In Biden's first year, economic growth reached a 37-year high

[Truth Detector]

I suppose that if you define "full-scale" to include only total war, where a nation is doing absolutely everything within its power to destroy another nation, it's not "full-scale" -- and not war has been since 1945, at least when it comes to nuclear powers, since none have used those weapons (and even non-nuclear powers have generally not used chemical and biological weapons, though they could). So if that's the semantic game you'd like to play, there's no point arguing it. But we're talking about huge columns of Russian armor and hundreds of thousands of Russian troops and mass shelling of civilian targets, all in an open attempt to steal land for Russia, which is the kind of thing people are normally talking about with full-scale war. It's not some limited-engagement air war, proxy war through local partisans, surgical strikes, etc.

gib•ber•ish (ˈdʒɪb ər ɪʃ, ˈgɪb-)
n.
1. meaningless or unintelligible talk or writing; nonsense.
2. talk or writing containing many obscure, pretentious, or technical words.

flail (flāl)
n.
To wave or swing vigorously; thrash: flailed my arms to get their attention.
To move vigorously or erratically; thrash about: arms flailing helplessly in the water.
To strike or lash out violently

 

[Mina]

Wrong.

If you want hyper inflation, international failure (Iraq), and endless mental lapses, vote Biden.

To point out the obvious, we don't have hyper-inflation, there's been no Iraq failure under Biden, and the legend of Biden's mental lapses came crashing down pretty hilariously when he showed up at the debates and utterly kicked Trump's ass.

 

[Truth Detector]

I'm highly educated,

That is doubtful. You come across as a low information partisan hack who doesn't even understand basic definitions.

...which is part of why you're finding yourself being schooled so hard by me.

Ironic in that it is actually YOU being schooled. But you know what they say. Fools are seldom aware that they are fools.

But, honestly,

I've seen very little honesty from your posts. More irony.

I could be a prating numbskull and I'd still be kicking your ass.

Ironic in that you are a prating halfwit and getting your ass kicked. But I am seeing progress. You've dropped the "what lies" bullshit after being shown the lies.

Can't the right put up any better competition here?

Just as I thought. One cannot educate or lead a jackass to water. But I am seeing progress. You've dropped the "what lies" bullshit after being shown the lies.

This is truly pathetic.

Indeed, you are.

 

[Mina]

Okay, I will point them out. All I will get in return is the typical "nuh uh!"

No point whining about: when you're challenged to point out a lie, and you can't do it, OF COURSE you'll get a "nuh uh." Rise to the challenge if you don't want to be dismissed. If you read what you posted, you'll see you were unable to identify a single lie, or even a single untrue statement. If you can disprove anything I said, do it. Otherwise, understand you'll continue to get laughed out of the room.

I would love to see your solutions to the current situation in Ukraine?

A quick question for you: why is it that wingnuts so frequently put question marks after statements? Is it something you learned on the troll farm? It's such an odd shibboleth.

How does one STOP Putin from doing what he has already done? How does one force him to stop?

The important thing is to make sure that Russia doesn't come out ahead because of what he's done. That's what's necessary for future aggressors to think twice before trying the same thing (which is what's needed to ensure the security of places like Taiwan). So, Russia needs to go right on suffering until they give up this aggression.

 

[Mina]

You've dropped the "what lies" bullshit after being shown the lies.

No. As you'll recall, what happened is that you were unable to find even a single lie, or even a single statement you could show to be untrue. Instead, you just pointed to some stuff that had hurt your delicate feelings and labeled them "lies." Then we all had an excellent laugh at your expense. It was a lot of fun. I'm particularly enjoying this latest melt-down. You fragile little snowflakes are a hoot.

 

[Truth Detector]

To point out the obvious, we don't have hyper-inflation,

hy·per·in·fla·tion
/ˌhīpərənˈflāSHən/
noun

1.monetary inflation occurring at a very high rate.

So what would you call the highest rate in 40 years along with the highest in our history skyrocketing gas prices? A blip? You're not very smart are you?

there's been no Iraq failure under Biden,

One can only make such a stupid and lie filled statement like this if one lives in a cave without any news.

Of course, in dimwit land, claiming that the Taliban will not take over, leaving tens of billions in dangerous weapons and equipment and a massive disaster evacuation resulting in dead marines, then yes, it was a stunning Biden success.

