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.
Lot of “excess demand” causing inflation, I’d better cut back on that avocado rent to help out.
You rent your avocados? You should really try leasing them
Best to get a let when it comes to avocados.
The BoC has made it abundantly clear, time and time again – even in this article, that interest rates are definitely not going down before you find yourself unemployed. Then and only then might they be able to consider easing up on the tightening cycle.
What about Sept 6th suggested “you’re fired” to you guys? Because it didn’t suggest anything of the sort to me.
God forbid their arcane tea leaf reading, bone tossing, star-chart influenced bullshit should confuse anyone.
I guess we could try Turkey’s approach to inflation.
Go for it.
I didn’t say they’re doing it wrong, not sure what your point is?
You called it bullshit. That usually means you don’t agree. I guess I’m not sure what your point was.
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.
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.
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.
You posted a pointlessly cynical take, and are now upset that someone pointed that out?
He just repeated what the BoC said using funnier words.
Pointless? Maybe, but I enjoyed the laugh. The universe doesn’t revolve around you.
Cynical? In what way?
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.
Isn’t that what happened in the spring?