Inflation Hit New Four-Decade High in June as Prices Climbed 9.1% (nytimes.com) 259
Prices in June climbed 9.1 percent from a year earlier, the fastest pace since 1981, as soaring gas prices, rising rents and swelling grocery bills made everyday life more expensive for American households. The pickup in prices was broad and faster than expected, spelling trouble for the Federal Reserve. From a report: The inflation index, including food and gas could slow down in July's data because prices at the pump have moderated in recent weeks. The national average cost of a gallon of unleaded gas peaked at about $5 last month. This week, it was around $4.65. But gas prices are volatile and could shoot up again. The report contained unwelcome news beyond the headline number. A core inflation index that strips out food and fuel prices -- giving a sense of underlying inflation trends -- remains high and came in faster than economists expected The core index climbed 5.9 percent the year through June, barely a slowdown from 6 percent in the previous report.
The core measure actually climbed 0.7 percent from May to June, more than the previous monthly increase and bad news for central bankers. The question is whether that deceleration will last, and the answer is unclear. The global economy has been buffeted by a series of shocks that have not ceased since the coronavirus pandemic began. Factory shutdowns and shipping shortages have roiled supply chains, worker shortages are making it harder for airlines to fly at capacity and hotels to rent out rooms, and Russia's invasion of Ukraine has disrupted oil and gas supplies. Economists have spent more than a year struggling to predict how and when inflation will settle back down.
The core measure actually climbed 0.7 percent from May to June, more than the previous monthly increase and bad news for central bankers. The question is whether that deceleration will last, and the answer is unclear. The global economy has been buffeted by a series of shocks that have not ceased since the coronavirus pandemic began. Factory shutdowns and shipping shortages have roiled supply chains, worker shortages are making it harder for airlines to fly at capacity and hotels to rent out rooms, and Russia's invasion of Ukraine has disrupted oil and gas supplies. Economists have spent more than a year struggling to predict how and when inflation will settle back down.
"Core Index" (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is there a "core index" that strips out food and fuel? What possible insight could this provide other than to give a smaller number that doesn't look as bad?
Volatility (Score:5, Informative)
In a word, volatility. Grocery prices can change weekly and gas prices change daily. For example, a hurricane in the gulf coast can drive gas prices up sharply for a few weeks and then back down almost as quickly. Prices for other goods and services tend to change more slowly which makes them a better indicator of long term trends. Both long term and short term rates are important of course, which is why both are tracked.
Re:Volatility (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, I don't buy it. If you want long term rates, track long term. You want short term, track short term. Pretty sure that why we have a monthly, 12 month trailing, and end of the year rate.
Removing volatile markets doesn't give you a long term outlook (especially when those markets have been volatile in one direction for a long period of time), it gives you an incomplete outlook.
Surely whan they say, for example, "March saw a 2% increase, but the last 12 months ending in March only went up 2.5%" that gives a more accurate view of a temporary increase than "March only went up 1% because we decided not to count a bunch of stuff".
Re:Volatility (Score:5, Insightful)
Food and gas change quickly, but because they change quickly it also means there are more tools in place to adjust those. Housing on the other hand moves slowly, but when it does move forcing a correction is actually quite difficult; the policy tools the government might use to help address rising housing costs take a long time to take effect. So it's important to look at both; data that understands both the volatile markets that change quickly and also the markets that change slowly. A 100% rise in the cost of food and gas might hide a 5-10% cost in goods like housing and related markets like construction materials, meaning there could be a problem brewing and the data you use might not tell you the whole picture until it's too late, particularly because these indices are always a basket of goods. Another way to think of it is demand shock or supply shock can change volatile markets like food and obfuscate the real picture, whereas a problem like too much money in the economy can be seen more clearly in slower moving markets like housing. Fixing a supply/demand shock is relatively easy or maybe you just don't do anything, whereas too much money in the economy can be catastrophic. Rising housing costs are rarely subject to short term demand shocks, but absolutely subject to an inflated money supply.
So instead they look at both measures in order to get a more complete picture of what's happening. There is no one silver bullet metric to understand the entire economy; multiple tools are needed to give a more complete picture.
Re:Volatility (Score:5, Insightful)
The only numbers that really matter are the prices of food, housing, and transportation. I think it is great that consumer items like TVs and phones are cheaper overall, but they mean fuck-all to whether or not I am breathing tomorrow.
