justoffal
Diamond Member
- Jun 29, 2013
- 24,649
- 16,707
As we have discussed ...excluding food and gas prices from the cpi makes absolutely no sense at all unless of course you are interested in phony numbers. Sure they add stability to the remaining numbers but that's just the point. As a consumer your wallet is not divided up with neat little compartments that store your bill money as a separate entity from your food and gas money. But be a good little ninny and do just agree with our new methods of crunching numbers now will you please?
When the Fed uses the Term inflation it has many meanings. Some of which actually argue for the use of other, more accurate terminology.
When goods and services overwhelm the money supply small amounts of inflation ( in the form of quantitative easing for instance ) can be good because the freshly printed paper actually represents something. When QE is practiced simply to pay debt....this is not good....because it directly devalues the currency in the form of inflationary pressure which is something distinctly different from the original form of QE done to keep pace with the economic demands. Yet the same word is use for both even though they are the Ying and Yang of economic policy.
To exclude food and fuel from the equation is to claim that they are totally unrelated to the currency valuation process. That is simply a flat out lie. It's this lie that you feel when you choose to eat for the week instead of making a car payment. See...to the consumer/wage earner the separation is meaningless because there is only one currency with which we are allowed to do business. Now should the Fed put out two different kinds of dollars, one for General non food items and non fuel items and another currency to go to the supermarket with and fill up you tank with...well then maybe I could give them a pass on the asinine exclusion of those two categories...but we all know that's not part of the game.
JO
When the Fed uses the Term inflation it has many meanings. Some of which actually argue for the use of other, more accurate terminology.
When goods and services overwhelm the money supply small amounts of inflation ( in the form of quantitative easing for instance ) can be good because the freshly printed paper actually represents something. When QE is practiced simply to pay debt....this is not good....because it directly devalues the currency in the form of inflationary pressure which is something distinctly different from the original form of QE done to keep pace with the economic demands. Yet the same word is use for both even though they are the Ying and Yang of economic policy.
To exclude food and fuel from the equation is to claim that they are totally unrelated to the currency valuation process. That is simply a flat out lie. It's this lie that you feel when you choose to eat for the week instead of making a car payment. See...to the consumer/wage earner the separation is meaningless because there is only one currency with which we are allowed to do business. Now should the Fed put out two different kinds of dollars, one for General non food items and non fuel items and another currency to go to the supermarket with and fill up you tank with...well then maybe I could give them a pass on the asinine exclusion of those two categories...but we all know that's not part of the game.
JO
Last edited: