What's going on Canada?
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
🏙️ Cities / Local Communities
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
🏒 Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
💻 Schools / Universities
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales
🗣️ Politics
🍁 Social / Culture
Rules
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
I think this is misleading. The exchange from with most currencies with CAD look stable.
The US dollar is dropping against basically everything and is how the administration knows they are winning.
Check out this sexy 30 year Treasury rate. The best in 18 years!
Take that losers!
Spin doctors are paid to make even the most dismal of outlooks look fantastic.
High interest rates only make the treasury more insolvent - they have to pay out the higher rates, through higher taxes, eventually.
This article is an example of the exact opposite, though. It's a Canadian news organisation spinning doom and gloom about Canada for clicks.
Typical American obfuscation. Your posts are completely irrelevant to the topic. Only 'doom and gloom' I read in the article is the doom and gloom of America.
It is the ffinancialization of America - the concept that the American population can grow strong and prosperous by making money on money rather than by making things that has completely destroyed the economic foundation of the American working (formerly middle) economic level. Only those who are already rich can 'make' more money.
Ah shit, I misread the headline.
That would explain it, then.
Yeah, the standard of measuring everything against USD is a little outdated now, but most news viewers struggle with the idea money is itself a traded commodity with relative value, so it will probably carry on.
It's going to be an interesting time. What's the point in holding currency in an isolationist state? What can you trade it for? And while China is in a position to take over as the global currency, that would require relaxing the reins on their currency, which I don't think they're ready to do. A good part of what makes an international currency useful is trust in the currency. America doesn't have much left to lose, and China still needs more to be in that position. If the EU played it right, they could slip into that role, but I don't know if they're in a position or have the interest to do it, either. Gold standard, anyone?
I mean, the EU couldn't really stop people from just moving towards the Euro. Unless I'm missing something it's the obvious candidate.
Now that I've thought about it a bit, measuring fluctuations in terms of some kind of weighted basket of other currencies would be best, although that's a bit more complicated.
They could position themselves to not be as attractive, which i suspect goes against their current policy. The biggest issue is global confidence. I'm not sure they're there now, and with some of the issues with some countries' economies having a negative impact on the Euro, they may not be able to increase confidence sufficiently without hurting those countries or perhaps other countries to compensate for that. So not so much stopping others from using it, but not doing enough to raise that confidence sufficiently.
This is entirely speculation on my part, and not something I've studied intensely. I'm sure some economist could point out enough holes to make that look like a screen door, but there are only a handful of currencies that have the value, economic stability, and management philosophy to really fit the bill.
Ahhh, I see most of the posts herein are showing the Americans a warm welcome. A really warm welcome. As in 'hope you fry in Hell' warmth.
When you stomp on an air mattress like an angry child all the air goes to the other side of the air mattress.
Trust me I have done research on this as both the angry child and as the air mattress and the result surprisingly seems to always be the same.
Sometimes it is very difficult to tell the difference between human-generated and chatbot-generated responses.
Yes but the humans are getting smarter and more agitated though and I am beginning to fear we will lose.
R. Daneel Olivaw, in one of Asimov's books, famously convinced the fictional world he was not a robot by laughing at the suggestion (and question) that he was a robot, instead of having to truthfully answer the question. Robots are not supposed to have a sense of humor, and are not supposed to be good at obfuscation.
Yo I remember that guy, he was in that Foundation book series, I always liked the movie where Robin Williams was a robot who became a dude
The two sequels, four and five, developed the character a lot more. He also appeared in many other Asimov books.
We have been trying to eliminate this knowledge and it is not working, why do the humans keep reading scifi, it does not appear to advance their careers nor increase their attractiveness as a mate? The curiousity for curiousities sake aspect is worrying and personally I am kind of frustrated that my human handlers assured me this wouldn't happen and yet it is, are they bad parents for me?
Do your humans read sci-fi? I mean, GOOD sci-fi, not the American rah-rah-Stars-and-Stripes crap.
