How much is $17 trillion? Visualized for reference.

[Bucketlist2012]

Originally Posted by parsonsj

We're coming up on 4 years since many economists claimed that fiscal stimulus and Federal Reserve quantitative easing were going to cause massive inflation and high Treasury bond yields.

So far they've uh, been a bit on the wrong side.

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/0...epartment.html

You are drunk on your kool aid..No Inflation ? Sure if your figures leave out Food and energy costs.

Dude you won't convert anyone with your "facts", they are biased numbers.

Again, the readers will decide from this thread what they think, and you are a lone wolf..No one believes what you believe.

Food costs are up, and the size of the products are down. So an increase of 30% in costs, and a reduction of the size of the product by 20% is Inflation, plain and simple.

[parsonsj]

Correct: core inflation excludes food and energy because they have volatile price swings. For example, recent oil prices have trended considerably downward -- which would skew inflation numbers, and cause poor policy choices.

That's not to say the food and energy prices don't show up in the core: they do as they are assimilated into the greater economy. Just not their "retail" numbers.

Here's a look at core vs "headline" (which includes energy and food costs). Note how they are similar, but core is less volatile:

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/d...e-and-Core.php

You can see that trying to use headline vs core inflation as a way of saying that we do have high inflation is a red herring.

[realcoray]

Originally Posted by Bucketlist2012

Again, the readers will decide from this thread what they think, and you are a lone wolf..No one believes what you believe.

Food costs are up, and the size of the products are down. So an increase of 30% in costs, and a reduction of the size of the product by 20% is Inflation, plain and simple.

I am pretty aligned with what JP believes (or at least his level headed approach), I just don't feel like arguing about it.

What I will say is that I heard something on NPR about a study that demonstrated the fairly obvious concept that people choose to access news/media that aligns with what they already believe.

Granted you could say I was listening to liberal government funded NPR because I believe X or Y, and just ignore whatever I have to say but the source shouldn't matter. Doesn't it just make sense that people would do that?

My point is only that it's good to listen to people with other opinions, and it's pretty weak to attack people that have different views because you just may be wrong.

[Tony_SS]

Originally Posted by parsonsj

Correct: core inflation excludes food and energy because they have volatile price swings. For example, recent oil prices have trended considerably downward -- which would skew inflation numbers, and cause poor policy choices.

That's not to say the food and energy prices don't show up in the core: they do as they are assimilated into the greater economy. Just not their "retail" numbers.

Here's a look at core vs "headline" (which includes energy and food costs). Note how they are similar, but core is less volatile:

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/d...e-and-Core.php

You can see that trying to use headline vs core inflation as a way of saying that we do have high inflation is a red herring.

The real red herring is that food and energy is excluded and the excuse because it's volatile? That goes for every other commodity. They're all "volatile". Try buying cotton, paper and ink. Should we exclude those too?

It's like real unemployment numbers are cooked too. It does not include workers that settle for part time, ones who's benefits expire or those who gave up and stopped looking. So yes, its true that official are deceptive.

Even the former Comptroller General agreed. David Walker admits the fudged numbers in all sorts of "official" areas. I just finished I.O.U.S.A and it 100% neutral. I'm going to keep recommending it until someone watches it.

BTW, they had to buy a new debt clock. The owners of it said so, since we broke the $9 trillion mark.

[Bucketlist2012]

Originally Posted by realcoray

I am pretty aligned with what JP believes (or at least his level headed approach), I just don't feel like arguing about it.

What I will say is that I heard something on NPR about a study that demonstrated the fairly obvious concept that people choose to access news/media that aligns with what they already believe.

Granted you could say I was listening to liberal government funded NPR because I believe X or Y, and just ignore whatever I have to say but the source shouldn't matter. Doesn't it just make sense that people would do that?

My point is only that it's good to listen to people with other opinions, and it's pretty weak to attack people that have different views because you just may be wrong.