Things are desperate for millions of people right now. At issue is whether or not they will be able to sleep somewhere safe and protected tomorrow. The price of shelter is the price to participate in society and millions are being excluded. That will not end well for you self satisfied fucks who are arguing about statistics and what they mean.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Tell me you're retarded without saying you're retarded. Or do you believe EVs with replace all diesel trucks? B/c though you may not have to stop at a gas station, fuel costs will still impact your life in major ways. Until we can run planes and trucks on smug, then you'll be golden.
Re:Volatility (Score:5, Insightful)
In a word, volatility.
If that made sense, we would have a "Core Dow Jones Index" and "Core Nasdaq" that stripped out stocks that fluctuates wildly. You don't see that because what made an index useful is to be able to track that volatility.
No, the reason to strip out food and energy is *precisely* to make the number look better when oil prices shoot through the roof, so whoever is president won't look the mid-term elections whenever OPEC play games with oil production.
Re:Volatility (Score:5, Informative)
We do have that; it's called the Blue Chip Index. [investopedia.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That page says that "blue chip" is a TYPE of stock market index, not a particular index, and Dow Jones Industrial Average is an example. "[T]he Blue Chip Index" you referenced does not exist.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The purpose of the Inflation measures are to check on the standing of the overall economy and costs to consumers.. The Core Inflation is used to adjust the benefits of a number of government programs and financial instruments such as Inflation-Protected securities for inflation, And, therefore it's really really important then that they have a number to accurately reflect Inflation that does not Overstate the amount of inflation just because of changes in price for a few goods and services such as
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Because there can be other things that influence the index. Housing prices, for example - if rents or interest rates shoot up, raising housing costs, but food and fuel costs remain stable, you sort of want to know this.
Even food and fuel isn't necessarily a good index, because some foods shot up, but other foods stayed stable - meat for instance has
Re: (Score:2)
What possible insight could this provide other than to give a smaller number that doesn't look as bad?
politics.
There are some things that are cheaper. (Score:4, Funny)
A pandemic and then printing money (Score:5, Insightful)
We go through a pandemic, lockdowns, shutdown economic activity so people can't work, and then we pump trillions into the money supply. You then have economic leaders and economists who just shrug their shoulders and say "We didn't get it right." or "We didn't think inflation would be a problem."
Hey, what could go wrong?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Except that they're not paying down the debt with all this money printing -- they're still increasing the debt.
Re:A pandemic and then printing money (Score:5, Informative)
Compare that to Japan with 236% of national debt to GDP but with literally 0% GDP growth for nearly 20 years and an aging population; they have a real debt problem and few tools to deal with it. Or Italy with 137% national debt to GDP, but they don't control their own currency and have limited population growth; also few tools to deal with it. Or China, which officially has around US$5T in debt, which seems low. However there is a massive shadow banking system with over $13T in debt that makes up for China's lack of a stock market or ease of financing, and most of this is unregulated so the quality of the loans is questionable, particularly when the assets backing those loans are real estate projects with no tenants. When Chinese banks are freezing deposits and people protesting wanting their funds are broken up violently by the police, that is a debt problem. The US is a LONG ways from that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A pandemic and then printing money (Score:4, Insightful)
Not quite. The Democrats and Republicans have inflated the non-defense budget and the defense budget. Totally cutting Defense won't get rid of the yearly deficit. The total 2021 budget was $6.82 trillion, the 2021 Defense Budget was $754 billion. The total deficit for 2021 was $2.8 trillion, but that is an aberration due to Covid, a better year for comparison is 2019 where the deficit was $984.4 billion.
The Republicans won't raise taxes because their agenda is to bankrupt the U.S. so that they can argue for cutting the non-defense budget. They'll have a rude awakening when they go after SS and Medicare. So far, those are in the black. However, about the time the total debt gets unsustainable, SS and Medicare will be in the red. When they try cut SS and Medicare, and they will, there will be no place Congress can hide where the Blued Haired won't come for them with torches and pitchforks.
Re: A pandemic and then printing money (Score:3)
Re:A pandemic and then printing money (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Get used to having less
Short term. But medium and long term, should not be, no.
In an economically free society, the more people, the better. [juliansimon.com] Counterintuitively, they solve shortage problems faster than they become issues, aside from short spikes, and in the long run prices drop, reflecting increased supply.
