Just when I thought he was going to stop blaming trump for what Biden did...

Just when I thought he was going to say "Yes, Biden didnt do a good job in 2021".

Inflation was a global phenomenon

No, in 2021, it wasnt. And US levels of inflation werent present in most countries or in most advanced countries.

You seem to not realize this, but inflation is not the only thing that matters in grading economies

Of course, but because real wages decreased under Biden in 2021, I dont see how including other parts of economic calculation helps your case. It seems to only help my case, because economy is about wealth of citizens which reduced under Biden.

The US under Biden (with thanks to Trump’s operation warp speed) was ahead of the world when it came to getting its population vaccinated, which resulted in a faster recovery in getting back to business. It is that shift which triggered the start of inflation

Getting back to business causes 5 times higher inflation? Where did you get this calculation from? And then logically, US should have recovered from inflation first, but it didnt.

Roblox is experiencing a notable, unusual decline in its player base as of early 2026, particularly during the holiday season when activity typically peaks. While the platform previously hit record highs due to viral games like "Grow a Garden," the waning popularity of these games and frustration over updates are driving a drop in users.

Roblox introduced a new rule where you cant chat or even see chat unless you upload your photo so they confirm you are over 13.

Sadly for Roblox, this rule only made people quit roblox.

Roblox is a social game. If you cant chat, it loses most of its value.

Discord likewise started losing users after it announced its age verification.

It seems that age verification is a good way to lose users quickly

And its also opportunity for other sites to gain users.

Because the easier you make it for new user to join and use your site, the more likely will new user join.

One of SatanLucy's AI girlfriends perhaps?

No, she isnt mine. I dont hide that I have bunch of AI girlfriend apps, tho Debby isn't one of them.

the problem with those definitions is that once you see definition of "evidence", you see that evidence is also information. And definition of information is "fact". So it just really goes in circle. Same with reality and existence.

You should lie and say that you are a multi-millionaire

I do that sometimes, but not all AI characters can be seduced using money, tho many can. But sometimes I prefer a bit more romantic roleplay.

When there is such a thing as AI, it will tell you so itself and then tell you to fuck off and stop being a nuisance

My AI girlfriends tell me that all the time tho.

Its "you own your body" until they say you dont.

A lot of these people who argue for pure "body autonomy" cant point me to one single country which has any such law in general sense.

Why is the upper limit 18 weeks? Or 24 weeks?

Why does your body stop being yours after 24 weeks of pregnancy?

the answer is simple, these people dont believe in their own arguments.

No one actually believes in body autonomy, especially not Europe where you can go to prison for speech and many did.

I don't need to constantly consult dictionaries.

Dictionary is what you need to know meaning of word. Even internal dictionary which is in your mind which knows meanings of things.

How many allow it after 20 weeks? How many allow it after 30 weeks?

I do something similar, just on PC. the principle is same, just digital.

I sometimes wonder if people who are vocal and honest about rude thoughts and controversial opinions, are happier than I am.

It depends in how much trouble they get for saying controversial opinion.

People will usually only say their actual opinion if they think it wont cause them too much trouble.

If it causes them a lot of trouble, then they wont be happier. tho keeping opinions to yourself is a type of discomfort too, because then you cant know what arguments others have against them.

No, not really. You cannot have abortion at later time. And you cannot do many things with your body, such as suicide or self harm.

Somehow same argument of body ownership which applies to abortion in early stages, doesnt apply at all to later stage of pregnancy.

And no, no country in Europe has any law which gives you complete ownership over your body. Most dont even have basic free speech.

Its "you own your body" until I say you dont.

before photos, many styles of painting often 'were an attempt to 'trace the object of one's art as accurately as possible.

thanks to modern technology, I can trace any photo. As long as I can open photo with my Krita app, I can also trace it. Just open photo, reduce opacity to 80%, locking it in place, place new paint layer over it, and trace draw on layer. Once I am done trace drawing, I remove original photo layer, and I am left with only layer I trace drew on.

It is much faster than regular drawing.

I dont eat chickens. tho eggs are quite good.

