On Bob Brinker today..

[planosteve]

Equateing "inflation" with price increases is an invalid concept. Prices rise and fall, they don't inflate and deflate. Inflation means that the money supply in increased, deflation means it is decreased. Prices of individual items rise and fall for many many reasons.
If anybody is disconnected with reality, it is Brinker. He can't afford to admit the truth which is that there is nothing he can recommend to invest in that will not loose purchasing power. That is why he is in denial and is claiming everyone is nuts but him.
We can argue what the cost of living actually is. But, the CPI was originally a basket of prices of goods and services. It was revised twice, in 1980 and in 1990 because the govt. did not want to pay for the social security increases that resulted. Based on the original CPI calculations in effect until 1980, prices are increasing at about 9% per year, not 1.9%.

[GFB]

Equateing "inflation" with price increases is an invalid concept. Prices rise and fall, they don't inflate and deflate. Inflation means that the money supply in increased, deflation means it is decreased. Prices of individual items rise and fall for many many reasons.
If anybody is disconnected with reality, it is Brinker. He can't afford to admit the truth which is that there is nothing he can recommend to invest in that will not loose purchasing power. That is why he is in denial and is claiming everyone is nuts but him.
We can argue what the cost of living actually is. But, the CPI was originally a basket of prices of goods and services. It was revised twice, in 1980 and in 1990 because the govt. did not want to pay for the social security increases that resulted. Based on the original CPI calculations in effect until 1980, prices are increasing at about 9% per year, not 1.9%.

I'll give you the same response I gave Mark. If that is true about the government's miscalculations..wouldn't that be a very good thing to hold down spending?..and especially entitlement spending?

[GFB]

Equateing "inflation" with price increases is an invalid concept. Prices rise and fall, they don't inflate and deflate. Inflation means that the money supply in increased, deflation means it is decreased.
.

So, you just don't like the semantics.

Whatever word you wish to use for prices increasing on a macro basis..it was 1.7% year over year.

[Mark]

Equateing "inflation" with price increases is an invalid concept. Prices rise and fall, they don't inflate and deflate. Inflation means that the money supply in increased, deflation means it is decreased.
.

So, you just don't like the semantics.

Whatever word you wish to use for prices increasing on a macro basis..it was 1.7% year over year.

Not on the stuff I buy.

[GFB]

Equateing "inflation" with price increases is an invalid concept. Prices rise and fall, they don't inflate and deflate. Inflation means that the money supply in increased, deflation means it is decreased.
.

So, you just don't like the semantics.

Whatever word you wish to use for prices increasing on a macro basis..it was 1.7% year over year.

Not on the stuff I buy.

Ok, but I know you understand that the Fed doesn't have an "MPI"..(Mark Price Index)

[GFB]

They sort of have to think..a little bit bigger than that..not to belittle the world of Mark.

[Mark]

Like I already told you, anything that increases in price is removed from their basket of goods. That is their methodology. I know you'll never believe anything I say, so I urge you to look it up.

[GFB]

Like I already told you, anything that increases in price is removed from their basket of goods. That is their methodology. I know you'll never believe anything I say, so I urge you to look it up.

Who took out these items that were increasing?

And how did the Federal Reserve co opt the Bureau of Labor statistics to get them to only show what the Fed wanted them to?

One of a number of questions you'd have to answer for yourself before you go down such a conspiracy road.

[Mark]

The consumer price index is a product of the bureau of labor statistics.

Are you capable of researching anything for yourself?

[GFB]

The consumer price index is a product of the bureau of labor statistics.

Are you capable of researching anything for yourself?

I don't have questions about the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

I had a question for YOU, because I have no idea where you get your conspiracies from.

So once again,who took out these items that were increasing..BECAUSE they were increasing..and what were those items?


I do know that they have modified the way they gather data over the years, I just want to know about your conspiracy to lie and defraud the public.

And please explain how and why the Federal Reserve, that acts independently, and often greatly disagrees among it's membership, goes along with the deception.

[Mark]

The federal reserve doesn't have anything to do with the consumer price index.

The federal reserve is the outfit that artificially props up the stock market.

[planosteve]

You can download the actual list of items surveyed for the CPI. I did once. It is very long and complex with various adjustments made to the prices for various reasons. Good luck trying to understand it. I am sure that is intentional. The purpose was to make the procedure reduce the money that had to be paid out to social security. And also to make it automaticly adjustable without having to amend the legislation or to publicly announce changes to the public some of who would realize that they were being screwed.
Shadowstats.com says the cumulative effect since 1980 is such that social security checks today would be more than double what they are. You can read John Williams whole article on the CPI here:
http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-438-public-comment-on-inflation-measurement

[GFB]

The federal reserve doesn't have anything to do with the consumer price index.

The federal reserve is the outfit that artificially props up the stock market.

Then why do they base so many of their decisions on the fraudulent data that comes from the Bureau of Labor Statitics and other goverment agencies.

They are independent. And they often disagree with each other on what to do next.

Wouldn't you suppose there's at east one honest person in there somewhere that would come clean if any of what you say is true?

I'm simply trying to make you think about the fact that the last thing any of these people want to do, is attempt to make decisions on faulty data.

Turning the Titanic that is the U.S. economy is difficult enough with the REAL data.

[GFB]

One of the problems with nearly all conspiracies, is explaining how so many people end up agreeing to continue the deception, when coming clean would make an instant hero out of anyone that would do so.

People that often disagree on so many things, probably don't always like each other that much, and are anxious to show that their plan is the best, suddenly agree on what is most likely criminal behavior that could ruin their career.

Then you must consider the ever growing number of people, in the past, present and future that have to agree to perpetrating the fraud.

They quickly fall apart for anyone that is willing to think beyond the platitudes and bumper stickers in their head.

[planosteve]

Equateing "inflation" with price increases is an invalid concept. Prices rise and fall, they don't inflate and deflate. Inflation means that the money supply in increased, deflation means it is decreased.
.

So, you just don't like the semantics.

Whatever word you wish to use for prices increasing on a macro basis..it was 1.7% year over year.

It's not semantics, it's the difference between cause and effect, it's apples and oranges. Or do you believe making the pie higher makes sence ?

[GFB]

Equateing "inflation" with price increases is an invalid concept. Prices rise and fall, they don't inflate and deflate. Inflation means that the money supply in increased, deflation means it is decreased.
.

So, you just don't like the semantics.

Whatever word you wish to use for prices increasing on a macro basis..it was 1.7% year over year.

It's not semantics, it's the difference between cause and effect, it's apples and oranges. Or do you believe in making the pie higher?

I have no idea what "pie higher" means.

[planosteve]

[/quote]I have no idea what "pie higher" means.[/quote]
It's a Bushism.

[GFB]

I have no idea what "pie higher" means.[/quote]
It's a Bushism.[/quote]


Ok, what is it you asking?