you always know that they'd have stalled out after a few months, and that they wouldn't have advanced for approaching 2 years against a country with less than 1/4 of Russia's population and wealth? I don't think you did. 🙃

No muppet. That was from Scotiabank at the end of 2022, and it was the title of their press release. https://www.scotiabank.com/ca/en/about/economics/economics-publications/post.other-publications.inflation-reports.causes-of-inflation--december-5--2022.html and then, after that, subtract another 35% - what do you have left? 1. Canadian inflation: mostly temporary and mostly foreign 2. Around 50% of the increase in inflation observed since the end of 2019 can be ascribed to global or foreign factors. These include US inflation, commodity prices and movements in the exchange rate. 3. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. 4. Well over half of the increase in inflation observed in Canada reflects global factors and supply challenges 5. Purely domestic factors account for a small, but important, share of inflation. all of these together, according to CdnFox fantasy-logic, means Trudeau was responsible for over 50% of inflation. 🤡👍

1. Canadian inflation: mostly temporary and mostly foreign 2. Around 50% of the increase in inflation observed since the end of 2019 can be ascribed to global or foreign factors. These include US inflation, commodity prices and movements in the exchange rate. 3. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. 4. Well over half of the increase in inflation observed in Canada reflects global factors and supply challenges 5. Purely domestic factors account for a small, but important, share of inflation. The above quotes are "word for word", the same thing as your claim: a) Only 50% is "external". b) Justin is responsible for over 50% of inflation. Thanks for summing up your clownworld reasoning so perfectly. 😆👌

Etc includes most of what he talks about now. He's one of the easiest and best examples of an online personality just repeating views back to people. He knows who is audience is and the sorts of things they're feeling and talking about, so he goes and pretends to lead them from the front of the pack by packaging it into some pseudo-intellectual gobbledygook.

and Jordan Peterson has a big following because he tells incels and other angry mooks exactly what they want to hear on topics that he doesn't really know anything about. He's as much a performer and entertainer as anyone.

No, they've already explained it. You said he has 7.5 million followers/subscribers, and that should tell us something. What exactly, is unclear, but if it does than the fact that Barack Obama, or Taylor Swift have +100M and would disagree with everything Jordan Peterson has to say, that should tell you something as well. Like that, and like vaccines, Russian and Ukrainian geo-politics, animal biology, economics etc... The majority of his time now is spent bullshitting about things he doesn't know anything about or have any training for, and on which he's no more knowledgeable than the average rube that follows him.

Oh wow. That's so interesting. I've never heard this before. This is the sort of rigorously skientific argument that we needed all along. Debate settled.

Correct. You said that. Nobody else did, and it's made-up nonsense. What top economists are saying: 1. Canadian inflation: mostly temporary and mostly foreign 2. Around 50% of the increase in inflation observed since the end of 2019 can be ascribed to global or foreign factors. These include US inflation, commodity prices and movements in the exchange rate. 3. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. 4. Well over half of the increase in inflation observed in Canada reflects global factors and supply challenges 5. Purely domestic factors account for a small, but important, share of inflation. From these 5 quotes, you're absurdly concluding: a) Only 50% is "external". b) Justin is responsible for over 50% of inflation. Got it! 😆👌

You're right. It's not complex. You're just making it up. What you're saying above doesn't even remotely resemble what the bank economists said below: a. Around 50% of the increase in inflation observed since the end of 2019 can be ascribed to global or foreign factors. These include US inflation, commodity prices and movements in the exchange rate. b. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation.

Not automatically, but when they say they "largely reflect developments at the global level" , it takes some clownworld logic to conclude that means "not global". 🤣 No they didn't. They provided examples of things they included in the first 50% of attributable causes for inflation: a. Around 50% of the increase in inflation observed since the end of 2019 can be ascribed to global or foreign factors. These include US inflation, commodity prices and movements in the exchange rate. Curiously missing from that list? Global supply chain issues. That merited its own entry: b. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation.