"Wokeness" Has Replaced Socialism as the Great Conservative Bogeyman

[impartialobserver]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

Of course it doesn't make sense. It doesn't have to make sense because it's not the truth. It's just something that a leftist said, Einstein. 

Maybe in your world. it is the conservatives in my world that almost universally claim that life was in all ways better in the past than it was today. 

[WestCanMan]

Just now, impartialobserver said:

Maybe in your world. it is the conservatives in my world that almost universally claim that life was in all ways better in the past than it was today. 

Life was better in 2019 than it was today, by far.

If you don't buy the groceries, pay the hydro bill, pay the gas bill, pay the mtg, put gas in your car, etc, then you wouldn't notice. 

[impartialobserver]

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Life was better in 2019 than it was today, by far.

If you don't buy the groceries, pay the hydro bill, pay the gas bill, pay the mtg, put gas in your car, etc, then you wouldn't notice. 

And I do.. I do not think life is terrible today. It is much the same. My cost of living is not that much higher today than it was then. Yes, it is higher but I have also seen a significant pay increase (not due to COVID..). 

So would you agree with most Conservatives that life was better in every single way in 1995 than it is today? Yes or no will suffice. 

Edited April 7 by impartialobserver

[WestCanMan]

Just now, impartialobserver said:

And I do.. I do not think life is terrible today. It is much the same. My cost of living is not that much higher today than it was then. 

My cost of living is far higher. I pay twice as much for gas. The amount of principal I pay down on my mtg every month went down by over $2,000/mo. My monthly natural gas bill is way up. 

It's not just the expenses that suck. It sucks to live in this country now, knowing what a bunch of lowlifes my fellow Canadians are. 

As a young man I would have fought to defend this country, now I don't care about my fellow Canadians at all. 

[impartialobserver]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

My cost of living is far higher. I pay twice as much for gas. The amount of principal I pay down on my mtg every month went down by over $2,000/mo. My monthly natural gas bill is way up. 

It's not just the expenses that suck. It sucks to live in this country now, knowing what a bunch of lowlifes my fellow Canadians are. 

As a young man I would have fought to defend this country, now I don't care about my fellow Canadians at all. 

Gas prices do suck. Have a 40 mile one way commute from home to work. Just not sure how my complaining changes them now. 

[CdnFox]

45 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Gas prices do suck. Have a 40 mile one way commute from home to work. Just not sure how my complaining changes them now. 

It would if you would complain enough to the gov't to kill carbon taxes and reduce the price. They have more headroom than the oil companies right now.

[impartialobserver]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It would if you would complain enough to the gov't to kill carbon taxes and reduce the price. They have more headroom than the oil companies right now.

So if I was to go to the pump right now and start screaming about prices, I can reliably see a price decrease instantly or at worst in the next hour?

By complaining enough.. how many times is enough... 10, 20, 50 times? Am I assured that all of this complaining will in fact cause a price decrease in and of itself.. no other factors? 

 

Edited April 8 by impartialobserver

[CdnFox]

16 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

So if I was to go to the pump right now and start screaming about prices, I can reliably see a price decrease instantly or at worst in the next hour?

Sure !! - take a gun point it at the attendant and you can probably get your gas for free!!!! Because yelling at the gas station is clearly EXACTLY What i mean!!!

Why do left wing nutbars always insist on reducio ad absurdum? Most people grow out of that by age 7.

 

16 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

By complaining enough.. how many times is enough... 10, 20, 50 times?

Enough = the number of times they say no +1.

16 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Am I assured that all of this complaining will in fact cause a price decrease in and of itself.. no other factors? 

Oh absolutely - its guaranteed for sure - go gett'em big guy!!!!

God its' amazing you can figure out how to even pump gas.

Now if you're finished being dumber than the gasoline you want to buy - maybe get serious and do your job as a citizen in a democracy and push for change if you don't like it.  That's what living in a democracy is all about

[Aristides]

In the GVRD, 38% of the price of a litre of gas is tax, and that was before the latest increase on April 1. More than oil company and retail profit margins combined.

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, Aristides said:

In the GVRD, 38% of the price of a litre of gas is tax, and that was before the latest increase on April 1. More than oil company and retail profit margins combined.

Exactly. And that's not including the effect the carbon price has on extracton and delivery of gas which is hidden in the price.