But that relies on not having iatrogenic problems in the economy. In medicine, this refera to problems caused by the doctor, or hospital. In govnment and politics and economics, it refers to problems caused by fingers in th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, the population is still increasing, but more slowly now, resulting in a much older population on average. Check out this graph:
https://ourworldindata.org/glo... [ourworldindata.org]
From 1950 to 2050 (still a ways off but more or less cast in stone by now) the global median age will have increased from 23.6 to 36.1 years. That's an increase of 53%.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A pandemic and then printing money (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll bite, point at one Democrat in DC that is either a Marxist or claims inflation is a good thing. You seem very confused about what the Federal Government does versus what the Federal Reserve does and who controls what. Most of the Covid relief bills were passed by Republican legislatures with the smallest one passed by Democrats under Biden. When it comes to inflationary spending Republicans have been doing this for 30 years. In the last 40 years the only balanced budgets happened under Democrat Presidents.
Trump in 4 years increased the deficit almost as much as Obama did in 8. Biden hasn't increased the deficit anywhere near either of them so far.
While Democrats like to try to do big things that cost a lot, you seem to forget that almost all of those attempts fail because they are not unified in the same way that Republicans are due to being a big tent party. They do however always attempts to pay for it with far less magical thinking than Republicans employed with the last tax cut assuming it would increase the GDP by more than 5% to pay for it all which was absurd.
Inflation is still better than recession (Score:2, Insightful)
Without "pumping trillions into the money supply" (a.k.a. stopping business from collapsing during a shutdown), we would have had an instant recession and super high unemployment that would have taken years to recover from and make the 2008 Great Recession look like mild downturn in comparison. A little inflation (at a time of record low unemployment) is a far more manageable problem. It's definitely the lesser of two evils.
Re: (Score:3)
Inflation isn't too bad, as long as it doesn't get way out of hand. What you actually want is a bit of inflation. Not too much, so people still want to accept your currency for their goods and services, but also not so little that people would rather cling to it than spend it.
An inflation bordering on 10% is a bit steep, but it's also a pretty good incentive to spend that dough on something while it still has value.
Re: (Score:3)
In other words, the three things where the world economy depends on either Ukraine or Russia?
Re: (Score:2)
9% inflation is not "a little". Inflation is an exponential function, it runs away fast, do the math and see where you end up with 9% inflation in ten years. Hint, it's not 90% higher prices.
Inflation also crushes the lower income people, the prices they pay go up right away, their wages might go up next year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The amount of wealth everybody thought they had was out of line with actual production, but not that out of line.
As for people not understanding exponents, I guess most of them also don't understand annualized calculations and feel like it's an additional 8% to 10% every month when the new figures are released.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In general, the demand for necessary things is relatively flat. You don't stop buying toilet paper to save money unless things are really desperate. And except at the peak of the pandemic, you still get your hair cut. And I hope nobody is trying to save money cutting back on deodorant.
The CPI i
Re:A pandemic and then printing money (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a certain god-like arrogance to some leaders.
It defies common sense.
I grew up in Africa, so inflation was just a part of life. The strange things though is moving to Canada, there's groups of people with views that just astound me. Inflation can't be a problem in a modern economy? Deficits don't matter...
I sit there and wonder. You know... if the solution to poverty is just deficits and printing money... then all those African nations must be pretty darn stupid or evil to have not solved it already.
It extends to other issues too. Like social cohesion is a huge thing. Tribalism and ethnic conflict were real problems where I grew up. You really tried to minimize it. In a weird way, it was often seen that the more education you got, the less tribal you *should* be. The less you should care about your race/culture... Maybe a colonial legacy, but that was the vibe.
So it's weird that now in Canada it's almost like the educated are the ones pushing for tribalism and having everyone be who they are and fermenting tribalism. I sit there... like what do you think is going to happen here? You really want everyone being who they are without common unity? You really think this is a good idea? The response from so many Canadians is a mythical these problems can't happen here.
