Moonbox

The nature of this sort of conversation is always coloured by hindsight, but that's unavoidable. It's not like I was part of the marketing team that greenlit or put this faceplant together. Doesn't matter if it's new. It was loud and out there before the ad campaign and Bud Lite was always a blue-collar brand. I've said it before elsewhere, but cheap and interchangeable brands don't have the luxury of being able to safely make political statements on highly divisive issues. If the Dallas Cowboys had used Mulvaney as their spokesman, there would have been next to no backlash. The culture warriors would have lived with it. With a cheap beer with hundreds of competitors offering the exact same thing, those culture warriors can loudly repeat their statements and reverse-virtue-signal to one other at no cost.

? That's exactly what I was saying, so thanks for backing me up. ? Victimhood? What!? ? Whatever you want to call me, I'm not demented enough to send messages like these: ???

Not as fun as the deluded clowns saying it was stolen. ?

No, because that's a delusion. You don't know anything about science. ?

I think the brand is toast for the foreseeable future. This was probably the biggest marketing faceplant I've ever witnessed and Bud Lite is a meme now. They aren't shaking this off, I don't think, for years.

I suspect the US would be happy to see us go on military adventures of our own. The fact that we'd have the capability would please them, and that our interests generally align with theirs. As for nukes, the only reason we'd need/want them would be to protect ourselves from the americans, and the only way they could stop us from building them would be to invade us, so why are we even talking about it?

The distinction you're trying to draw here is hilarious. "I'm not telling you that you lost, I'm asking you why you're mad that you lost!" ?

Unless it's just math or computer programming. True, but I can speak to my experience in Waterloo, where probably 10-15% of my program was mainland Chinese students who could barely communicate in English. There was no way they could fairly complete my program with their English skills. Yes, but then these are all publicly funded institutions, so the question of stakeholders should be made. If tuition were going down on account of these foreign students paying 4x tuition, that would be one thing, but we're seeing the opposite, with more foreign students and tuition skyrocketing.

Yeah, you're such a great debater. Winning the fight so handily, you're reduced to petulant DM's: ?

No, because as you say, the trucker protest was moronic and it lasted over a month, vs the 1-2 day BLM protests in Canada. If the trucker protestors had all been arrested on day 3 or 4, you'd have a point, but obviously that wasn't the case. The fossil fuel industry gets billions of dollars every year in subsidies, grants and tax breaks from the federal government...so...yeah. Their coal and diesel motors won't matter when they're dealing with drought, flooding and crop failures, and good trade policy moving forward could/should include tariffs against heavy polluter imports. As you say, there's no point in carbon taxing our industry if we just export our pollution abroad. Rare earth metals aren't rare, they're just expensive to dig up and refine. Known reserves are expected to last over 100 years, and we are already developing REE alternatives in case we somehow don't discover new reserves in that spam. Simply put, we'll be fine.

You literally couldn't have written anything more cluelessly ironic if you tried. ?

There really is a lot to be said about this. It boggles my mind just how expensive university (worse in the US) and how they can't seem to function profitably (or even break-even) without needing to sell degrees to students who can barely even function in the classroom. When I was doing my BBA you needed at least a 87% highschool average just to get in, yet when we were assigned a group project you inevitably ended up with a mainland chinese student who could barely even speak english (and definitely couldn't write it). Simply put, there was no way that these students could complete the curriculum with their communication skills in English, yet there they were at graduation. Let's not even get into how their parents buy them a house here to live in, that sits empty after they graduate.

I never made any assessment about asian women, so I'm not sure what I overstepped. ?

Okay, fair point about that being during the pandemic, but can you not see the inherent problem of a protest against the pandemic measures meant to prevent large groups of people from spreading illness? You really see these as direct parallels, especially in Canada? No, I mean that vehicles and power generation are moving away from fossil fuels whether you like it or not, and when the tech and production methods are scaled/matured, legacy industries relying on them will be caught with their pants down and left behind. Yes, because when their cities sink under the seas, or their rivers dry up, coal won't seem like such a great idea anymore, and we'll be the ones with the means to adapt to a changing climate, not them.

Your views come from the same demented mind that sends messages like this: ???

Of course it works better. Dividing the $2.5B rebate by the overall size of the grocery market ($189B per year, by your numbers) gives us 0.013 (or 1.3%). That this needed to be explained to you is ridiculous. Ignoring the fact that the rebates wouldn't all be spent on groceries (and certainly not on $2.5B in extra groceries in one month, as you absurdly suggested), you now need to explain how poor people are worse off getting 5-10% of their annual grocery bill rebated because of <1.3% food inflation, which was the whole point of the argument.

You can try again if you want. Start here: After somehow derping up and reversing the order of a one-step math equation and then realizing it made no sense, instead of checking the post again and making sure, you shot off your mouth without thinking and pounded out another clueless ramble. ?

Yes, so google the grocery/food market and then divide $2.5B by that, like I already suggested numerous times, you donkey. Show us those estimates you saw, that were totally not made up ?.

but you're not, and you've already said as much: Saying you're neutral when literally every single thing you say is pro-Russia and anti-Ukraine is dumb dumb dumb.

Yeah, gee, you 'got' me. ? Our groceries are expensive, and stupidly so. He's probably right.

You've quoted the wrong person. Don't call me MAGA. ?

Maybe, but then how many of the other protests you referenced were at that scale, happening amidst a contagious public health crisis, and based (mostly) on misinformation and conspiracy theories? The Emergencies Act was a joke, but that was a joke that played out across the local/provincial and federal levels. You'll have to refer me to that, because I can't find anything on it, and even then, so what? You oversimplify. I've long agreed that hobbling ourselves with carbon taxes while importing goods from countries who don't do that is just exporting our pollution, but this is something that could be addressed with proper trade policies. Regardless of your feelings on the issue, we are transitioning to a low-carbon economy, and sooner than you suspect. Part of the Bank of Canada's job is to prepare for and highlight short term and long term risks, and beyond expensive natural disasters and the like, the risk of being left behind on low-carbon economy is real.

It's no question. We don't have to wait and see. Your ramblings don't change that. ?

Please refer to immediately prior post for basic math (no feels involved! ?) My "evidence" doesn't need to go any further beyond showing you how the scale of the rebate itself vs the markets it may effect do not come anywhere close to supporting the oversized impact you're suggesting it does. Do you need someone to run you through the math of $2.5B divided by Canada's GDP, or by the overall food/grocery markets? The only person doing any hand-waving and feels-based economics here is you, but please feel free to correct this with those "estimates" you were telling us about.

You're asking for proof affirming a negative, which is dumb. You're making an absurd claim that is not supported by any math, economics, or anything, except for that you've "seen estimates" (which you didn't/won't share ?). I've already hinted at my math, and if you want to go ahead and do a little Googling, compare $2.5B to the overall Canadian economy in which this money will circulate to get an idea of how inflationary this might be. Heck, even compare it just to the overall food consumption market in Canada, and assume that every single dollar that goes to recipients will be spent on food (which wouldn't be the case). Even then your conclusion doesn't bear out.