Moonbox

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.

Where does it say "internal"? Where does it say, "Caused by Trudeau?" Here it is again, in case you're still confused about what they were talking about: b. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. Except 50% to global factors, plus another 35% to supply challenges = 85%. Your math does not check out. 🙃

and then: b. Supply challenges that largely reflect developments at the global level account for another 35% of the rise in inflation. Right there, in plain English! 🤣 50+35 = 85% of inflation accounted for!

No, I mean: 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. 50% global/foreign factors + 35% to supply challenges = 85% of inflation accounted for.

Dear @I am Groot, We regret to inform you that your "conservative" membership card has been revoked for the following reason(s): - Having nuanced opinions on different subjects - Not approving of Orange-Man, his incoherent tantrums, his conspiracy-peddling and his victim-playing. As a result, you are hereby declared a Marxist/socialist, woke Trudeau-lover. Good luck on the other side of the Wall. 🫡 Sincerely, -MAGA Anyone else see the contradiction here? 🙄

I'm saying that these words mean exactly what they say: 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. 50% global/foreign factors + 35% to supply challenges = 85% of inflation accounted for. Your bozo claim that Trudeau was responsible for over half therefore makes absolutely no sense, and it's just more of your make-believe bullshitting. 🙃

You melted your own brain doing desperate mental gymnastics to make these quotes mean something that doesn't so obviously torpedo your clueless bullshitting. It's definitely not complicated, and it's definitely not saying what you pretend it does. 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. I don't see any mention of "internal but reflecting world issues" there. That was Fox-believe fantasy. Those two quotes cannot be true alongside your claim. Trudeau can't have been responsible for over 50% of the inflation spike we experienced, when we already have 85% specifically accounted for.

Ah, a "student of history" I see. You're talking about that wonderfully myopic faction in the US that tried to ignore naked aggression and pretend they were just "regional problems", as they predictably became continent spanning problems and then global problems, all the way up until they rolled on to their doorstep. 🙄 Yeah big-brain Putin faceplanted his peasant army into an impoverished nation 1/4 of Russia's population, in an invasion that was expected to take a few week, that has now gone 2 years and for which he has almost nothing to show. "ChEcKmAtE!" 🙃

That's his automated response when someone says offers a reality-check on his (often banal) musings.

He does, but he's too belligerently stupid to back down. Supply challenges like Russia's invasion of Ukraine, China's zero-COVID lockdowns and the 2 year backup at the Port of Lost Angeles: Trudeau's fault. That makes so much sense. 🤣 It's both pathetic and hilarious that you think this is a compelling reasoning. Everything CdnFox thinks he knows about economics, summed up in two sentences profoundly stupid sentences.

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. https://www.scotiabank.com/ca/en/about/economics/economics-publications/post.other-publications.inflation-reports.causes-of-inflation--december-5--2022.html

I'm okay just letting your spastic responses here speak for themselves. 🙃

None of which you can or will reference saying what you pretend they do. The BOC and bank reports may say a lot of things, but they don't line up with CdnFox's low-IQ hot-takes and interpretations. 🤡 No muppet, you did not. Here is how that conversation actually went: I posted it, because you specifically claimed that Scotiabank backed up your retarded claims, when I'd already read what they had to say for work and knew they said the opposite. You did your usual jackassing about why you wouldn't provide your sources, so I spent 30 seconds to put you out of your misery. 🥱