The Canadian government has insisted that information on domestic goods is readily available to all trading partners, even including nations that recently elected a felony-convicted game show host to be their head of state. Instead, the United States has decided to employ a rarely-chosen trade tactic that international economists refer to as the “fuck around and find out” model.
Oh I know, I’d probably take issue with that as well. I just hate blanket statements.
You hate all blanket statements?
As I said earlier, I believe blanket systems should be called out when they’re wrong. Maybe you missed that part.
But isn’t the problem is that all blanket statements are wrong?
I mean there will always be an exception.
I get that you love arguing. You’re pretty notorious for it. But unfortunately, I’m not going to fall for that shit.
It’s very clear for anyone to easily understand exactly what I am saying and with all due respect, I’m not going to get caught up in some derailment of the discount because you feel the need to lead me into one of your “gotcha” moments.
Blanket statements issued for the purpose of misleading people, or injecting a bias into the topic should be called out. That is what I said- that is what I meant.
I am not arguing semantics.
I’m thinking its clear to most people that a blanket statement like “americans choose this” didn’t mean every individual american. It didn’t need to be said. So saying it of course attracts arguments about the exact semantics.
I actually don’t like arguing and I had to google semantics to figure out it wasn’t sexual.