Moonbox

Pretty easy to win an election when you murder or disallow any real opposing candidates. 🤡

Gosh, you're right. Herbie mentioned the jug of milk, so that means the debate is all of the sudden only about milk. 🙄 Speaking of 1diots, let's talk milk. You provided a source with a high-end estimate for carbon taxes increasing its cost by 0.9 to 0.95% annually, and only if it received no exclusions whatsoever (which isn't the case). Based on that, we're looking at a <5% increase in the price of milk attributable to carbon taxes since Jan 2019, vs a ~20% overall increase in the price over that time span. As your own source stated, this is one of the food items that would be worst effected by carbon taxes. It's also based on worst-case no-exclusion scenario, which didn't happen. It's also only a fraction of the food budget, with most agriculture receiving far more substantial exclusions. Soo...whoopsie for you again. 🤣

I didn't post anything about dairy. Nobody else posted anything about dairy. That's just your lame pivot after faceplanting again. 🤣

The Governor of the Bank of Canada did, you absolute clown. He understands that inflation refers to final prices, inclusive of taxes paid along the way and by the consumer. CdnFox, as with everything else, obviously does not. It's written by an economics professor. 🤣 A study merely estimating the costs published back in 2018, with the numbers assuming farmers received zero exemptions from carbon taxes. The reality is a large share of farming activity is either fully or partially exempt, so you're quoting a worthless and totally irrelevant number. Here's the very next sentence from the quote you're lifting: "The second scenario assumes agriculture and government services sectors are exempt from carbon taxes. The increase in food prices was estimated to be 0.24% per year on average, which is significantly smaller than in the first scenario." You didn't include that, because (if I can borrow a phrase from you) you are A LIAR! 🤣 Thanks for the entertainment. A 3-for-1 faceplant isn't your best work, but it's still pretty funny.

You're the one who never actually has any information to offer. You love making specific claims, but can't run away and change the subject fast enough when pressed for cites. You'll spend pages and pages arguing about why you won't provide your sources, instead of just...posting them. 🙄 At any rate, here are two sources that took 30 seconds to find, far less than however long it took you to write out your little tantrum above: Canada's price on carbon only contributes 0.15 percentage points to inflation, Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem reiterated on Thursday. (this is a per-year figure) https://www.ctvnews.ca/climate-and-environment/carbon-pricing-accounts-for-0-15-percentage-points-of-inflation-boc-governor-says-1.6554273 UCalgary economics professor Trevor Tombe, who wrote the study alongside public policy and economics associate professor Jennifer Winter, says the facts reveal fairly minimal effects for most products from the carbon tax. “All in, we estimate that the changes in carbon taxes affect consumer prices today by only 0.6 per cent and so that’s how much things would get cheaper by if we were to eliminate the carbon taxes completely,” Tombe said. https://calgary.citynews.ca/2023/12/05/ucalgary-carbon-tax-affordability-study/ 🤡🤡🤡

I have often referred to the Russians as "servile donkey-people". Does this count? 🥺

Let's skip the part where you first addressed me in this thread rather than the other way around, but then bizarrely claimed I'm following you around. 🤡 Let's focus instead on the actual published figures that real economists and the governor of the BoC are using that prove how clueless you are, and how you predictably reverted to boring copypasta insults and jackassing as soon as you were confronted with hard facts.

It's not the things you don't know that make you look like a clueless fool. It's the things you think you know, but that just ain't so. 😆 Based on your dopey example, it's clear you don't understand what tax stacking even means. Nobody anywhere, ever argued that vendors don't pass carbon taxes on to consumers. It's just not being multiplied up the chain for wildly outsized effect like your ridiculously suggest. All of your clueless bullshitting on this topic is hilariously underlined by the fact that we have published bottom-line numbers from the BoC for overall carbon-tax related inflation (0.15% per year), as well as broad studies across markets all concluding the same things. The impact of carbon taxes on inflation is marginal, and was practically irrelevant to the big spike we saw in 2022/2023.

Yes, but they're applied proportionally to their carbon-related inputs. They don't multiply and snowball on top of each other like CdnFox fantasy-math would have us believe. You did make one good point here, despite yourself: This what happened in Ontario after the Wynne/McGuinty Liberals cataclysmically botched their Green Energy plan. Ontario is a wasteland for the provincial Liberals now, and will likely remain that way for another 2-3 elections at least. ...and yet I'm paid more and more each year to understand, research and advise on this sort of stuff for a living. My growing list of clients fortunately counts for more than the clueless bullshitting of a no-life forum warrior. 🥱

Yes, but this sort of basic math and common sense goes counter to the narrative, so why would you bother using it?

What he's saying (I think) is that things are reasonably good in Europe. They aren't emigrating en masse. We are taking Ukrainian refugees, but we're not getting many Danish or Norwegians applying, are we?

The quote function is highly inconvenient for when you're making up what other people say to argue against points they never made, while in the same breath reflexively calling them liars. 🤡

That's literally what I just got done saying... What about my last post gave you any indication whatsoever that's what I'm telling people to do? I just got done encouraging the opposite...🙄

These are the sorts of batshit thoughts I suppose someone might have if they spent 16 hours a day alone at their computer fighting on an internet forum like you do. Fortunately for reality (and my ability to sleep at night 🙄), insisting and insisting on something doesn't make it true.

I can predict your behavior too. 🤣 You'll start a debate, get into an argument, make up and mischaracterize something someone says, tell them they're lying when they point that out, then squawk and carry on about muffins, little guys and project about fragile egos. You've been doing it all day. You'll do it tomorrow. You'll do it 16 hours a day, multiple people will call you out for it, and you'll argue as long as somebody is paying attention to you. 🤡

No, you're too stupid to argue actual points people are making (or maybe you don't understand them) so you make up something ridiculous to argue against instead. We should keep a tally of how many different members (both old and new) have pointed this out to you. Nobody argues with themself like CdnFox can. Nobody wins as many arguments against themself than him. 🤣

It's funny watching you say stuff like this, because nobody on this forum is less capable of introspection or self-awareness than you. 🤡

Yes, but you still don't understand why they're selling, and at what prices. A good investor cashes out when their investment is being overvalued. Amazon is trading at 60x it's earnings right now and grossly overvalued. Jeff Bezos will happily take advantage. META is selling at 32x earnings. Mark Zuckerberg will do the same. JP Morgan is at an all-time high as well, so Mr. Dimon will cash out as well. There is no mystery here. This is the oldest investing dynamic in the book. Markets go up, people hop on the bandwagon, which makes it go up more, which gets more people on the bandwagon. Eventually, the big money and the smart money sees it's unsustainable and ridiculous, sells ahead of everyone else, and the prices start to go down. This triggers a reverse bandwagon, with silly emotional investors panicking and selling, driving prices down, making more people panic sell, driving prices down further and faster. This is where the Warren Buffets step in and starts buying, and thanks the average investor for being a rube. That's what he's done lately. That's what he says he's been doing. That's what he's been doing his whole career.

I'm not sure who you're talking about (the comic?). These terms of left/right/progressive/conservative etc, or "proponents of identity politics" don't mean a heck of a lot either. I can probably agree the "proponents of identity politics" have no humor in them, but that goes for those from the Right as well, doesn't it?

I said Americans died at double the rate of Canadians (actually closer to 2.5x). We had roughly 51,000 dead, and the Americans had 1,200,000. If you'd have bothered looking, you'd have seen the difference. You didn't have to be good at math. We didn't fare better because our health care system was better either. Ours is also shit. The difference was that we didn't have Orange Man undermining trust in our health officials at every opportunity with retarded, self-serving lies and batshit conspiracy theories. Whatever standard you figure you hold Justin to is irrelevant. Neither of us can stand the guy and both agree he couldn't be gone sooner. The difference between us, I think, is that I don't think blind anger is worth much, and being "opposed" to Trudeau (or the "Left") isn't enough to make me automatically trust what someone is saying.

I think in this case, you opinion is based on amplifying whatever good he may have done (and there was some) while blissfully ignoring all of the truly awful (of which there was much more). More than a million Americans died to COVID, more than double the rate they died here, and much of that can be blamed on the lies, mistrust and conspiracy theories Donald Trump promoted to his dumb-dumb rabble. The contradiction I'm trying to draw for you here is that you abhor Trudeau's lies and deceit (which is fine) but then somehow feel Trump's are acceptable. It makes absolutely no sense.

Yes, but then we don't really need papa government getting involved in that, do we? 🫡

True enough, but but that's the perspective and self-awareness that the average culture warrior (of both sides) seems to lack. It's self-absorbed and ignorant snowflakes arguing just raging and yelling at each other, yes.

Most things do, or should, have limits. That's why Section 1 of the Charter is Section 1. As the "tolerance level" for rudeness, I'd say it should be pretty high when it comes to regulation, law etc. Having hurt feelings, being offended etc demands far too much attention these days. People need to get over themselves.

So what? Putin can't use his.