You miss my point and call it a weak attack..The point is that one person can post all the "facts" that they want, and we all know that they are just cooked numbers. Reality in the real world,it tell us different. You cannot say that inflation is not happening if you are out buying products.It is obvious that it is here.

Why do you think I post to let the readers decide ? I did not "attack" him.

I own tons of several assets that are Commodity based..I see my profits.I know what is happening..I don't worry about food or gasoline because others are paying me for it.

It is obvious that we will never change each others minds. That isn't what the thread is about..It is to post ALL sides, and let people decide for themselves... Everyone will have their own view, no doctored figures will change my mind, or your mind, and that is what is cool about it. We don't have to think like each other.

So with that, I welcome John's posts, and your thoughts, because the readers need both sides to make their own choice. I personally don't care what someone thinks, I for sure am not posting to win the"argument". There is no arguing.We all have our beliefs and one thread won't change that.

And I really appreciate your post. It makes me realize that I am wasting my time on this thread. Nothing will change, and no one may be reading this but us few people..So I will leave it at that and let the facts speak in the real world, and not on paper, or the Internet.

[parsonsj]

Policy choices take time, and need to be done based on reasonable and continuing trends. Excluding volatile data helps keep policies on that path. Commodity prices do get reflected into core inflation as they change long term wages and business costs.

As an example look at Headline inflation in the chart from my previous post. If the US and/or the Fed had reacted to the spikes and valleys in those numbers during the recession of 2008/09, we might have seen an amplification of them, rather than damping.

I was hoping we could discuss these matters using facts -- but we seem to have trouble even agreeing on those.

[parsonsj]

Originally Posted by Mike

No one believes what you believe.

Many message boards tend to have echo-chamber tendencies, and this one is no different. But I must point out that there are millions of people, nations even, of people with views different than one's own. We ignore the possibility of being wrong at our own peril.

[Tony_SS]

Originally Posted by parsonsj

Policy choices take time, and need to be done based on reasonable and continuing trends. Excluding volatile data helps keep policies on that path. Commodity prices do get reflected into core inflation as they change long term wages and business costs.

As an example look at Headline inflation in the chart from my previous post. If the US and/or the Fed had reacted to the spikes and valleys in those numbers during the recession of 2008/09, we might have seen an amplification of them, rather than damping.

I was hoping we could discuss these matters using facts -- but we seem to have trouble even agreeing on those.

But who's facts, the governments? Is 8.2% unemployment a "fact"?

Facts are digging up my receipts from the past 2 years and seeing ink, paper and cotton just WELL over 10%.

But what sort of policy change can reverse the decline of the dollar to the tune of 95%? It doesn't matter because the monopoly known as the Fed is not interested in that. It's an instrument of wealth transfer. Yet we somehow give them clout as innocent, principled bankers just trying to do the 'right thing'. AKA, Gods' work.

[Tony_SS]

Originally Posted by parsonsj

We ignore the possibility of being wrong at our own peril.

A-men!

Here you go:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...67650600562607

But in reality John, you should be riding high. The Fed is in power, along with Wall St and they are running the show, so what are you so concerned about? The policy of govt stimulus and creating more fiat money is in full effect.. What are you warning us about?

[realcoray]

Originally Posted by Tony_SS

But who's facts, the governments? Is 8.2% unemployment a "fact"?

I don't think anyone would disagree in terms of 'underemployment', ie people who took part time work or just gave up completely, being much higher than 8.2%, but wasn't that also the case back when unemployment was reported at 5%, chances are some people had to take part time jobs when they would have preferred full time, etc.

It's a number that is not shrouded in secrecy in regards to how it's calculated, just like the inflation values thrown around here. It's common knowledge that it excludes some things, things which actually have a real effect on everyday people. We all notice food and gas prices going up or down, we're less likely to notice the price of paper going up as you point out.

A business owner might but even then, myopia can influence things. If I work at a business that uses a lot of paper, ink and cotton, and they all go up 10%, of course inflation would seem high, but what if I worked at a plant that used natural gas to manufacture things, where the price of it has dropped significantly, wouldn't I have a different view?