I work at a bank and I remember a few years back attending a large meeting where our VP was seated at our table. I was just listening. What struck me was the sheer arrogance of how he spoke. I'll paraphrase as best I can remember, but he basically said
"I don't know why people are worried about their job and money. Plenty of jobs and we'll eventually have a guaranteed income. People are just causing trouble"
On the one hand, I guess there was comfort in that a guaranteed income is probably being talked about at a high enough level. On the other hand, it caused me distress to see how casually this guy spoke ignoring very real human issues. People don't live in a theoretical future, they live now. You're not giving out a guaranteed income right now. People can snap at any moment. Protests can get out of hand. Revolutions can happen. Economies could collapse. Inflation could take over. Riots can happen. Yet, here is was... so confident I guess in Canada's good government that people concerned about their own well being were just trouble makers. They got it... they got it. Trust them.
I don't get how so many really intelligent people can be so arrogant or ignorant of reality. It baffles me.
Re: A pandemic and then printing money (Score:3)
Remember that these people can be flippant because they wonâ(TM)t personally be affected. I recall last year when an acquaintance of mine - with a household income of around $250k - couldnâ(TM)t understand why people on Facebook were complaining about $4/gallon gasoline. It doesnâ(TM)t affect him or me, yet I have other acquaintances who canâ(TM)t afford the extra $100/month. He doesnâ(TM)t get that.
Re: (Score:2)
Those elitists who ignore the risks should see Sri Lanka [youtube.com] as a reference right now.
Re:A pandemic and then printing money (Score:5, Funny)
Any chance you would have the time to run for US president in 2024?
Re: (Score:2)
I think I just received a cultural enema.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think of currency as "shares" of a country, that you need to use to buy whatever of value that country is producing, that is what creates the demand for the currency. Haiti or Zimbabwe don't produce a lot that outsiders value, so there's not much demand for their currency. I'd guess it's mostly internal de
Re: (Score:2)
Once Biden and the Democrats took over, they felt compelled to repeat the sam
Re: (Score:2)
Supply chain throttling and Russia invading Ukraine which caused oil prices to spike. Also, there was pent up demand due to the lockdowns being lifted.
Re: (Score:2)
Oil prices have been going up ever since late 2020. Prices [macrotrends.net] actually fell in 2020 due to the pandemic but took off in 2021, up 55% and so far in 2022 up another 45%.
There is a lot of speculation in the market and a war and sanctions against an energy exporter don't help.
Re: (Score:3)
Well that's the BRICS [utoronto.ca] strategy right?
Re:A pandemic and then printing money (Score:5, Informative)
The US economy is still some magnitudes stronger and more resilient than Russia and its cronies. Hell, the BIP of Russia is half of that of Germany, and less than 1/10th of that of the US.
Just to put it into perspective.
Re: (Score:2)
"force as many nations as possible to de-dollarise", absurd. You obviously have not ever bothered to take a look at the currency markets. The dollar has jumped in value over the past 2 years, and is now close to parity with the Euro;
https://tradingeconomics.com/u... [tradingeconomics.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong way. The Euro has been falling [cnbc.com]. Yes, the dollar has been rising, but it's the Euro coming down.
Re:A pandemic and then printing money (Score:5, Funny)
The result will be a tidal wave of dollars coming home to roost, because foreigners no longer want them. India is selling for rupees; China for yuan; and Russia for anything except dollars or euros.
Yes, you can tell that the dollar is at record lows right now against every major currency, because of the tidal wave of selling worthless USD.
Oh wait. It isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
The Fed is being idiotic, as usual (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Inflation is being driven by the printing of $2.2T. Which, by the way, was an increase in the money supply by about 11%. Isn't it odd how the prices have gone up by about the same amount?
Re: (Score:2)
The situation is ok though. All that money will naturally flow into the hands of the rich, and once that settles down the wild inflation will settle down too. Some prices will even come back down to familiar levels.
Incidentally, as another poster in this thread stated, the prices of stocks are quite low now. If anyone is interested in joining the ranks of the rich, now is an excellent time to get started. Ownership of the means of production (not of dollars) is what distinguishes the rich from the poor,
Re: The Fed is being idiotic, as usual (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People who don't have enough money to invest in stocks/bonds DO have more immediate concerns, agreed. They need to acquire education/certification to work in a field that actually pays. The easy jobs that anyone can do without much education don't pay enough to create upward economic mobility.