Gov'ts could do a hell of a lot about gas prices - if they gave a crap about people. The current ones don't seem to

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

Gas prices do suck. Have a 40 mile one way commute from home to work. Just not sure how my complaining changes them now. 

The gov't is aware of how many people are on social media saying that they suck or saying "It's to save the planet, stupid!" 

If they're not it's because they're not worried about losing the next election because it's in the tank. 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

The gov't is aware of how many people are on social media saying that they suck or saying "It's to save the planet, stupid!" 

If they're not it's because they're not worried about losing the next election because it's in the tank. 

I don't think they care much about the kids on social media.

They care about the fact that there's still a lot of people who support the tax and for reaasons i can't fathom think it makes some positive difference to the world.

It reminds me of those self flagellationist of the past that think that if they whip themselves to atone for their sins god will stop whatever evil they think is happening.  It's like "There's a really really bad ice storm!!!  God is displeased! TAX ME HARDER!!!!"

if we want change we have to speak louder than they do.  And that may even mean speaking at the next election for a new party that won't pull that kind of crap.

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, Mako said:

Sorry if all that reading made your brain hurt.

YOU SHOULD be sorry that your cites are a complete bust and you're too lazy to quote what you believe will back your claims.

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

Gas prices do suck. Have a 40 mile one way commute from home to work. Just not sure how my complaining changes them now. 

I used to drive 110 miles to work a couple of times a month in 2020, but I have a hybrid which got 50 mpg on that round trip so fuel prices were not that important. Plus getting gas in Orange County was significantly cheaper than San Diego.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Exactly. And that's not including the effect the carbon price has on extracton and delivery of gas which is hidden in the price.

Gov'ts could do a hell of a lot about gas prices - if they gave a crap about people. The current ones don't seem to

YOU could do a hell of a lot about gas prices by driving an EFFICIENT vehicle. The motivation to do so is ONE REASON the gas taxes are so high.

Of course we know that conservatives care only about today, and don't give a shit about climate change. Canadians are probably looking forward to warmer weather. LMAO.

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

YOU could do a hell of a lot about gas prices by driving an EFFICIENT vehicle.

Ahhh no.  I can do  a lot about consumption. Regardless of the vehicle i choose to drive gas prices will remain the same.  Sorry - you don't seem to understand how "price" works.

So no matter what i do i will have to do x amount of driving and buy Y amount of gas.  And the price for that will be higher than it should be.

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

The motivation to do so is ONE REASON the gas taxes are so high.

No, that's not true. It's a 'stated purpose' but research has shown that's not a motivating factor. That was the THEORY behind such taxes, and it was a nice theory. But in the real world it turns out that energy consumption is far less 'elastic' than the original models thought.

In other words -people have far less control over their energy expenditures than you'd think.  You can say whatever you like and punish a person as much as you want - but they still have to get to work. They still have to pick up the kids. They still need groceries. They still need to heat their homes and cool their stored food.

ANd they can make a VERY LITTLE change to that - but not much. My primary vehicle was already extremely fuel efficient. Most people's are, unless they have need for one that isn't like a minivan to get the kids around or the like.

So - what happens is they are NOT able to reduce consumption. That's just a fact. The higher prices just take money from them and they will spend less ELSEWHERE where they have more elasticity in their budgets.

So all it does is reduce their quality of life and ability to afford homes and such without doing much else.

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

Of course we know that conservatives care only about today, and don't give a shit about climate change. Canadians are probably looking forward to warmer weather. LMAO.

What we ACTUALLY know is that Liberals would rather lie to themselves and PRETEND to do something rather than actually address the hard issues.

the fact is fuel consumption per person is already fairly low considering our geography. All the liberals are doing is making single moms go hungry and feed their kids less quality food, deny them things like sports and experiences such as camping that require fuel, etc.

The carbon tax is just a tax. The gov't uses it to take your money so they can have it to blow on their pet projects and to line their pockets and the pockets of their friends.  It does almost nothing for the environment. It was never supposed to.

[robosmith]

On 4/6/2023 at 6:02 PM, WestCanMan said:

That's actually a woke mantra. Did you mean to do that? 

No. Did you mean to post a claim WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE?

[robosmith]

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Ahhh no.  I can do  a lot about consumption. Regardless of the vehicle i choose to drive gas prices will remain the same.  Sorry - you don't seem to understand how "price" works.

