J
JAMESBJOHNSON
Guest
Sure! And the original Constitutional Convention is the precedent for it, it wasn't called to draft a new constitution, it was called to fix the articles of confederation.
Where is the Inflation?
- Thread starter 4est_4est_Gump
- Start date
Sure! And the original Constitutional Convention is the precedent for it, it wasn't called to draft a new constitution, it was called to fix the articles of confederation.
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,664
Most people at the time agreed that the articles of confederation just weren't working.
Only fringe looney tunes wingnuts such as yourself seem to want to jettison the Constitution.
M
miles
Guest
You're an ignorant shit pile, you aren't competent enough to comment. Shut the fuck up.
Too bad Mama Throb didn't swallow instead of allowing Papa Throb to infect her with RobDownSouth.
Last edited by a moderator:
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,664
הילדים שלך צריכים למות בשריפה.
You think the civil disarray in Egypt today is bad?
You think The War Between the States I was horrific?
Do you fully understand that the full force of the federal government and the blue states will ally against such perceived sedition as you are championing above?
Do you truly realize that, if what you champion happens, America will change in ways unimaginable now?
Do you actually fantasize that what you champion can possibly be accomplished without Americans going to war against each other?
U
unregistered
Guest
U
unregistered
Guest
Sean
We'll see.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2005
- Posts
- 96,193
Suck French cock.
So, you are - at this time - advocating armed revolution against the federal government...
...is that correct?
Weren't no frogs anywhere close...
...when the Concorders hounded those hundreds of limey tw^t-kin of yours all the way back to Boston.
Ishmael
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2001
- Posts
- 84,005
The government tells you that it is under control, but they control the yardstick...
Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/2012/06/25/new-chapwood-index-reveals-cpi-flaws/#ixzz2achzLzhu
That speaks to the crux of the matter.
Currently the CPI-U is being published by the government as being approx. 1.9%. Actually a very good number.
But...................................
The formula used to calculate the CPI has changed twice in recent history, in 1980 under Carter and in 1990 under Bush I, both one term presidents. The reason for Carter wanting to change the calculation is obvious, he was struggling with inflation even though Volker was getting it under control. The reason for the change under Bush is not so obvious, the economy was doing fairly well (at least until late 1991), so perhaps some financial historian can fill in that blank.
Be that as it may, when using the pre 1990 formula to compute the CPI, the inflation rate comes in at about 5.2%. If we go back and use the pre 1980 formula the current inflation rate comes in at an astonishing 9.3%!!!!!!
Anyone that is paying attention to prices at the grocery store, or fast food joints, will readily attest to the 9.3% figure.
Changing the formulas to reflect more pleasing numbers WRT inflation is roughly equivalent to BIST declaring that a Yard is now 33 inches, or that a pound is now 14 ounces. Declarations that no citizen would allow to stand, but these same folks seem to have no problem with the Fed debasing the currency as long as the numbers 'look good.'
Ishmael
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,664
The big "tell" here is when Ishmael doesn't supply a link to back up his work. It's a huge red flag indicating he's hiding something.
Sure enough, there is a hand-wringing wingnut site that claims to "experimentally" recalculate CPI on the old standards. Of course, it says these are merely "estimates" and you have to pay money to see their underlying data.
"Conclussion" (sic): Ishmael found some numbers he liked, and attempted to pass them off as "facts" here.
The world changes, even if Ishmael doesn't. And the CPI adjusts along with changes in the world.
Ishmael's daddy spent 12 cents for arsenic to treat his syphillis.
Ishmael spends $25.00 for a co-pay for a penicillin shot to treat his syphillis.
VatAss spends $100 for a shot to treat his penicillin-resistant STD.
Tmmldr
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Posts
- 966
No, there is no "big tell" as you assert because Ishmael does not back up his data with a link.
Things that are common knowledge do not need a link, and in many cases in the Days of Google, it's easy to find things out fast. Anyone knowledgable about US economics history knows about CPI revisions and the POLITICAL reasons for it.
