|
0 members (),
6
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,128
Posts314,541
Members6,305
| |
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134
Administrator Bionic Scribe
|
Administrator Bionic Scribe
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134 |
The core CPI index excludes goods with high price volatility, such as food and energy. This measure of core inflation systematically excludes food and energy prices because, historically, they have been highly volatile and non-systemic. More specifically, food and energy prices are widely thought to be subject to large changes that often fail to persist and do not represent relative price changes. In many instances, large movements in food and energy prices arise because of supply disruptions such as drought or OPEC-led cutbacks in production.
Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie Mame
You are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010 |
If one's objective were to make the rich become richer, then one would have to acknowledge that Republicans are fantastic managers.
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,430 Likes: 373
Member CHB-OG
|
|
Member CHB-OG
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,430 Likes: 373 |
The core CPI index excludes goods with high price volatility, such as food and energy. This measure of core inflation systematically excludes food and energy prices because, historically, they have been highly volatile and non-systemic. More specifically, food and energy prices are widely thought to be subject to large changes that often fail to persist and do not represent relative price changes. In many instances, large movements in food and energy prices arise because of supply disruptions such as drought or OPEC-led cutbacks in production. So what if the prices are volatile? ![[Linked Image from i48.photobucket.com]](http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f228/ca_rickf/Smilies/icon_mad.gif) It's a reality to factor these "volatile prices" into pricing - we average Americans must do it when we budget our monthly expenses. To leave out these "volatile" indexes is simply not stating reality or how true money is spent.
Contrarian, extraordinaire
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 228
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 228 |
And even if it is volatile, there is nothing to say that the government couldn't calculate an average of some sort (last 3months or something) and use THAT number in the CPI. That would reduce the volatility aspect, and still count in very basic, important indicators of the hits on the average American.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,499
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,499 |
President Bush is living on Planet Wealth - the same planet he's been on since birth. Someone who can talk about "core inflation" being low in the same breath as citing higher gas and food prices has absolutely no understanding of what it is like to live without money. Of course, whoever decided "core inflation" DOESN'T include the most necessary expense of food, is also a denizen of Planet Wealth. "SPOT ON" erinys! [I would "add" that "He and his Cohorts" are UNBELIEVABLY "S[P]OILED AND GREEDY"]
------------------------------
You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time,but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.[A. Lincoln]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,342 Likes: 20
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,342 Likes: 20 |
And even if it is volatile, there is nothing to say that the government couldn't calculate an average of some sort (last 3months or something) and use THAT number in the CPI. That would reduce the volatility aspect, and still count in very basic, important indicators of the hits on the average American. I'm sure they could do this, and I really do wish they would. But, if they did, then we would all know how high the inflation rate really is. Who do you think it would hurt? It would hurt the corporations. Where I work, they go by this government inflation number for pay increases. When the government released inflation rate is 3.25%, where I work, we get a 2% cost of living increase. Now, if that government number was closer to reality, I am thinking around 8%, then my employer would perhaps give us cost of living increases around 5% or 6%. That's that much more taken away from their bottom line. That much less the corporations would make. It matters not, to them, that their employees wages are actually decreasing every year because of this unreal way to calculate inflation. Some of us understand who runs this country and why some of the numbers are askew. Unfortunately, just like most other things that happen, the average working man pays. I calculated that my income has dropped by approx 23% in the last 9 years because of this inaccurate inflation rate.
Good doesn't always win!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 232
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 232 |
U.S. Stocks Drop for Third Week as Recession Speculation Builds By Elizabeth Stanton Jan. 12 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. stocks fell for a third straight week, the longest streak since August, after forecasts from AT&T Inc., American Express Co. and Tiffany & Co. bolstered speculation that the six-year economic expansion is ending. AT&T dropped the most since 2003 on the New York Stock Exchange after saying customer demand weakened. American Express had the steepest loss since September 2001 after adopting a "cautious view'' for the year. Tiffany tumbled the most in 5 1/2 years on slower holiday sales. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. economists said the U.S. may already be in a recession, joining counterparts at Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch & Co. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index fell 0.8 percent to 1,401.02 this week, bringing its year-to-date loss to 4.6 percent for the worst start since 1982, according to Bloomberg data. The measure fell to an almost 10-month low on Jan. 8. The Dow Jones Industrial Average sank 1.5 percent to 12,606.30. The Nasdaq Composite Index declined 2.6 percent to 2,439.94. "We certainly have another couple of months to go before we see the bottom of this thing,'' said Richard Weiss, who helps manage about $60 billion as chief investment officer at City National Bank in Beverly Hills, California. "The duration of the downturn is still unknown.'' See full report at http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aUMCsasxI.3o&refer=home
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134
Administrator Bionic Scribe
|
|
Administrator Bionic Scribe
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134 |
As presidential candidates and government policymakers rush to offer prescriptions for the deteriorating U.S. economy, some are beginning to worry about a disturbing possibility: This may not be your traditional downturn. And the tools that helped restore prosperity in the past may prove less effective this time around.