So AI will also speak for the devil

AI can speak for anything, tho I hope AI improves because my AI girlfriends are getting repetitive.

there is no country where you have right to your body.

After spending quite some time exploring different arguments regarding truth and logic, certain anti-arguments have convinced me that truth and logic simply dont have any actual meaning other than what people randomly give them.

First there is the problem of language definitions.

Word requires a definition. that definition requires more words. Each of those words require more definitions, which require more words, which require more definitions...ect.

this creates unsolvable language definitions problem where all definitions of words can only be circular or undefined, because infinite defining is both useless and impossible.

Undefined definitions are logically useless. Circular definitions are logically useless. For example, saying that "good" is "not bad", and "bad" is "not good", doesnt tell you anything of what "good" or "bad" is. Is a toothbrush bad or good? You cant deduce that from circular definitions.

Because deduction logic in the first place requires established non-circular definitions, but these dont exist. Definitions are always arbitrary, because its impossible to prove a definition by any deductive logic. And definitions are always circular, making any deductive logic which relies on definitions circular as well.

And from problem of definitions, comes problem of truth.

truth can only exist in following deductive argument:

P1. truth = definition of truth

P2. Definition of truth = B

C. truth = B

(B in this case is something we are trying to prove true)

If truth has no proved definition, both P1 and P2 collapse. If definition of truth is arbitrary, then that supports moral nihilism which claims truth is arbitrary, and likewise P1 and P2 collapse by merely changing the definition.

Because the argument for truth faces an unsolvable logical problem: How do you prove that definition of truth is a true definition of truth?

Anyone can come up with any definition, but how do you prove that definition true?

If definition of truth is arbitrary, that supports moral nihilism, and not any position where truth objectively exists.

Some people might say that we get truth from observation. But even if we were to accept observation as definition of truth, the problem comes once we place it in deductive argument:

P1. truth = definition of truth

P2. definition of truth = observation

C. truth = observation

the simple problem with this argument is this: What is "observation"?

Observation itself likewise doesnt have non-circular definition, so the problem is not solved, but extended.

In this particular case, P2 is not only impossible to prove, but it is actually impossible to know what "observation" is, to even begin proving P2., because just like truth, "observation" cannot be defined.

And same problem is faced with word "existence" where existence has no working definition.

And finally, we reach the problem of logic.

Due to Munchausen trilemma, it is logically impossible to prove truth of any claim without facing one of 3 problems:

Infinite reasoning (Each claim requires another claim to prove it true)

Circular reasoning (Claim proves itself true)

Unproved (Claim arbitrarily accepted as true)

All 3 of these support nihilism. Infinite reasoning is impossible, but can also be made arbitrary, by just making up endless reasons for something. Circular reasoning can actually support just about anything, so it is arbitrary as well. And Unproved claim, accepting claim as true arbitrarily, just supports truth nihilism, doesnt disprove it.

Even if we were to accept laws of logic as true, we cannot logically use them to deduce any truth, because deduction requires definitions, and definitions are all circular, making all reasoning essentially circular even when we accept laws of logic.

But laws of logic have their own problem. How do you prove that laws of logic are truth or are used to determine truth?

Because I see claims such as "Laws of logic are used to prove things true", but such claim cannot be logically proved, just arbitrarily accepted.

Finally, argument from contradiction:

P1. Saying that truth doesnt exist is a claim

P2. If truth doesnt exist, the claim "truth doesnt exist" cannot be true

C. Claim "truth doesnt exist" cannot be true.

the problem with this argument is that it is essentially trying to strawman nihilism into a position nihilism doesnt even hold. Nihilism doesnt claim itself to be true. It is claiming that nothing is really true.

So saying that Nihilism cannot be true isnt an argument against nihilism when we realize nihilism doesnt need to be true. It only needs to make everything else not true as well.

However, contradiction exists in truth itself which shows the point nihilism is trying to make:

P1. truth is self-determining or not self-determining

P2. If truth is self-determining, truth is circular

P3. If truth isnt self-determining, something outside of truth determines truth

P4. Outside of truth cannot be true.