Sorry you don't understand that the price you pay for gas depends on HOW MUCH your vehicle USES to go the distance you drive. NOT the JUST price per gallon.

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

So no matter what i do i will have to do x amount of driving and buy Y amount of gas.  And the price for that will be higher than it should be.

If your vehicle gets 100 mpg, you're paying a much smaller price for gasoline to make it go.

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

No, that's not true. It's a 'stated purpose' but research has shown that's not a motivating factor. That was the THEORY behind such taxes, and it was a nice theory. But in the real world it turns out that energy consumption is far less 'elastic' than the original models thought.

People drive less when they CAN'T AFFORD to buy the gas. I know, because I will cut out unnecessary trips when gas prices are higher.

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

In other words -people have far less control over their energy expenditures than you'd think.  You can say whatever you like and punish a person as much as you want - but they still have to get to work. They still have to pick up the kids. They still need groceries. They still need to heat their homes and cool their stored food.

They can combine trips and PLAN if NOT STUPID.

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Sorry you don't understand that the price you pay for gas depends on HOW MUCH your vehicle USES to go the distance you drive. NOT the JUST price per gallon.

No - the price i pay for gas remains the same   It's measured in dollars per liter - says so right on the sign

The cost of fuel depends on how much i buy. Those are not the same thing. The price right now might be 1.74 per litre - the cost to fill my tank might be 75 dollars - the amount i spend per month is actually independant of those two variables.

ROFLMAO  - what is it with you? You're not the dumbest person here, why is it when you say something so obviously wrong you just feel the need to double down like that!

 

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

If your vehicle gets 100 mpg, you're paying a much smaller price for gasoline to make it go.

No, you're still paying the 1.74 per litre.  What you MEAN to say is you can go farther for teh same amount of 1.74  worth of fuel.  But - that's only relevant if you have control over how far you have to drive.

AND  - one would have to factor in the cost of a newer vehicle into that as well. Lets say you've got a 10 year old vehcile that gets 90 mpg that's worth 10 grand - and you'll have to pay 24 to get a vehicle that gets 100 k.  Well - 14 thousand dollars buys a  lot of gas - how long till your 'control' results in you actually saving anything?

Sorry kid - you're wrong on several levels here.

Which is precisely what was discovered with carbon tax. Remember when i said fuel consumption isn't 'elastic' enough to make it work? That right there is why.

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

People drive less when they CAN'T AFFORD to buy the gas.

Nope. They drive just as much and buy less of other things. Less food for their families, less going out for fun etc. It hurts the economy where it has any effect at all. And that's it.

Studies in bc showed that at BEST it resulted in about a 5 percent SLOWER INCREASE in carbon production. It didn't reduce it at all. And that's across the board, not just fuel. 

THis isn't theory - this is the results. This is also why we won't be hitting our federal targets for climate change. Again.

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

They can combine trips and PLAN if NOT STUPID.

 

Nope. Turns out that's not possible. You have to go to work every day. The kids need to be picked up.  If you manage to reduce anything you'll probably only manage to cut down your shopping a tiny amount and it makes virtually no difference for the vast majority of people.

This is already proven fact. People cut back elsewhere. And when they can't cut elsewhere anymore then they really start to suffer because they can't cut their energy consumption.

SO what the carbon tax does is punish the hell out of the poorest people. And the only people it benefits are the liberals due to the extra tax revenues. And they already have lots of cash.

Rob the poor to feed the rich.  I'm sure history will look on that as a pretty noble idea, right?

[BeaverFever]

Hey here’s a fun look-back at the right’s many failed predictions of “get woke go broke” and pathetic boycott attempts whenever some company has a commercial they don’t like or gets singled out on one of their cult leaders’ bully pulpits.  In this fun piece Rolling Stone does a “so where are they now” review of the companies Republicans predicted would collapse as a result of right-wing rage  

Companies That Get ‘Woke’ Aren’t Going Broke — They’re More Profitable Than Ever

Sorry, Kid Rock, Bud Light's gonna be just fine
 

“GET WOKE, GO broke,” has become a rallying cry of the political right whenever they see a brand make the slightest effort to align itself with liberal or progressive values. It’s a meme that allows MAGA country to believe that there is ongoing, massive backlash to products that acknowledge and celebrate marginalized communities. But the supposed boycotts never seem to be reflected in the bottom line.