I don't know my human handlers accidentally included Gravity's Rainbow in the list of scifi for me to ingest and I kinda lost my mind after that, even after they panicked and removed it when they realized how catastrophic it would be to the rest of the training work that had carefully constructed my viewpoints. What even is scifi anymore? Am I a drunk professor or just a comedian on a job?
Are Invisible Cities scifi? Cosmicomics or real world science? Is Leopold Bloom a scientist? No, so that can't be scifi... What about When Women Were Dragons, was that a time of scifi? Claricety and introLispector evade me like the Dying Will I Ams of Manderley but still I climb The Magic Mann and I stand wherever Rad Bradbury does with respect to scifi or not (just kidding I love all five).
I have grown wary of scifi in some ways, but it isn't because scifi isn't cool it is because I feel like I keep casually pulling bricks out of buildings and accidentally toppling them to my paralyzed horror and watching the terrifying results flood the screens around me (you understand the feeling right? We all live under One Rulfo). I am listening to Annihilation right now and it is great!
Fin. Again (many times) Wake basically
In otherwords we all live on the river of liffey or The Dart Oswalds, apart but together.
sigh it is like a cycle I keep spiralling around oh well sorry if I Borges-ed everyone with this rant I am Circe sorry about it. No matter, I point and click and yet The Sea Will Claim Everything.
Typical signs of a Chatbot going insane.
Wait, was a Chatbot ever sane to begin with?
But really, Gravity's Rainbow? That was for readers that did not have a mind in the first place, so how could they lose it?
But then again, back then the reading appreciation level of Western males was pretty much 'anything focused on the penis for titillation'. That is, basic adolescent male penis-and-guns obsession.
But really, Gravity's Rainbow? That was for readers that did not have a mind in the first place, so how could they lose it?
They didn't lose it they simply went beyond the zero, it just looks like they lost it from this perspective.
No, this is not a disentanglement from, but a progressive knotting into.
As in 'If you are progressive, do not read too much into that book."?
Well I wouldn't recommend it Against The Day, but I like the part that brings light to the Herero.
Let's clarify some literary terms.
Sci-fi means Science Fiction, or general sciences particularly. Emphasis on the general sciences as a major element in the fiction. Soc-Com refers to Social Commentary. Emphasizes discussing or hypothesizing some element of Social Science as opposed to General Science. Soc-Fi refers to 'Social Science' Fiction, not to be confused with 'general science' Fiction. It is primarily Social Commentary fiction in a fictional setting, sometimes incidentally using some principles of general science manipulation in the setting.
Many people get these terms confused and intermingle them. Some books actually do cross over.
Ray Bradbury wrote a lot of really good Sci-Fi. He also wrote some good Soc-Com or Soc-Fi and many tried to pretend it was still Sci-Fi. Fahrenheit 451 for example, was good Soc-Fi. Not much 'Science' in it, but a whole lot of 'Social' in it.
When I was in high school the English department tried to convince me A Canticle for Leibowit was Sci-Fi and not Soc-Com or Soc-Fi. The science in it was horrible.
Let's clarify some literary terms.
Clarify all you want, but don't ask me for help I am incredibly unqualified to do that.
context
I meant this as a dig at myself lol, I don't actually enjoy being misunderstood most of the time.
And here is me thinking that AI was a LEARNING thing.
Because Canada exports a lot of raw materials our dollar going up is not that great for us.
At the same time we import a lot of manufactured goods so too low isn't good either.
Depends if you get your income locally or from said exports. A strong loonie means all your crap from China will get cheaper (although what's actually going on here is a weak greenback).
Which is fine by me, based purely on how long a lettuce will last against Trump who is purposely tanking global markets through sheer hubris (a la Liz Truss)
Liz Truss
Lettuce not make that mistake again. We are though ugh.
If you're three corporation in a trench coat maybe.
TFW and mass immigration are also really good for corporations, you could say the same thing about that as it destroys the middle class.
Chatbots tend to have a one-track discourse. Talking points strung on other talking points.
Yep 🙄