Live data from Hacker News

Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

bls.gov

81–90 of 150 posts

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#81
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying it seems to have become a taboo, probably because of the existential horror of it possibly being true.

Is there an alternative?

Say the truth; take the downvotes.

But I would say that the voting that matters most is voting in primaries. Get rid of the ideologues and zealots on both sides; get some people who can think rather than just yell.

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You do it via constitutional amendment, which is a popular referendum. Aka...voting. If you truly believe "voting doesn't work", as you first said (EDIT: that was someone else whose username starts with a "b" sorry), then this referendum won't go anywhere either.

They didn’t say that! That was kitty Caligula.

Actually in this thread it was https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48490568 but yeah the person I responded to isn't them either.

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#83
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This presumes way more competence at the top than we’ve got. That is the intended perception because the public figures are imbeciles. The people in the background are highly competent and controlling energy flows to US "allies" has been a priority issue since Reagan blew up a Soviet pipeline to Germany. Or make the starting point the Suez Crisis when the US unseated Britain in the Middle East and took over.

> people in the background are highly competent and controlling energy flows to US "allies" What’s your evidence? Because nothing done recently has supported American hegemony, even among our allies. Many of whom yes, are buying a bit more from us energywise, but a lot more from others all while accelerating decarbonisarion. It’s always nice to think someone is in charge. The truth is modern societies are too complex…

Yet, growth mindset.

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#84
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your suggested alternative? Would you say that American democracy is broken or democracy in general?

"Democracy" is a hugely wide category some variant of it is likely the preferred system of governance. Regardless, it's a weasel category. Many would argue that China is democratically reflecting the will of their people. In fact, Von Mises famously argued in his seminal work Liberalism that all systems are democratic because they require the will of the people or are overthrown. A little silly of a reductio in my op…

So, to repeat, what is your suggested alternative?

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there an alternative?

Say the truth; take the downvotes. But I would say that the voting that matters most is voting in primaries. Get rid of the ideologues and zealots on both sides; get some people who can think rather than just yell.

Agree. Voting doesn't just mean voting in regular elections for legislators and executives. Vote in every election you are eligible for.

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#86

Yes, purchasing power of USD declines with inflation. No, that doesn't mean over a long enough time horizon what most people think it means. USD has declined significantly since 2017 ( https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CUUR0000SA0R ), but what it buys has substantively changed. - You couldn't buy continous glucose monitors, OTC hearing aids, home heart monitors using your cellphone or watch or countless medications…

This comment that seems determined to state its conclusion without providing any evidence other than “why is so much agriculture in parts of the country that are conducive to agriculture”.

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#87
post #60
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how you elect to name two presidents in an era that were democrats while conveniently omitting the republican president in between. With all his baggages, I find this quite convenient.

It's an interesting point. With Clinton, l'affaire de bj was a willful attempt to take the president's private life public as a means of congressional focus. It should be noted that until then, this was effectively off limits . It was an open secret in DC that his predecessor, Bush the 1st, kept a mistress for years and that was never discussed publicly. In the case of Obama, the GOP noted that their top priority was…

The Lewinsky Affair got traction because Clinton used his position of power (literally in the Oval Office) to take advantage of a young subordinate, in a time when ‘sexual harassment’ was becoming a hot topic. Then lying about the affair made it much worse (as cover-ups often do). It was definitely used against Clinton by his opponents, but the way he abused his position, then perjured himself was truly shameful.

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn’t say that! That was kitty Caligula.

Actually in this thread it was https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48490568 but yeah the person I responded to isn't them either.

Kitty Caligula would have been a better name than DOGE.

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people in the background are highly competent and controlling energy flows to US "allies" What’s your evidence? Because nothing done recently has supported American hegemony, even among our allies. Many of whom yes, are buying a bit more from us energywise, but a lot more from others all while accelerating decarbonisarion. It’s always nice to think someone is in charge. The truth is modern societies are too complex…

Yet, growth mindset.

Not following.

Re: Core PPI up 9.6% annualized (0.8% MoM) in May

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's at best a weak check by the populace on two rival gangs of the ruling class. It's certainly not what its proponents claim it to be.

I see, you prefer your gangs unchecked?

I clearly did not say that, re-read and try again.

There's a lot of thoughtful responses to your histrionics, I suggest you take a breath and actually engage with the ideas contained within them.

Post reply on HN