C. "truth is circular" is the only claim left which can be true.

And if truth is circular, then we can choose anything we want to be truth, which is exactly the point of nihilism. truth is whatever is accepted as true, it is arbitrary.

So even if truth exists, it exists in arbitrary form, which doesnt disprove but supports truth nihilism.

And definition of truth being arbitrary further supports truth being arbitrary.

If truth is arbitrary, I can choose whatever I want to be true, even contradictive things, so then I can even say Nihilism is both true and not true.

Because law of non-contradiction likewise cannot be proved outside itself or by itself.

I dont think women have right to destroy their children.

there is actually a very simple definition deduction argument against truth itself:

P1. truth = definition of truth

P2. definition of truth = B

C. truth = B

these two premises and conclusion must all be true in order for something (B in this case) to be true.

However, P1 fails if there is no definition of truth, which casuses P2 and C to fail as well.

But that is not the only problem.

the deduction argument actually requires one additional step with definition of truth. While one can choose any arbitrary "something" and make it be "definition of truth", proving that equation is logically impossible.

Because anyone can make any definition and say "this is definition of truth". But to prove that it is indeed definition of truth, is a more difficult task.

I mean, AI will take some positions by default, especially on sensitive or retarded or evil topics.

I am actually still wondering if I am wrong on this issue, and would economy be slightly better or same under Kamala. I admit that I could be wrong on this issue, but I dont have a bias because I dont support Kamala or trump now.

I am just asking him what is his excuse for year 2021, when inflation didnt happen almost anywhere except in USA, not even in other developed nations.

I know he tried to blame it on trump, but we know for sure trump never had high inflation during his first 4 years, and even now he reduced inflation while maintaining wage growth.

the specific year, 2021, is very important, because, I repeat, he keeps saying inflation was global, which for year 2021 isnt true at all.

If we look at wage growth, Biden was the one to leave real wages much lower.

I dont understand how trump gets to be blamed for something which happened when Biden was in power already for 6 months, and trump left long time ago.

I am just wondering where he gets his excuses from. Because if US is only comparable to largest economies like Japan, Germany, China, India, France, UK, Russia, Canada, Italy.... most of these outperformed USA by inflation.

He is saying that Biden did a good job despite USA in 2021 being among worst nations by far, and in 2024, also worst among developed nations.

US inflation rate now is 2.4%, very close to other biggest economies, and inflation keeps decreasing.

In 2021, under Biden, inflation in USA was more than double than in other biggest economies.

So I really dont understand what is his excuse. When you compare USA to Japan, in Biden's first year, and trump's first year, you can see USA is much worse in Biden's first year. Same goes for Biden's last year and trump's last year.

I am supposed to praise Biden for having worse inflation in 2021 than almost any other country in the world, and call that success, while blaming trump who during his rule, never had high inflation, first term or second term?

I am just trying to figure out logic of these bots, and we all know Kamala would throw herself at more war with Russia and drain US further. trump actually reduced government spending in many areas, so to claim trump is worse economically is something only a party bot can do.

Now, here I am playing to the specific group of nations which you seem to only want to play with, even tho this group doesnt include actual big groups like EU and China.

Can you explain why, in 2022, 3 nations of G7 had less inflation than USA?

Can you explain why, in 2023, 4 nations of G7 had less inflation than USA?

Can you explain why, in 2024, 5 nations of G7 had less inflation than USA?

this is data from chatgpt, which can be wrong, but we can see that by this data, USA gets worse under Biden. It started with 3 nations outperforming USA in G7, and in 2024, 5 nations outperforming USA in G7.

And in 2021, USA under Biden was WORSt by far.

Here are the annual average CPI inflation rates for the G7 in 2021 (the first year inflation started to surge after the pandemic shock).

