By my count you've used the term "wild fluctuations" or "wild market fluctuations" in four assertions / reassertions, and this started with my question to you based specifically on your use of this term. Its actual meaning and your intended meaning are certainly relevant to the conversation.
I didn't realize it was such a loaded technical term. I thought it was glaringly obvious from my explicitly expressed concern about whether or not people were being displaced that I was referring to price increases. My bad.
You win the argument over the semantics of two words... congratulations?
It's not a technical term to my knowledge and if it's a loaded term, I believe that would be by your choice ("wild"). This is not about the semantics of two words but about the proper approach to conversation about serious matters. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Be precise. Avoid exaggeration and equivocation. This matters far more than any particular subject under discussion.
So... the proper approach to conversation about serious matters is to harp on someone for using terminology you don't like even though its blatantly obvious from context what they mean?
And honestly, I only ceded the point about the terminology because I thought it would prompt you to finally make your on-topic point. "Fluctuation" can certainly mean "movement from low to high" without being in error - read your own definition. I guess you really don't have anything to contribute, though.
By my count you've used the term "wild fluctuations" or "wild market fluctuations" in four assertions / reassertions, and this started with my question to you based specifically on your use of this term. Its actual meaning and your intended meaning are certainly relevant to the conversation.