@Had2Explain@greshy998@Greeb45785336@Matt_James37@HabZ360 A circumvention would be finding a way to avoid obeying the rules. Optional obligations are clearly specified within the rules thus not a circumvention but a behaviour already outlined within the rules. Basic logic.
@Had2Explain@greshy998@Greeb45785336@Matt_James37@HabZ360 That would be a correct example because it is in fact against the rules. Conditional obligations are not and are specified within the rules. This is like saying you stay onside to circumvent the offside rules. Retard logic.
@Had2Explain@greshy998@Greeb45785336@Matt_James37@HabZ360 If you don’t like actions that are specifically mentioned and incentivised by the rules then you don’t support the rules. Supporting a rule set that allows and incentivises behaviour you disagree with is not logical but you clearly lack basic critical thinking skills.
@Had2Explain@greshy998@Greeb45785336@Matt_James37@HabZ360 “A truly optional loan allows the receiving club to decide whether to purchase the player at the end of the loan; it is recorded initially as a temporary deal, and accounting costs apply only if the option is triggered” it’s clearly specified so not a circumvention.
@NMichel300@greshy998@Greeb45785336@w3stHypocrisy@savethewest2026@BasilTheGreat A person capable of critical thinking would need evidence to believe a claim to be true. Clearly that’s not you. I can make the claim I just saw a pig fly. The burden of proof is on my to provide evidence for that claim not on you to prove I didn’t see that. This is basic logic.
@dearbrit_ian@Greeb45785336@PolitlcsUK@FindoutnowUK Do not talk down to me you are intellectually inferior. To make accurate statistical inferences yog need a random and representative sample. The fact you think a twitter poll fits that shows how utterly ignorant and low IQ you must be.
@PhotobombingC@Greeb45785336 @TomRose @JDVance@grok You don’t know how to read economic data then such a small fluctuation is just noise and says nothing about the actual direction of inflation. Very telling you ignore all the actual arguments against tariffs and focus on noise.
@PhotobombingC@Greeb45785336 @TomRose @JDVance@grok No I’m saying those 0.2pp are just noise and say nothing about the actual trend of inflation. Where do you think the $200bn tariff revenue came from??
@PhotobombingC@Greeb45785336 @TomRose @JDVance@grok Moronic. A 0.2pp decrease in inflation is nothing that’s just noise you’re telling me that’s more important than the fact tariffs are taking billions out the US economy and hurting industry.
@PhotobombingC@Greeb45785336 @TomRose @JDVance@grok Price level inflation won’t capture the sectoral effects of tariffs. Tariffs are causing price rises in affected goods as well as decreased investment and employment. Americans bear 96% of the cost of tariffs this is the largest tax hike in US history.
@Anteiku_48@Greeb45785336 @TomRose @JDVance I don’t think it needs to be said again. Tariffs are a tax paid on imports by importers. Americans have born 96% of the cost of tariffs.