Live data from Hacker News

Inflation Truthers

awealthofcommonsense.com

21–30 of 99 posts

Re: Inflation Truthers

#21
post #2

“Cars last longer, require less fuel to operate and are better for the environment.” That emissions chart looked good. Half as much as 1970. Too bad we have 5 times as many vehicles There were 250 million vehicles in the world in 1970. 1.3 billion today and we’re projected to go to 2 billion by 2035. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle#Ownership_tren...

> That emissions chart looked good. Half as much as 1970. Too bad we have 5 times as many vehicles

Yes, which is a problem environmentally, but from a basket-of-goods measure for the individual consumer, the number of cars is irrelevant: we as buyers are getting a better product.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#22
post #9

It's a bit confusing what he's arguing against. But his 2nd-last graph is the good one, [1]. That's only 20 years but [2] is the same thing since 1950. Some things have become much cheaper, other things have become more expensive. Attempting to summarize that in one number seems like it hides more than it exposes, no matter what number you pick. [1] https://awealthofcommonsense.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/... [2]…

I find it interesting to look at this graph against Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

First layer, shelter and food, have increased almost perfectly in line with wages. That's reasonable.

Second layer, security - including healthcare in the US - "feels like it’s experienced hyperinflation", according to the author. And, as you age, your healthcare needs increase.

So if you're low in this hierarchy, being relatively poor, then inflation might feel much more punishing to you.

As a poor person, you might have experienced inflation as averaging 6% over these 20 years, even if the underlying figure averages 2%.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#23

I found the “Price Changes” graph about 2/3 down the page really alarming. Virtually all of the gains in the form of lowered prices are purely in discretionary consumption and subsistence goods. Cheap entertainment, toys, staple foods. Meanwhile the insane price increases are in critical needs, medical care, housing, college education. In my mind that graph is pretty strong evidence that there really is massive infla…

This is just it ; The author doesn't compare to CPI as calculated using the methodologies for the 1990s or the 1980s - he just builds a straw man and throws cheap consumer electronics at it. What he fails to realize, is that this is precisely the argument of those who believe real inflation to be higher than reported; Namely, that without including cheap electronics and luxury items the picture is much much worse - which it is. This article built a nice strawman and burnt it - what I'd like to see is the author actually tackle the claims of his opponents rather than gross mischaracterizations of them.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#24

One gotcha about how inflation is calculated (at least in Germany, I assume it to be the same in the US), is that they try to compare identical products. So if this years cars do not have air conditioning, but next years cars do, the prices can increase accordingly without showing up as inflation, because you are getting "more car for more money". The problem appears at the point, when there are no cars without air c…

This is the same in the US, yes. And it's still the correct thing to do. Inflation can't be a measure of every dimension of economic hardship at once. As the article points out, healthcare has risen in cost dramatically more than most other things. Does that mean that somehow the inflation rate must reflect the pains of those households not in the average and aggregate? Less capable goods may no longer be available.…

But things are indexed to inflation assuming it represent the dynamics of “this is what you need to maintain your current quality of life”.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#25
post #3

Is the author debating a strawman or something? Actually, they just seem confused. At the start, they state asset price increase is not inflation, then, at the end, agree that there is some inflation going on in the real estate space. So the author is agreeing with the people they're supposedly countering. I don't understand the point of this piece.

Yes, the author is debating a straw man. The argument that the government is understating inflation is a pretty simple one.

1) The government is heavily incentivized to understate inflation in order to limit its expenditures for social security and TIPS, both of which are indexed to inflation. Social security in particular would explode in costs if, say, the official rate had been 1% higher on average over the past 30 years since the inflation measure got significantly changed during the late 80s and early 90s. In fact, if you look back at the discussion surrounding those changes, bringing down the costs of social security was an explicit reason for the redesign.

2) Complexity and obscurity. None of the input data is released, and there's this thing called 'hedonic quality adjustments' which is the umbrella beneath which economists decide how much to lower inflation when the quality of goods gets a little bit better. The FED economists point out that a car from 2018 is better than a car from 2012 and they adjust inflation downwards in order to account for the increase in value that consumers are getting in their car. Consumers counter by pointing out that they still have to spend the actual money...

Analysis) With transparency and a lack of incentive to cheat (see 1) hedonic quality adjustments would be an allowable modification, but with opacity and a strong incentive to cheat, they pretty much guarantee that inflation is fudged downwards. The debates around changing the inflation measure have focused heavily on reducing social security payments. In short, any time you have excessive complexity, lack of transparency, and an incentive to cheat, you can expect cheating.

Why should we care? First and foremost, Anyone who has a relative collecting social security would probably be upset to hear that grandma is getting about 60% of what she should be getting, given the promises made and the value of the money she contributed.

