Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 13 Oct 2025, 9:47 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 9:47 am

But this is about YOUR suffering, Silly..

You're not doing it to me. You're doing it to you!

Blackvegetable » 13 Oct 2025, 9:56 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 9:56 am

In his case it's global.

Cannonpointer » 13 Oct 2025, 10:05 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 10:05 am

I will try to stop hitting myself - it seems to make you squeal.

Blackvegetable » 13 Oct 2025, 10:09 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 10:09 am

They may smother yours, but here we're all cannonpointer.

Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:

1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense. 
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat

2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..

3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...

Blackvegetable » 13 Oct 2025, 10:09 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 10:09 am

They may smother yours, but here we're all cannonpointer.

RebelGator » 13 Oct 2025, 6:00 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 6:00 am

That's two of you so far.

Blackvegetable » 12 Oct 2025, 7:22 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Oct 2025, 7:22 pm

Everything we need to know

"Global droughts in Brazil"

So **** g'ddammned stupid...

MR-7 » 13 Oct 2025, 8:29 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 8:29 am

Thanks....glad I could help.

Blackvegetable » 11 Oct 2025, 9:06 am » wrote: ↑

11 Oct 2025, 9:06 am

The Trump administration said that its immigration crackdown is hurting farmers and risking higher food prices for Americans by cutting off agriculture’s labor supply.

 The Labor Department warned in an obscure document filed with the Federal Register last week that “the near total cessation of the inflow of illegal aliens” is threatening “the stability of domestic food production and prices for U.S. consumers.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... od-prices/

I really think the best strategy here is to shoot the messenger...

Any messenger.

Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:

1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense. 
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat

2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..

3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...

PlumHollow » 13 Oct 2025, 7:27 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 7:27 pm

Was there a drought at fault or not? Who cares what exact verbiage is used? You don't back up anything you post with a stupid remark like that. Makes you look like the dumb guy here.

Blackvegetable » 13 Oct 2025, 7:46 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 7:46 pm

What backed up mr-7?

Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:

1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense. 
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat

2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..

3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...

Blackvegetable » 13 Oct 2025, 10:09 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 10:09 am

They may smother yours, but here we're all cannonpointer.

Cannonpointer » 13 Oct 2025, 7:13 am » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 7:13 am

I just told YOU that.

The difference is, one of us understands it. That's me.

One of us doesn't. That's you. 

You're too stupid even to understand that using tariffs to drive up Brazilian coffee will make ALL coffee more expensive.

*Beekeeper » 14 Oct 2025, 5:48 am » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2025, 5:48 am

My Colombian coffee is the same prices it was 1-2 years ago

Bidenflation did more to raise coffee prices that ANY tariffs have. Seems you didn't learn that one.

Blackvegetable » 14 Oct 2025, 6:17 am » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2025, 6:17 am

show me your math.

MR-7 » 12 Oct 2025, 5:59 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Oct 2025, 5:59 pm

Claim: “Not the market, stupid. The Republican president. Trump is raising coffee prices and likely many other prices of groceries.”

False attribution. Trump’s 50% tariff on Brazilian coffee may contribute to price hikes, but:

Coffee prices were already up 80% year-over-year before the tariff took effect.

Global droughts in Brazil, supply chain issues, and increased demand are the primary drivers.

Grocery prices overall have risen due to a mix of factors: avian flu, war in Ukraine, post-COVID demand spikes—not just tariffs.

I hope this helps and you are welcome. 

Grocery prices overall have risen due to a mix of factors: avian flu, war in Ukraine, post-COVID demand spikes—

not just tariffs.

PlumHollow » 13 Oct 2025, 7:29 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Oct 2025, 7:29 pm

Your friend Blackv... liked it. He sure posts a lot for somebody that never says much. Is he stupid?

So, let's recap the Ignorance here...shall we.

BV posted...Only the zealously stupid, like zeet and a few other local dim lights, believe that 1.87 has any meaning beyond the symbolic. Supply/Demand stooges who believe POTUS can control oil prices.........

Then he posted....Grifty was the entire reason gas went to 4.50 this year.

Blackvegetable » 14 Oct 2025, 8:08 am » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2025, 8:08 am

Which were NOT contributing to inflation between 2021 and Jan. 2025...

• Major outbreaks in 2022–2023 led to the culling of tens of millions of chickens and turkeys across the U.S. and Europe.
• Result: Egg prices skyrocketed—in some regions, they more than doubled.
• Poultry shortages also hit meat prices and disrupted supply chains.

• Ukraine is a top global exporter of wheat, corn, and sunflower oil.
• The 2022 invasion triggered:
  • Global grain shortages
  • Surging fertilizer costs due to disrupted Russian exports
  • Higher fuel prices, which raised transport and production costs across the board.
• These effects rippled through everything from bread to packaged goods.

• 2021–2022 saw massive demand rebounds as lockdowns lifted.
• Combined with labor shortages, supply chain bottlenecks, and shipping delays, this drove up:
  • Packaged food prices
  • Fresh produce costs
  • Restaurant and takeout inflation.

So, let's recap the Ignorance here...shall we.

BV posted...Only the zealously stupid, like zeet and a few other local dim lights, believe that 1.87 has any meaning beyond the symbolic. Supply/Demand stooges who believe POTUS can control oil prices.........

Then he posted....Grifty was the entire reason gas went to 4.50 this year.

MR-7 » 14 Oct 2025, 8:35 am » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2025, 8:35 am

🦠 Avian Flu

• Major outbreaks in 2022–2023 led to the culling of tens of millions of chickens and turkeys across the U.S. and Europe.
• Result: Egg prices skyrocketed—in some regions, they more than doubled.
• Poultry shortages also hit meat prices and disrupted supply chains.

🌍 War in Ukraine

• Ukraine is a top global exporter of wheat, corn, and sunflower oil.
• The 2022 invasion triggered:
  • Global grain shortages
  • Surging fertilizer costs due to disrupted Russian exports
  • Higher fuel prices, which raised transport and production costs across the board.
• These effects rippled through everything from bread to packaged goods.

📈 Post-COVID Demand Spikes

• 2021–2022 saw massive demand rebounds as lockdowns lifted.
• Combined with labor shortages, supply chain bottlenecks, and shipping delays, this drove up:
  • Packaged food prices
  • Fresh produce costs
  • Restaurant and takeout inflation.

Every one of those factors—avian flu, Ukraine war, post-COVID demand—was a documented driver of grocery inflation from 2021 to 2025. If you’re gonna refute, bring data—not denial Mary.

PlumHollow » 12 Oct 2025, 7:08 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Oct 2025, 7:08 pm

This info was already posted but a repeat is usually needed for dumb people. Thanks.

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."