And Shadowstats is a very reputable site. John Williams is an outstanding guy. The government is making stuff up and distorting info to suit it's purposes of the moment.
Sean
We'll see.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2005
- Posts
- 96,193
Saint Peter
shoots left
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2002
- Posts
- 94,045
"arbitrary constant"
Sean
We'll see.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2005
- Posts
- 96,193
Yeah, that kind of leaps out at you, doesn't it? For the layman, that can be read as "made up".
J
JAMESBJOHNSON
Guest
The bottom line is, you cant cheat God.
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,664
U
unregistered
Guest
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Blah blah blah faggot bullshit theory fuckwad....
Dollar doesn't go nearly as far as it did two years ago, much less 10.
Eventually a loaf of bread is going to cost
https://s3.amazonaws.com/lardbiscuit/pix/idiotcash.jpg
and the left will deny ANY inflation....unless a REPO is in office, then they prob won't STFU about it, and the RWCJ will deny any inflation....
I hope to god a REPO get's into the oval office here in a few years.....just so I can watch all the politico hacks on this board do a fucking 180 on everything they have been saying for the past 8 years.
Dollar doesn't go nearly as far as it did two years ago, much less 10.
Eventually a loaf of bread is going to cost
https://s3.amazonaws.com/lardbiscuit/pix/idiotcash.jpg
and the left will deny ANY inflation....unless a REPO is in office, then they prob won't STFU about it, and the RWCJ will deny any inflation....
I hope to god a REPO get's into the oval office here in a few years.....just so I can watch all the politico hacks on this board do a fucking 180 on everything they have been saying for the past 8 years.
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,664
Since 2009, Shadowstats has also been predicting hyperinflation will arrive by 2014.
Hmmm....that rings a bell.....2009 prediction for 2014 hyperinflation...where have I heard THAT before. Ah yes, now I remember.
Hmmm....that rings a bell.....2009 prediction for 2014 hyperinflation...where have I heard THAT before. Ah yes, now I remember.
J
JAMESBJOHNSON
Guest
KK, who I see some people on here are still wanting to fuck in the ass, predicted hyper inflation way back when.
I just bought a new truck a few months ago and was charged 0.9% on the loan.
Fucking Obama.
And they stuck it up your ass on the trade in, extras, fees, etc.
Ishmael
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2001
- Posts
- 84,005
So ole Fric and Frac have chimed in.
Well Rub Down, prices, across the board, have been edging up ever sicne the Fed decided it could, and would, control the economy. Meaning that inflation to a certain extent has always been with us. At times within a reasonable level, other times not so much. I think that most people are aware of that your pathetic attempt to project your own battles with STD's on others not withstanding. The fact that prices have been going up is immaterial, it is the the relationship of ones income to the rise in prices that count. If prices are rising at a 10% rate and your income is only rising at a 4% rate, you are eventually going to end up in the shitter, this is a fact of life. It's also hard for me to take seriously posters that argue that wages are falling behind in one thread and then turn around and argue inflation isn't a factor in another.
And seany poo jumps in with a blurb trying to bolster the BLS drones attacks on Williams. I suppose my first observation would be that if Williams had no credibility why in the world would the government drones see fit to attack him to begin with?
Regarding the 'arbitrary ad factor'. that is rebutted, albeit poorly, in Williams response to the attack by the drones. He points out that the differences from year to year are NOT a constant as the author of the article seany poo posted is asserting. In that Williams is working of the same base data set as the BLS it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that the resultant numbers should be in rough alignment. The granularity of the graphs is too crude to reflect the differences that Williams is referring to. Be that as it may, the similarity is enough to raise suspicions. Williams has stated that an academic paper is forthcoming to fully address that issue. I look forward to reading that paper.