There are SOME low-education jobs that DO pay serious cash, but it is because there is some other reason nobody wants to (or can) do it. Either they are dirty work that people hate, or they require some highly speci
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's say we prohibited oil exports and put a price cap of $2.50/gallon on gasoline, what do you think would happen? The answer is that people would buy as much gas as they could for $2.50/gallon and illegally export it at $4/gallon netting a nice $1.50 profit. And US gas stations would be dry and now you couldn't buy enough gas to
Re: (Score:2)
Where do these "$200k" numbers come from? That seems to be an outlier, and not where my small samples suggest.
I'm a UC engineering undergrad and masters grad, admittedly a long time ago, but when I go right now and look at the annual costs for getting an undergrad degree, even UCLA is in the $17k range per year. And the Cal State system (better for undergrad engineering degrees) is only around $5k per year. That's a bargain for an extremely high quality education. Here in AZ, ASU, NAU, and UA are similar in
Re: (Score:2)
And my first job out after my undergrad degree paid enough that I could have paid off my student loan in the first year or two, but there wasn't a real reason to do so. Again, only a sample of one, but I'm not a member of the gentried class. Just a working stiff.
Re: The Fed is being idiotic, as usual (Score:2)
Wow thank god we donâ(TM)t have you running the Fed. You could not be more completely wrong. We have had high inflation many times. Most recently in the 70s.
Paul Volcker used blunt force to finally break the high inflation, raising the average Fed Funds rate up to over 16% by 1981), creating recessions and market losses - while finally breaking the inflationary cycle. It worked. We know that this strategy works. That experience is a key part of what is now called the Taylor Rule, which calls for 12.
Re: (Score:2)
Completely wrong (Score:2)
Corporate greed is contributing to the problem.
https://www.epi.org/blog/corpo... [epi.org]
https://www.npr.org/2022/02/13... [npr.org]
Data from the U.S. Commerce Department shows that corporate profit margins are the largest they've been in 70 years, and that's caused progressive leaders like Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren to cry foul, saying some companies are using the pandemic as a cover to raise prices far more than is warranted.
So no, businesses are doing the complete opposite of keeping prices down.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Great, can you point me out the competition in this graphic? https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Raise interest rates, and all it does is make other things more expensive.
That's entirely the point!
If businesses can cope with X% inflation. And workers then get X% pay rises, and businesses increase prices X%. Workers get X% raises again.
Guess what you now have perpetual X% inflation.
Fine if X is 2%
Not so fine if it's 10 or 20.
Raising interest rates enough to slap businesses in the face, and kick workers in the balls, IS THE POINT.
Businesses will go bankrupt workers will lose their jobs. Businesses won't be able to just pass on X% price increases. Workers won't be able to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://thehill.com/policy/ene... [thehill.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Assuming "gas" means gasoline, the US makes nearly all of the gasoline it consumes.
I assume you mean buy the crude at the cheapest cost possible. That would probably be Canada's WCS, which trades at a discount, and which the refineries on the Gulf Coast are well equipped to use. However, capacity for Canada to deliver to the US refineries is pretty much capped, thanks to the cancellation of Keystone.
However, that's not the whole story. Gasoline is a fungible commodity, and lowering the cost of production do
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For sure it wouldn't work. Besides the points you make, the people who run those businesses well wouldn't participate, leaving the government to operate them. With the expected result, of course.
Disinflation already starting (Score:4, Insightful)
This could be a sign of recession kicking in but prices are starting to drop:
Oil Falls to Three-Month Low as Recession Fears Spook Market [bloomberg.com]
Chip shortage looking to turn into a glut soon [twitter.com]
Disinflationary forces rise as commodity prices tanked on recession fears w/Brent tumbled 8% to $99, Copper collapsed nearly 5%, iron ore slumped 3%, Corn dropped 7%, Wheat fell 5%. Bloomberg Commodity Index down 4%. [twitter.com]
Let's all remember that while macroeconomics does have some decent predictive power there is a large part of it that is simply reading tea leaves still.
Re: (Score:2)
Look at energy use stats. If energy use is dropping (or its growth is slowing), the economy is slowing, whatever the cause. Unfortunately I don't have any idea where to get at least monthly stats.
A secondary indicator could be pollution levels. During the first chinese lockdowns which they did not admit to, pollution reduction was a sign of "no industrial activity". This one is tricky to correctly factor in the type of pullution of country you're looking at.