....and the legend of Biden's mental lapses came crashing down pretty hilariously when he showed up at the debates and utterly kicked Trump's ass.

More lies. Biden's sad mental state isn't a legend. It is visible to anyone with even half a brain every time he speaks. How fucking dumb are you? Don't answer that, it was rhetorical.

As for the debates? Trump made Biden look like a dumbass. Biden even looked like a dishonest lying dumbass with the moderators help. But I leave you with one of Trumps predictions during those debates which, unfortunately for you, came true:

Trump Says Biden Would ‘Destroy’ Oil Industry | NBC Newsi

 

[Truth Detector]

No point whining about: when you're challenged to point out a lie, and you can't do it, OF COURSE you'll get a "nuh uh." Rise to the challenge if you don't want to be dismissed. If you read what you posted, you'll see you were unable to identify a single lie, or even a single untrue statement. If you can disprove anything I said, do it. Otherwise, understand you'll continue to get laughed out of the room.

A quick question for you: why is it that wingnuts so frequently put question marks after statements? Is it something you learned on the troll farm? It's such an odd shibboleth.

The important thing is to make sure that Russia doesn't come out ahead because of what he's done. That's what's necessary for future aggressors to think twice before trying the same thing (which is what's needed to ensure the security of places like Taiwan). So, Russia needs to go right on suffering until they give up this aggression.

It's apparent that you can't post without lying and looking like a low IQ, dishonest. uneducated halfwit.

 

[Truth Detector]

No. As you'll recall, what happened is that you were unable to find even a single lie, or even a single statement you could show to be untrue. Instead, you just pointed to some stuff that had hurt your delicate feelings and labeled them "lies." Then we all had an excellent laugh at your expense. It was a lot of fun. I'm particularly enjoying this latest melt-down. You fragile little snowflakes are a hoot.

It's apparent that you can't post without lying and looking like a low IQ, dishonest, uneducated halfwit.

 

[Celticguy]

It’s world wide dude


Russia ducked everyone including themselves

run along and let the grownups talk

 

[Mina]

hy·per·in·fla·tion
/ˌhīpərənˈflāSHən/
noun

1.monetary inflation occurring at a very high rate.

Exactly. Right now, we don't have that. What they're talking about with a high rate is more like 50% in a month or 1000% in a year:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topic...ion is defined by a,1000% per year by another.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hyperinflation.asp
https://www.investopedia.com/are-we-in-for-a-hyperinflation-5093627
https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Hyperinflation.html

The lowest I've seen it defined is cumulative 100% inflation over three years:

https://www.iasplus.com/en/standards/ias/ias29

We're at 8.22% over the last 12 months, so even if that continued, we'd be at around 27% over three years, which is far below that 100% threshold.

Hyperinflation also generally refers to accelerating inflation (where the rate of inflation is not just high but growing). Last month, the annualized inflation rate was 3.98%. That's a bit high (the average is around 3.45%), but not terribly so, and down from the prior month, so there's no clear pattern of acceleration.

So what would you call the highest rate in 40 years along with the highest in our history skyrocketing gas prices? A blip?

Yes, that's a good description.

You're not very smart are you? [/size]

Smart enough to know what hyperinflation is.

Of course, in dimwit land, claiming that the Taliban will not take over, leaving tens of billions in dangerous weapons and equipment and a massive disaster evacuation resulting in dead marines, then yes, it was a stunning Biden success. [/size]

Speaking of not being very smart, the Taliban isn't in Iraq.

Biden's sad mental state isn't a legend. It is visible to anyone with even half a brain every time he speaks

As you're aware, you're lying. It wasn't, for example, visible to most of those who saw the presidential debates, given the fact that Biden notched clear victories in both of them according to polls of debate viewers.

Trump made Biden look like a dumbass.

Most debate viewers disagreed with you... and the tracking polls supported the view that Biden helped himself in those debates.

 

[gfm7175]

Academic. The choice is either a debt crash or a cash crash. If you want to argue about the deficit, argue about the DEBT (which is still going up), and the means to repay it (not possible, since the government is broke). Printing money does not solve the problem. It only moves it around.

I'm sure that you've noticed this as I have, and I've made note of this phenomenon multiple times in my posting history, but liberals such as Mina all but ALWAYS make reference to 'deficit' rather than 'debt'. They also tend to pretend that "lowering the deficit" is something that is somehow worthy of praise.