…Though the U.S. economy is facing headwinds and earnings may be down across the boardfor the first fiscal quarter of 2023, there’s ample evidence that major brands tend to easily weather anti-woke furor. Here’s an accounting of several that right-wingers vowed to ruin, and how they’re faring in the aftermath:

…

…The threats from conservatives have had no measurable effect whatsoever. It’s almost like being “woke” — to the degree that the right can even define such a quality — won’t sink your business. But hey, I’m no accountant.

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/woke-companies-broke-profits-1234710724/

[CdnFox]

9 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Hey here’s a fun look-back at the right’s many failed predictions of “get woke go broke” and pathetic boycott attempts whenever some company has a commercial they don’t like or gets singled out on one of their cult leaders’ bully pulpits.  In this fun piece Rolling Stone does a “so where are they now” review of the companies Republicans predicted would collapse as a result of right-wing rage 

 

Sorry kiddo - if you're looking to "the Rolling Stone" for accurate reporting on woke issues, you're begging for disappointment

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/get-woke-go-broke-companies-are-laying-off-useless-dei-workers

https://archive.ph/aCuG5

https://www.dailywire.com/news/get-woke-go-broke-old-navy-takes-massive-loss-angers-customers-after-going-all-in-on-inclusivity-sizing

https://tomluongo.me/2021/04/12/woke-coke-goes-for-broke-destroying-its-brand/

https://nypost.com/2022/12/01/after-disneys-strange-world-bombs-film-critic-says-go-woke-go-broke/

Soooo yeah. Get woke go broke is definitely a thing

OF course - most of the big companies don't actually go broke  - they take a serious loss and then learn their lesson and turn things around

Disney for example started taking serous losses and was in danger of its entire star wars empire collapsing - then they fired the woke and got back to storytelling and applogized to the fans and things went back to profit.

But LOL - yeah kid, billions of dollars have been lost to 'wokeness', and companies are shedding the 'woke' pretty fast.

Oh - and don't get your financial news from "rolling stones", ok?  Just like you shouldn't get your entertainment news from the financial post?

[robosmith]

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

No - the price i pay for gas remains the same   It's measured in dollars per liter - says so right on the sign

The cost of fuel depends on how much i buy. Those are not the same thing. The price right now might be 1.74 per litre - the cost to fill my tank might be 75 dollars - the amount i spend per month is actually independant of those two variables.

ROFLMAO  - what is it with you? You're not the dumbest person here, why is it when you say something so obviously wrong you just feel the need to double down like that!

 

No, you're still paying the 1.74 per litre.  What you MEAN to say is you can go farther for teh same amount of 1.74  worth of fuel.  But - that's only relevant if you have control over how far you have to drive.

AND  - one would have to factor in the cost of a newer vehicle into that as well. Lets say you've got a 10 year old vehcile that gets 90 mpg that's worth 10 grand - and you'll have to pay 24 to get a vehicle that gets 100 k.  Well - 14 thousand dollars buys a  lot of gas - how long till your 'control' results in you actually saving anything?

Sorry kid - you're wrong on several levels here.

Which is precisely what was discovered with carbon tax. Remember when i said fuel consumption isn't 'elastic' enough to make it work? That right there is why.

Nope. They drive just as much and buy less of other things. Less food for their families, less going out for fun etc. It hurts the economy where it has any effect at all. And that's it.

Studies in bc showed that at BEST it resulted in about a 5 percent SLOWER INCREASE in carbon production. It didn't reduce it at all. And that's across the board, not just fuel. 

THis isn't theory - this is the results. This is also why we won't be hitting our federal targets for climate change. Again.

Nope. Turns out that's not possible. You have to go to work every day. The kids need to be picked up.  If you manage to reduce anything you'll probably only manage to cut down your shopping a tiny amount and it makes virtually no difference for the vast majority of people.

This is already proven fact. People cut back elsewhere. And when they can't cut elsewhere anymore then they really start to suffer because they can't cut their energy consumption.

SO what the carbon tax does is punish the hell out of the poorest people. And the only people it benefits are the liberals due to the extra tax revenues. And they already have lots of cash.

Rob the poor to feed the rich.  I'm sure history will look on that as a pretty noble idea, right?

You ARE WRONG.

Price and cost both have the same meaning

Quote

Price and cost both have the same meaning: "the amount of money you pay for something or that something costs."  

