The Bank of Canada’s governing council worried that the decision to hold rates steady on Sept. 6 could be ‘misinterpreted’ as a sign that the rate tightening cycle was finished.

      • sik0fewl@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You called it bullshit. That usually means you don’t agree. I guess I’m not sure what your point was.

        • totallynotarobot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Bullshit != most bullshit.

          It can be the lesser of evils, and still be based in needlessly gatekept prognostication. It can be bullshit, but still préférable to some other bullshit over there. I made no comparative judgement.

          Are you an economics student? You seem to have taken this really personally.

          • sik0fewl@kbin.socialOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not sure why you think I’m taking this personally. I was simply pointing out that there are worse ways to do it, since I took your comment to mean that you disagreed with their approach.

            • totallynotarobot@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t disagree with their approach to inflation. Frankly I’m unequipped to comment, so I didn’t. You assumed that, which is why you seemed to have taken it personally.

              I think it’s natural that people misread their actions given that finance is basically voodoo to most non-economists. This plays a part in keeping people poor, especially across generations. I am, apparently controversially, not a fan of this fact.

              Have you ever actually read the CRA’s literature explaining various parts of the tax code, for example? Opaque af. It’s not in the least surprising that people misunderstand the application of various economic levers when applied by fancy men in tall buildings.

              Any attempt by experts to explain this shit can be juxtaposed with a similar attempt by another expert who says the complete opposite. Conclusions can generally be boiled down to “a will lead to b unless c, d, e, f, g…y, or z.” Hence: nonsense.

          • alabasterhotdog
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You posted a pointlessly cynical take, and are now upset that someone pointed that out?

            • totallynotarobot@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Y’all weird. No one is upset here. Calm down.

              If you think my opinion that economics should be made accessible and that we’re so far failing at that is “pointlessly cynical” then I have some other boots for you to lick after you’re done with the banker train.

            • Rocket
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              deleted by creator