Alright, while your crude behavior doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence about your receptivity for reason and evidence, let’s take a look how Biden actually defines “price gouging”:

“Any corporation that has not brought their prices back down, even as inflation has come down, even as the supply chains have been rebuilt, it’s time to stop the price gouging”

This is either another one of his classic faux pas, or it’s used as a propaganda term here, because on closer examination, this sentence reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between prices and inflation. Stay with me here, and I’ll explain why, but I’m afraid it’s going to require just a little of high school math.

Inflation is defined as the rate that prices rise, i.e. higher inflation = prices rise faster, lower inflation = prices rise slower. Read that last part again, because that means specifically that lower inflation does not mean prices go down. It means they go up more slowly. In order for prices to actually go down, inflation would have to be negative, which it currently isn’t. Hence, Biden is either making a mathematical error here, or he is deliberately misleading people about the nature of the relationship between prices and inflation.

There you go, I hope that was clear enough. Now feel free to continue your verbal abuse, but I think it’s amply clear who’s the buffoon here.

Making gas more expensive to produce will drive up the price you pay at the pump. It’s not that difficult to understand, is it?

Yeah, like I said, I can live with that. If it’s important, I’m sure it’ll come up again. If not, well, then it wasn’t important.

I’ve already been banned from an entire server simply because my username apparently contains a secret message of bigotry and hatred, so I hope you’ll excuse if I’m gonna try to keep it civil and friendly and try not to rustle too many jimmies during my time here.

Thank you. I did put some effort into it.

That’s okay, I can live with that.

I honestly don’t know, since I’m neither a politician nor a foreign policy expert, but it certainly seems to me that the critics were right on this one, and it was mostly a useless proxy war designed to fill the coffers of the morally ambiguous and well-connected elite at the cost of thousands of innocent human lives, so it seems that either preventing it from the getgo or not funding it all would have been the better choice. But hindsight is always 20/20.

Yes, if Putin had invaded and we had done nothing at all, some lives would have still been lost, but most likely the Ukrainian army would have folded much quicker and the death toll would have been much lower than it stands now. And let’s not forget, the whole thing only started because Biden greenlit that Nordstream Two pipeline that Trump had spent his entire four years blocking for fear of precisely this incident. Literally within a week of the pipeline’s approval, the first Russian boots were on Ukrainian soil, so whatever you think of the orange cheeto, it seems he was 100% on the money on this one.

I do, but if I said it outright I would just be accused of a lack of empathy and intelligence, plus a whole lot of other things far worse than that, so I won’t.

So if you didn’t get my broad hint, I’m not going to be upset, and if you do, like I said, perhaps take my advice to stew and simmer over it before posting a response in affect.

Hm, I was under the impression there recently was a package of $100 billion being discussed, but it appears that at least some of that money was supposed to go to Israel, not to Ukraine, and I’m not entirely sure if it ever made it through the house.

As far as what’s already been spent, the BBC has reported a total of $46.6 billion as of February 21 this year, and the Council of Foreign Relationships claims a total of $76.8 billion, of which the aforementioned $46.6 billion constitute the direct military aid.

Of the bill mentioned in the first paragraph, $61 billion would supposedly go to Ukraine, so if passed, this would definitely bring the total to over $100 billion. So I regretfully admit to having slightly exaggerated my figures for dramatic effect, and humbly beg for your forgiveness, but least I only missed the mark by a single order of magnitude, and we’re still somewhere in the right ballpark.

Ah yes, if only one of those country club going billionaires would decide to use their power to try and come help us…

Yeah, I think I’m just gonna let you stew and simmer on that one.

No one with any power, no one from the right families is coming to help their capital livestock.

That’s an interesting sentence right there. What does that even mean, the “right” families? Are you seriously expecting the people who created the problem to now help solve it?

This exploitation machine is exactly what they wanted and spent decades lining pockets to achieve.

No, of course you aren’t. But by God, let’s also not ask for help from the “wrong” families…

Sending hundreds of billions of dollars to fight the war in Ukraine, for instance.

What, you thought we actually HAD hundreds of billions of dollars? They’re all just printed from thin air and added to the national debt, and then inflation goes up as a result of the increased money supply.

Shutting down the Keystone XL pipeline and restricting domestic oil leases almost immediately increased the price of gas by 20 or so cents.

I thought the President doesn’t control the price of goods…

See, Microsoft cares so much about you they’ll even make a backup of all of your emails, completely for free, without you even having to ask. And here you are complaining…

I’m willing to be convinced by reason and evidence, but you have provided neither.

I don’t care about your opinion AT ALL.

I understand the concept of what a fallacy is. But like I said, unless you can explain what KIND of fallacy you think my argument is, simply calling it a fallacy thinking you’ve proven anything is a fallacy in and of itself. I don’t need to make your arguments for you if you want me to be convinced of what you’re saying.

Adding an ad hominem on top just shows you have no idea what a fallacy even is.

Yeah unless you can explain WHY it’s a fallacy, that’s just your opinion.

Simply calling something a fallacy doesn’t make it one.

Ah, okay then. The good old “you’re wrong because I say so.”