You can be as self-assured as you like, and that's your prerogative, but why post a response if you're not going to take the time to be convincing in any way, such as by providing any evidence, information, or even rhetoric? I'm certainly not going to change my mind because you said you read a book.

Cutting and pasting someone else’s work is not a discussion. Not to mention what you added didn’t exactly contradict my take so there’s not much else to say.

I mean, I did contradict your take. I contradict that inflation dropped primarily due to Carter picking Volker, or that dropping oil prices were a major factor. How much more contradictory can I be?

There's plenty of other takes that contradict yours as well, like this one: https://www.forbes.com/sites/briandomitrovic/2011/02/07/volc...

The authors claims that the Reagan tax cuts were a key ingredient without which the inflation reduction may not have occurred at all, or it at least would have occurred at a much slower rate.

But, look at me not carrying on a "discussion" because I keep citing other sources. I should just respond with one single sentence stating my belief as fact, right?