Cyclical downturns, including recessions, have long been a feature of the nation's economic landscape after periods of sustained growth. So has one of the most popular antidotes: a fiscal stimulus in the form of tax cuts or higher government spending.
[snip]
But such proposals [as proposed by the candidates] are designed for normal downturns, in which the fundamental problem is that the economy has stalled because consumers have run out of steam or because policymakers have made a mistake, stomping too hard on the economic brakes. Under such circumstances, pumping money into the economy gets it moving again.
In the current downturn, something more unsettling than a traditional swing in the business cycle appears to be at work: The United States has become increasingly prone to financial bubbles -- huge, seemingly irreversible rises in the value of one sort of asset or another, followed by sudden and largely unforeseen plunges.
Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie Mame
You are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,027 Likes: 98
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,027 Likes: 98 |
Lets see, now. We are borrowing to the tune of somewhere around 2 to 3 billion dollars a week (ie, selling America to China). Federal regulation, through cutbacks, is simply a joke (Bush's solution to his/Republican trillion dollar debt). Our balance of payments (more debt) is hitting record highs. Our congress is, obviously, having a fire sale (which would explain almost 40 THOUSAND registered Washington lobbyists). Oil is up to 100bbl. The value of the dollar is seriously dropping. We have a huge number of idiots who thought there was a free lunch losing their homes. We have a fed pandering to those same idiots thereby assuring serious inflation in the long term. Our government is seriously bailing out financial institutions because, I guess, they deserve it. Now the employment figures are starting to get hinky and, I think, folks are getting worried because, no matter what Bush claims, we got pretty serious problems and they do not seem to be getting any better.
Bush's wars may also be of interest. Consider, if they really do shut it down, several hundred thousand workers get added to an already hinky employment situation (one can only wonder about how the war helps Bush's economy - nonsense, of course).
So, after the somewhat lofty discussions of economics, theory, etc., I think it would be fair to say we got problems and, I think, a faltering economy just might be an indicator of a whole raft of problems? One can only hope that the current political hyperbole, on both sides, turns into serious, and long standing, solution to the our mess. When pigs fly?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,428 Likes: 1
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,428 Likes: 1 |
To: RS I almost always agree with your thoughts on the economy... and found this quote quote interesting: Also Ardy, consider why the Republicans give tax cuts to one group and Democrats give tax cuts to another group. Since taxation is merely an economic control to stablize the dollar, each group contributes a stabilization factor to the value, inflation rate and exchange of the dollar. It is all part of the wider fiat scheme to keep the dollar in play. Each Party, when in power, take their respective turns and roles in managing the various aspects of dollar controls. The Republicans play the role of cutting taxes for the wealthy, thereby increasing investments; the Democrats cut taxes for the middle class, thereby increasing consumerism...both types of tax cuts and tax increases are necessary in a fiat system to maintain its viability. Then you have the Federal Reserve, which plays the role of Interest Rate Controller.
Since under a fiat system, taxation is not used for revenue, but for the redistribution of wealth, social construction and to maintain the fiat currency system, the political parties must each play a designated role in providing the system with its particular and necessary components in order to remain viable. How does the taxation part work in balancing wealth redistribution, in the case of the Bush tax cuts? Perhaps the freeing up of investment money may have had some benefits in a different time, but it seems to me that based on the "concentration" of wealth that is growing exponentially, the monies that would have gone to "taxes" have not gone into the economy at all, but directly into the coffers that are establishing new dynasties. It seems to me that the nouveau riche (top 1/2 of one percent) is a new phenomenom of selfish wealth that we have never seen before. ( IMHO, the top 5 percent believes that they are already there). The growth of this wealth does not seem to come from risk investment, but from the riskless growth accruing from the attainment of "critical mass". Am I wrong? It appears to me that we have entered a totally new world of finance, that doesn't adhere to any of the traditional theories.
Life is Good!
|
|
|
|
|