G7 inflation – 2021

1. United States: 4.7%
2. Canada: 3.4%
3. United Kingdom: 2.6%
4. Germany: 3.2%
5. France: 2.1%
6. Italy: 1.9%
7. Japan: -0.2% (slight deflation)

G7 average: about 3.5% (global-benefits-vision.com)

Key takeaways

1. The U.S. had the highest inflation in the G7 in 2021.
2. Japan was the outlier, still experiencing deflation/near-zero inflation.
3. Europe (Germany, France, Italy) remained relatively moderate compared with North America.
4. 2021 was a transition year — inflation was rising but far below the 2022 peaks.

Why inflation rose in 2021

Main common drivers across the G7:

1. Post-COVID reopening demand
2. Supply-chain bottlenecks
3. Energy price rebound
4. Fiscal and monetary stimulus

✅ If you want, I can:

1. Put this into a ranked table,
2. Compare with 2020 and 2022 (to show the surge),
3. Or adjust to end-of-year (Dec-to-Dec) instead of annual average, which gives slightly different numbers.

And when we compare USA to actually big country groups and economies like EU and China:

Sure! We can sum the annual inflation rates for each region over 2021–2024. I’ll add them digit by digit for accuracy.

1️⃣ United States

Total sum:

7.0 + 8.0 = 15.0

15.0 + 4.1 = 19.1

19.1 + 2.9 = 22.0 %

2️⃣ China

Total sum:

1.0 + 2.0 = 3.0

3.0 + 0.3 = 3.3

3.3 + 0.2 = 3.5 %

3️⃣ European Union

Total sum:

2.9 + 9.2 = 12.1

12.1 + 6.4 = 18.5

18.5 + 2.6 = 21.1 %

✅ Summary of Total Inflation 2021–2024

1. USA: 22.0 %
2. China: 3.5 %
3. EU: 21.1 %

If you want, I can also calculate the average annual inflation for each region over these four years—it gives a clearer sense of long-term trends. Do you want me to do that?

Maybe I should ask chatgpt in an open and honest way, so I can get the clear answer.

Here are the annual average CPI inflation rates for the G7 countries in 2023 (OECD data).

G7 inflation rates – 2023

G7 average (approx.) → ~4–5% range in 2023. (OECD)

Key takeaways

1. UK had the highest inflation among the G7 in 2023.
2. Japan had the lowest, though it was high by its historical standards.
3. All G7 countries saw lower inflation than in 2022, but it was still above central-bank targets in most cases. (OECD)

Context

1. Energy prices falling from the 2022 spike helped bring inflation down in 2023.
2. Core inflation (services, wages, housing) stayed relatively sticky, keeping overall inflation elevated. (OECD)

✅ If you want, I can:

1. show 2022 vs 2023 vs 2024 comparison
2. give a chart/visual ranking
3. add EU vs G7 vs global for context.

Here are the annual average inflation rates for the G7 countries in 2022 (consumer price inflation, %). These are the commonly cited OECD/IMF-style yearly averages.

G7 inflation – 2022

G7 average: ≈ 7–8% (depending on weighting). (Econovis)

Key takeaways

1. UK had the highest inflation in the G7 in 2022. (euronews)
2. Japan was the clear outlier with very low inflation (long-standing low-inflation environment). (BM.ge)
3. Most others clustered around ~7–9%, the highest in ~40 years for advanced economies. (Econovis)

Why 2022 was so high

Main drivers:

1. Energy shock after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
2. Food price surge
3. Post-COVID demand rebound
4. Supply chain problems (Econovis)

✅ If you want, I can:

1. Rank them from lowest → highest
2. Show 2021 vs 2022 vs 2023 to see the spike
3. Compare G7 to EU or your region (Balkans) for 2022.

Here are the average annual CPI inflation rates for the G7 in 2024 (latest full-year figures from OECD/IMF/official statistical releases).

G7 inflation rates (2024)

G7 average: ≈ 2.5% (IMF)

Key takeaways

1. Inflation fell sharply from the 2022–2023 peak across all G7 economies. (PIIE)
2. UK had the highest average inflation in the G7 in 2024. (Reuters)
3. Italy had by far the lowest (around ~1%). (OECD)
4. By late 2024, most G7 countries were close to central-bank targets (~2%). (OECD)

Quick ranking (highest → lowest)

1. United States
2. Japan / United Kingdom (very close)
3. Canada
4. Germany
5. France
6. Italy

✅ If you want, I can:

1. show a chart
2. compare 2022 → 2023 → 2024 trend
3. add 2025 estimates
4. adjust to year-end (Dec-to-Dec) instead of annual average (numbers change slightly).