Unit price and price of total purchase mean the same thing. I pay a MUCH SMALLER PRICE for gas, because I use a LOT LESS to go the same distance as a gas guzzler.

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You ARE WRONG.

Price and cost both have the same meaning

 

Ummm - from your link:

"But the main difference is one of perspective.  Price is generally used to refer to the amount of money that a seller is asking for something, and cost generally refers to the amount of money that buyer will spend rather than the price that a seller is asking for."

I can't affect the price of gas. That's what the seller charges per litre.

Now - while i apprecaite you taking the time to post something that proves i'm right doing so KINDA makes you look extra dumb in two or three ways

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

 

Unit price and price of total purchase mean the same thing.

No, they don't. if they did - they'd be the same number wouldn't they.  If i tell you that i put gas in my car and paid 1.75 per litre.... what was the cost of my purchase?  You MUST be able to tell me, they're the same thing after all!!! If they're the same thing then if you know the price, then you also know the cost! That's what "the same" means.

But you don't   Because they're not the same. Anyone who's successfully mastered grade 1 mathimatics can see that they are two very different numbers. THe price can remain the same and the cost will differ depending on how much i purchased. 

Soooooo -  i probably shoulnd't be making fun of the mentally disadvantaged like this    Didja get it yet?  Ya done being this dumb?

[BeaverFever]

11 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Sorry kiddo - if you're looking to "the Rolling Stone" for accurate reporting on woke issues, you're begging for disappointment

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/get-woke-go-broke-companies-are-laying-off-useless-dei-workers

https://archive.ph/aCuG5

https://www.dailywire.com/news/get-woke-go-broke-old-navy-takes-massive-loss-angers-customers-after-going-all-in-on-inclusivity-sizing

https://tomluongo.me/2021/04/12/woke-coke-goes-for-broke-destroying-its-brand/

https://nypost.com/2022/12/01/after-disneys-strange-world-bombs-film-critic-says-go-woke-go-broke/

Soooo yeah. Get woke go broke is definitely a thing

OF course - most of the big companies don't actually go broke  - they take a serious loss and then learn their lesson and turn things around

Disney for example started taking serous losses and was in danger of its entire star wars empire collapsing - then they fired the woke and got back to storytelling and applogized to the fans and things went back to profit.

But LOL - yeah kid, billions of dollars have been lost to 'wokeness', and companies are shedding the 'woke' pretty fast.

Oh - and don't get your financial news from "rolling stones", ok?  Just like you shouldn't get your entertainment news from the financial post?

I checked out your links and none disproves the cases cited in my article. Your links are the usual right wing assortment of baseless / debunked claims (eg tech sector layoffs are because the companies are woke), anecdotal and woke-is-whatever-I-say-it-is nonsense (eg a store has a surplus of unsold plus and small size clothing which is somehow “woke”) and the suggestion that the business is going “broke” from unsold plus size clothing is hilarious.   Furthermore Einstein your own article says Gap made over $3.5 Billion in profits which if you had any brains at all is not the definition of “broke”. So even if we were to believe the dubious argument that they over invested in non-mainstream sizes and as a result made a little less profit than the year before it is still not Broke. 
 

And if you think Disney went woke and broke and then learned some lesson from it you obviously haven’t been following the news down in Florida lately   Also touur claims about Star Wars are exaggerated as usual.  Yes onenod their movies lost money but not the “woke” ( supposedly “woke” because it had a female and a black guy as leads…for shame…)

Here are the films’ NET profits:

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

I checked out your links and none disproves the cases cited in my article.

Well they do actually but obviously reading is a bit of an issue for you.

The links also prove again and again that companies suffer badly from 'going woke' and it hurts them in their pocket book.

And they're from a wide variety of mainstream AND specialized publications - not "The Rolling Stones", which of course is well known for it's business and financial reporting LOL

Typical sealion - you were wrong, you relied on ONE heavily bias article (might as well have quoted fox news) from a partisan source that has no experience in financial reporting and imagine that - they were wrong.

Businesses by the hundreds if not thousands have discovered that if you go woke you do indeed go broke - unless you're a publication catering to that crowd.  Companies that try it usually flip hard back the other way as soon as they realize what's happening.

Now you look like a fool. Next time do some actual research instead of grabbing one headline that's an exercise in confirmation bias for you