Price signals are IMO absolutely worthless at the
Re: (Score:2)
Heres the June 2022 EIA energy report:
June 2022 Monthly Energy Review [eia.gov]
Do you have a source that explains the relationship you are describing, would like to read it.
I am not making claims of economic growth or recession (although it seems likely to recede for a little while at least) just that this 9.1% number is more complicated than it seems and CPI is also a lagging indicator.
For "regular folk" the two biggest pain points (food and gas) look to be on the decline in terms of real numbers and at the very lea
Re: (Score:2)
The general idea is based on this:
https://www.researchgate.net/f... [researchgate.net]
tell me your energy consumption, I can guess your GDP. +/- some error margin.
I absolutely love this part: [the relationship is pretty much the same as the] scaling of metabolic rate with body mass in animals.
Concretely the relationship I'm describing
https://jancovici.com/en/energ... [jancovici.com]
About half way down.
I know, random link... But look the guy up, he's a really big fish in France.
Thanks for the link. Should have thought of the EIA. Although som
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
lol
and another thing: im not mad. please dont put in the newspaper that i got mad. [stlouisfed.org]
Profits! (Score:2)
That's not "inflation" FFS. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And corporate profits are skyrocketing (Score:5, Insightful)
"The S&P 500â(TM)s profit margin had never before hit 11%, but it surpassed 12% in 2021 and is expected to reach 13% in 2022"
(source) [marketwatch.com]
Corporations are taking advantage of the situation to increase their profit margins and claim it's all inflation. Major producers of energy, food and other necessities are all reporting record profits and those profits.
Inflation is still an issue, but it's being aggravated by corporations making a grab for all the short-term profits they can get regardless of the effect it has on the country.
Not 9.1% (Score:2)
9.1% is the year over year figure, which says very little about the current rate of inflation. The month over month figure for June was 1.3%, which is an annualized rate of 15.6%, but that does not include the monthly compounding. The monthly compounding means that the current inflation rate is about 17% a year, and that is even still using the various fudge factors that were created to make it seem lower. This is the same rate as the days of Jimmy Carter.
Most genius "journalists" don't even report the m
Average Inflation Rate Target (Score:2)
Now that we have sustained high inflation, I look forward to the Fed compensating with sustained zero or negative inflation, in line with their policy.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/2... [cnbc.com]
No Tools Left in the Toolbox (Score:2)
The "next-to-no-interest" wild party was extended far too long. Now there's nothing left. No leverage remains, and no yanking back and forth on lending rates will help. Understand that this was "earned". The good news for the Republicans is that the timing has worked in their favour. While they have been the most strident of objectors to ending the prosperity party, the inevitable crash is happening under Democratic governance. So they can do what they would have done under any circumstance, but with a thin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Those who don't learn from history (Score:2)
Quite right. It's been said that those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I see that so much now.
Trying to understand what modern communists could possibly be thinking, I ask them about the dozens of times it's been tried - always leading to catastrophe, often actual mass starvation. In every case they are COMPLETELY unaware. They just have absolutely no knowledge that the kind of junk aoc is trying the sell them has been sold to generations before - who then starved to death after buying
Re:It's actually higher than 15%! (Score:5, Informative)
Shadowstats has been known as a pretty dubious source for info for years now
shadowstats.com [reddit.com]
I’m not going back and recalculating the CPI. All I’m doing is going back to the government’s estimates of what the effect would be and using that as an ad factor to the reported statistics.
Seemingly the guy is not doing actual CPI calculations but just adhoc adding a foxed constant of what he *thinks* the value should be and the poster here was able to pretty exactly replicate their stats by doing exactly that.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd actually believe his numbers if he didn't charge people $175 to view them.
Re: (Score:2)
And that $175 is unaffected by inflation! It's been steady for 10+ years!
Re: (Score:2)
Literally not [econbrowser.com] using the government's older calculations:
I'm not going back and recalculating the CPI. All I'm doing is going back to the government's estimates of what the effect would be and using that as an ad factor to the reported statistics.
And getting suckers to pay 3 figures per year for the privilege of seeing "I(t)= reported value(t) + ad factor" in a graph.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, anybody who doesn't think that destroying a huge part of the world's food supply isn't going to drive up food prices is in the same boat.
Although there is food waste at the consumer level, food production and wholesale purchases have to stay pretty close to being in balance.
There are *many* causes of inflation and it was already a very complex problem. Add a large-scale war
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)