Second, and the big point that the article missed entirely, is that real gdp per capita HAS been declining, reflecting that decrease in standard of living that one would expect to see if inflation were understated.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#26
post #2

“Cars last longer, require less fuel to operate and are better for the environment.” That emissions chart looked good. Half as much as 1970. Too bad we have 5 times as many vehicles There were 250 million vehicles in the world in 1970. 1.3 billion today and we’re projected to go to 2 billion by 2035. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle#Ownership_tren...

Also, all those changes were wrought by government fiat, and have been accomplished almost completely by reducing the weight of the cars, not by quality improvements as the article implies.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#27

I found the “Price Changes” graph about 2/3 down the page really alarming. Virtually all of the gains in the form of lowered prices are purely in discretionary consumption and subsistence goods. Cheap entertainment, toys, staple foods. Meanwhile the insane price increases are in critical needs, medical care, housing, college education. In my mind that graph is pretty strong evidence that there really is massive infla…

This is just it ; The author doesn't compare to CPI as calculated using the methodologies for the 1990s or the 1980s - he just builds a straw man and throws cheap consumer electronics at it. What he fails to realize, is that this is precisely the argument of those who believe real inflation to be higher than reported; Namely, that without including cheap electronics and luxury items the picture is much much worse - w…

I can't imagine that would go any better. I think I'll just pass on reading the author's thoughts.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#28

I found the “Price Changes” graph about 2/3 down the page really alarming. Virtually all of the gains in the form of lowered prices are purely in discretionary consumption and subsistence goods. Cheap entertainment, toys, staple foods. Meanwhile the insane price increases are in critical needs, medical care, housing, college education. In my mind that graph is pretty strong evidence that there really is massive infla…

This was a point I made when the pandemic shortages kicked off. The entire world's purchasing habits shifted towards guns, food, prepping gear, and TP. The prices of those items skyrocketed (when they could be found). I predicted at the time that, even though everyone was experiencing massive price inflation in the stuff we were actually buying, largely due to increased demand, it was not going to show up in the numbers because of the way inflation is calculated.

Put another way, if I'm in the market for housing, healthcare, groceries and gardening supplies, and the prices of all those things around skyrocketing, then it doesn't matter much to me if the price of cars is down 20% since the crisis began. The inflation measures, however, don't account for the shifts in purchasing demand, which should weight the measure heavily.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#29
post #3

Is the author debating a strawman or something? Actually, they just seem confused. At the start, they state asset price increase is not inflation, then, at the end, agree that there is some inflation going on in the real estate space. So the author is agreeing with the people they're supposedly countering. I don't understand the point of this piece.

Yes, the author is debating a straw man. The argument that the government is understating inflation is a pretty simple one. 1) The government is heavily incentivized to understate inflation in order to limit its expenditures for social security and TIPS, both of which are indexed to inflation. Social security in particular would explode in costs if, say, the official rate had been 1% higher on average over the past 3…

> Yes, the author is debating a straw man.

No, the author is debating crazy people:

> Unfortunately, the pandemic has permanently broken every economic chart in existence.

> But if we take away the outlier 2020 data points, the average real annual GDP growth from 2010-2019 was 2.3%. The inflation rate in that time averaged roughly 1.8% per year.

> If you’re one of the conspiracy people who believe inflation has actually been running at 5-6% per year, that would assume the economy has been contracting by 1-3% per year over the past 10 years.

> And if you’re a full tinfoil hat person who assumes inflation is actually 10-12% per year[fn2], that’s like saying we’ve been in a full-blown depression and the economy has lost 80% of its value.

> This is absurd and patently false but that’s the claim you’re making if you really think inflation is this high.

[fn2] then points to a tweet:

* https://twitter.com/tanayj/status/1345080274107785216?s=20

Which has inflation at 10-12%, per:

* https://chapwoodindex.com/

The creator of this report is Ed Butowsky:

* https://chapwoodindex.com/contact-us/

Butowsky is one of the people who put forward the idea that the DNC murdered Seth Rich for Hillary's Wikileaks e-mails:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Butowsky#Murder_of_Seth_Ric...

If GDP was growth for the last decade was "only" ~2.5%, then how could have inflation been higher than that? It would have meant we were in a recession/depression.

Re: Inflation Truthers

#30
Isn't this entire article missing the difference between a luxury item and an essential item? A smartphone 10 years ago was a luxury for just about everyone who owned one (that is, bought with extra money) now it's a requirement.

The luxury purchase folks are certainly getting a better deal as apples:apples prices go down; but if you're paycheck to paycheck and used to be able to not buy a smartphone but now have to - you're just running on tighter margins.

I would imagine measuring economic well being directly through something like a "economic desperation index" makes more sense than doing a bunch of calculus on comparing the price and quality of items in two different years since the latter would only apply to people who own the item in both domains. Especially in the context of this article which is discussing if people have it better now or then.

Post reply on HN