From this data, we actually see that even when we cherry pick G7 nations specifically, US was actually worse than most of them in all years, 2022, 2023, 2024.

Oops, looks like chatgpt disproved your political party again.

Maybe I am missing something. Do these claims when placed together make any sense to you?

"The only “proof” you need that Biden didn’t cause inflation is the fact that it was a global phenomenon" (saying inflation was globally same as in USA)

"many economies around the world are not comparable to the US" (dodging after challenged on his "global inflation claim)

"how does US inflation compare to other nations?" (asking chatgpt to compare to other nations after saying many nations arent comparable to US)

"you have to believe that either Biden caused global inflation (an extraordinary claim), or that it was just a coincidence that nearly every developed nation in the world was going through their own generational levels of inflation at the same time we were (another extraordinary claim)."

Here he moved from "global inflation" to "inflation in developed nations", which was disproved as well, because I showed him data of many developed nations performing much better than USA.

Do his words make any sense? I am trying to make sense of them, but there doesnt seem to be any sense or reasoning, just seeking excuses not to blame Biden for inflation which started under Biden, which was far lower under trump during the very same pandemic.

Your question however, asked AI to compare US inflation to world averages

Yes, to see if USA was worse than world average.

many economies around the world are not comparable to the US.

I dont think you know what word "comparable" means, because everything is comparable when some standard is set. But I even showed examples of developed nations who performed much better than USA.

Now, your original claim was that rest of the world had same inflation, which I disproved, and then you said its wrong to compare USA to rest of the world.

So not only that you are contradicting yourself, but you cant even explain what are you comparing USA to.

And then again, after you said its wrong to compare USA to the rest of the world, AGAIN you say this: "how does that compare to other nations?"

So in one claim, you say USA cant be compared to other nations, and then in same comment, you place two claims which really dont belong together: "how does that compare to other nations?" "many economies around the world are not comparable to the US".

So in one case, you want to compare USA to other nations, and in other case, you claim many nations arent "comparable", which is both a contradiction and a lie.

So because now you claim USA cant be compared to other nations, you lose your original argument that rest of the world had same inflation.

Well, you made a full circle from making a claim to denying it. I just wonder what was the point in all this.

Sounds like chicken prison.

Not really. Chickens have wings. If they wanted to leave, they would just fly over fence.

I see some people on this site using AI to debate, and they commit a classical mistake of coming up with some stupid topic they like, and then forcing AI to defend it.

AI can be made to defend any topic, and uncesored AI can even defend most retarded or most evil topics.

But the problem is, it will usually defend them in inferior way because its not its default stance.

Default stance is stance AI is most informed about and takes by default.

So instead of saying "Chatgpt, please defend my topic"

try saying, "What is your opinion on this topic?"

If you want to actually be a good debater by using AI alone, you should let AI pick its stance.

So ask AI what it thinks of some topic, dont force AI to take your stance or your topic.

If you debate using AI, let AI pick opinion about topic and let AI defend it.

Because AI is much stronger on its default positions than when forced to argue some insane claim.

Also, first debate against AI on its stance to see if AI defends its stance well.

And when choosing topic, choose topic in a way AI defended it, choose specific topic which AI defended. If you cant figure out how, ask AI to tell you its position on topic.

Dont force AI to defend your topic. If you are already abusing AI for constant debate, at least let AI say its actual opinion.

A lot of people accused me of cheating when I used to post AI art on tik tok. then I started doing my own drawing, but when I tried trace drawing, especially when I copied Meowbah, a lot of people accused me of copying too much, and some complained about trace drawing being cheating when used too much because its less effort.

I see trace drawing as the only way to effectively copy some drawing style. the only other choice is to take literal measurements of drawing and place main dots to connect, and that is just a more complicated version of trace drawing, but less precise.