Regardless of whether debt has increased at a slower or faster rate than it did before, it has still increased all the same. "Reducing the deficit" is still increasing an unsustainable debt and it will still result in a crash.

 

[Mina]

It's apparent that you can't post without lying....

Interesting, then, that you've yet to be able to identify a single lie. Why is that, do you think?

 

[Mina]

I'm sure that you've noticed this as I have, and I've made note of this phenomenon multiple times in my posting history, but liberals such as Mina all but ALWAYS make reference to 'deficit' rather than 'debt'. They also tend to pretend that "lowering the deficit" is something that is somehow worthy of praise.

Regardless of whether debt has increased at a slower or faster rate than it did before, it has still increased all the same. "Reducing the deficit" is still increasing an unsustainable debt and it will still result in a crash.

When discussing fiscal stimulus, anyone with a brain will, of course, discuss changes to the deficit, not changes to the debt, for obvious reasons.

Consider it in the context of a business, instead of a government, to see the point more easily. Let's say you work at a company that had $1 million of sales last year, while running a deficit of $100,000. That guy gets fired and you inherit the company, and cut the advertising budget, leaving the company with a $50,000 deficit, and, say $1.1 million in sales. Now, someone with no knowledge of business might conclude you did a worse job that your predecessor, since debt is now even higher than you inherited. But among people who aren't blithering imbeciles, that would be seen as a step in the right direction.... you relied less on new borrowing to advertise products, but still managed to boost sales. If you keep heading in the same direction, boosting sales and dropping deficits, debt will become a less and less burdensome problem, relative to revenues, and eventually you'll even be able to start paying down debt.

 

[Truth Detector]

Exactly. Right now, we don't have that. What they're talking about with a high rate is more like 50% in a month or 1000% in a year:

Halfwit thinks hyperinflation is 50% or 1000%. That's not merely stupid, it's uneducated. I give you the exact definition, and you still don't get it. Talk about dumb.

 

[Truth Detector]

To point out the obvious, we don't have hyper-inflation, there's been no Iraq failure under Biden, and the legend of Biden's mental lapses came crashing down pretty hilariously when he showed up at the debates and utterly kicked Trump's ass.

Translation; this halfwit is unconcerned with facts, history or the real meaning of words. Carry on halfwit. You're more evidence of why one cannot argue with dishonest hacks lacking an IQ above room temperature.

 

[Mina]

.... hyperinflation is 50% or 1000%.

Yes, or at least 100% over three years. I posted links to confirm that's the general thinking among those of us we a decent education into economics. Now you know and can be slightly less ignorant than before. You're welcome.

 

[Mina]

You're more evidence of why one cannot argue with dishonest hacks lacking an IQ above room temperature.

Mine's 160. That would be a deadly hot room. You?

 

[Truth Detector]

Exactly. Right now, we don't have that. What they're talking about with a high rate is more like 50% in a month or 1000% in a year:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topic...ion is defined by a,1000% per year by another.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hyperinflation.asp
https://www.investopedia.com/are-we-in-for-a-hyperinflation-5093627
https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Hyperinflation.html

The lowest I've seen it defined is cumulative 100% inflation over three years:

Gas prices 2020: $2.24 a gallon. Gas prices now: $4.76. That's an increase of 212%. Yeah, just your average annual inflation rate. Dumbass.

 

[ExpressLane]

Mine's 160. That would be a deadly hot room. You?

Fahrenheit scale or Centigrade ?

 

[Mina]

Gas prices 2020: $2.24 a gallon. Gas prices now: $4.76. That's an increase of 212%. Yeah, just your average annual inflation rate. Dumbass.

You're cherry-picking a single indicator. One could, of course, pick some other indicator and show much lower inflation, or actual deflation. That's why CPI uses the full "basket of goods," while partisans pick and choose which indicator they want to look at based on what's convenient for their argument at the moment.

Anyway, core inflation rose to a high in April 2021, and is actually down since then. It peaked at about 10.23% (annualized) and now stands at 6.81% (total inflation is currently significantly lower, but economists typically look at core inflation, since it ignores the noise of fuel and food prices, which are all over the place from month to month). I think most people regard 6.81% as too high. But, the "smart money" is betting it's mostly about short-term supply chain snags, rather than long-term money-supply issues. Like investors have priced the 5-year TIPS spread at 3.04%, meaning they expect inflation to be BELOW AVERAGE over the next five years.