Williams, in his rebuttal disclosed the 'why' of the 1990 readjustment of CPI calculations. The reasons were ominous to say the least. Essentially it was nothing more than the government welching on its commitments, knock me over with a feather. And it follows in it's consistency with the recent findings of one of Obama's 'blue ribbon' panels that recommend a further adjustment in CPI calculations to even further reduce the COLA of Social Security payments. Doubly important now that the Fed. is flooding the economy with currency created out of nothing.
In the end people have to have shelter, food, and consume energy each of which has a cost associated with it regardless of whether the individual is being subsidized by the government or not. Obviously the subsidized individual will feel considerably less of an effect of rising prices than the non-subsidized individual. And those with considerable discretionary income will hardly feel the effects at all...............in the short term. Subtracting out invisible 'increased value', or other nebulous factors from the CPI does nothing to change the effects on the real costs of those things that are a requirement for life.
So, all one has to do is do a little price comparison at the grocery store between last year and this year. Who you going to believe, the government or your own lying wallet?
Ishmael
Well Rub Down, prices, across the board, have been edging up ever sicne the Fed decided it could, and would, control the economy. Meaning that inflation to a certain extent has always been with us. At times within a reasonable level, other times not so much. I think that most people are aware of that your pathetic attempt to project your own battles with STD's on others not withstanding. The fact that prices have been going up is immaterial, it is the the relationship of ones income to the rise in prices that count. If prices are rising at a 10% rate and your income is only rising at a 4% rate, you are eventually going to end up in the shitter, this is a fact of life. It's also hard for me to take seriously posters that argue that wages are falling behind in one thread and then turn around and argue inflation isn't a factor in another.
And seany poo jumps in with a blurb trying to bolster the BLS drones attacks on Williams. I suppose my first observation would be that if Williams had no credibility why in the world would the government drones see fit to attack him to begin with?
Regarding the 'arbitrary ad factor'. that is rebutted, albeit poorly, in Williams response to the attack by the drones. He points out that the differences from year to year are NOT a constant as the author of the article seany poo posted is asserting. In that Williams is working of the same base data set as the BLS it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that the resultant numbers should be in rough alignment. The granularity of the graphs is too crude to reflect the differences that Williams is referring to. Be that as it may, the similarity is enough to raise suspicions. Williams has stated that an academic paper is forthcoming to fully address that issue. I look forward to reading that paper.
Williams, in his rebuttal disclosed the 'why' of the 1990 readjustment of CPI calculations. The reasons were ominous to say the least. Essentially it was nothing more than the government welching on its commitments, knock me over with a feather. And it follows in it's consistency with the recent findings of one of Obama's 'blue ribbon' panels that recommend a further adjustment in CPI calculations to even further reduce the COLA of Social Security payments. Doubly important now that the Fed. is flooding the economy with currency created out of nothing.
In the end people have to have shelter, food, and consume energy each of which has a cost associated with it regardless of whether the individual is being subsidized by the government or not. Obviously the subsidized individual will feel considerably less of an effect of rising prices than the non-subsidized individual. And those with considerable discretionary income will hardly feel the effects at all...............in the short term. Subtracting out invisible 'increased value', or other nebulous factors from the CPI does nothing to change the effects on the real costs of those things that are a requirement for life.
So, all one has to do is do a little price comparison at the grocery store between last year and this year. Who you going to believe, the government or your own lying wallet?
Ishmael
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,664
Ishmael, I know you "want to believe", but just take a look at shadowstat's graph:
http://www.shadowstats.com/imgs/charts/alt-cpi-home2.gif
The two data trendlines are in virtual lockstep.
Over the entire series.
The only way you're going to get that much of a perfect fit is to apply an arbitary constant.
The guy decided to multiply the actual CPI by 1.x% to fit his preconceived bias, knowing guys like you would back him up.
http://www.shadowstats.com/imgs/charts/alt-cpi-home2.gif
The two data trendlines are in virtual lockstep.
Over the entire series.
The only way you're going to get that much of a perfect fit is to apply an arbitary constant.
The guy decided to multiply the actual CPI by 1.x% to fit his preconceived bias, knowing guys like you would back him up.
Similar threads
