Inflation continues on record pace.

Fed crushing the stock market by raising interest rates to fight inflation which Trapper says no longer exists.

This inflationary cycle has been interesting because IMO it is showing how allowing lighter controls on markets, commonly called neoliberalism, creates the situation where the 99% cannot save money, since when they do the owners just raise the prices to suck it out the 99%'s saving accounts and into the owner's pockets.

I'll assume only the US is having inflation issues because of Biden, no way the whole world is having inflation, right?

InTenSity wrote:I'll assume only the US is having inflation issues because of Biden, no way the whole world is having inflation, right?

The US is having inflation issues because of Biden - printing up trillions of dollars and injecting them into the economy. What would you expect?

Other countries with inflation followed the same failed economic path.

Economics really needs to be a required subject in high school and college rather than gender studies and DEI administration.

Did you forget Trump pumped $2.6+ trillion into the economy with backing of the Rs before Biden? (disingenuous/hypocritical much?)

Let alone the trying to look at that in a vacuum... Both DID pump a shit ton into the economy... because it would have been/was SHOT because of the pandemic (unless you need a scape goat in the next election cycle, or your own little personal mental gymnastics...)

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Did you forget Trump pumped $2.6+ trillion into the economy with backing of the Rs before Biden?

This doesn't count. Trump was saving the country and Biden and the libs are trying to destroy it. Duh.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Did you forget Trump pumped $2.6+ trillion into the economy with backing of the Rs before Biden? (disingenuous/hypocritical much?)

Let alone the trying to look at that in a vacuum... Both DID pump a shit ton into the economy... because it would have been/was SHOT because of the pandemic (unless you need a scape goat in the next election cycle, or your own little personal mental gymnastics...)

I suppose all the inflation due to huge profits for the corporations is a global thing, so it would be all the money pumped into the economy by Trump & Biden and the automatic money pumped into their economies by the other countries on the globe, now being gobbled up by the corporations because they can.

"Free Market" economic theory doesn't work when the owners are in cartels with no meaningful competition.

Our inflation issue is not because of spending. We should be spending more. Should the pandemic relief have been more targeted? Yes. Did it have any effect on inflation? Yes. But it was far from the primary factor. The pandemic spending saved us from a recession. The pandemic spending allowed us to rebound faster than anyone thought possible. Inflation isn’t about the checks or the social spending to keep people healthy and salient. This administration is doing a fucking great job. If you can’t see that you’re purposely not seeing it or you’re dumb. Corporate profits and the proliferation of ultra wealthy .001% is the highest it’s ever been. Prices are going up faster than inflationary pressure. There is price fixing happening. They talk about it openly on their earnings calls. I mean, fuck. Are we so blinded by our hatred for trans kids that we can’t see who’s really fucking us over? Does a pronoun really mean that much to us?

Putin and Trumps’s biggest fan is back.

Rocinante wrote:Our inflation issue is not because of spending. We should be spending more.  Should the pandemic relief have been more targeted? Yes. Did it have any effect on inflation? Yes. But it was far from the primary factor. The pandemic spending saved us from a recession. The pandemic spending allowed us to rebound faster than anyone thought possible. Inflation isn’t about the checks or the social spending to keep people healthy and salient. This administration is doing a fucking great job. If you can’t see that you’re purposely not seeing it or you’re dumb. Corporate profits and the proliferation of ultra wealthy .001% is the highest it’s ever been. Prices are going up faster than inflationary pressure. There is price fixing happening. They talk about it openly on their earnings calls. I mean, fuck. Are we so blinded by our hatred for trans kids that we can’t see who’s really fucking us over? Does a pronoun really mean that much to us?

I agree.

However, the US system is set up to create this issue.

When we are using the idea of market forces creating more competition to keep profits controlled along with too few companies in each market we end up with inflation.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Rocinante wrote:Our inflation issue is not because of spending. We should be spending more.  Should the pandemic relief have been more targeted? Yes. Did it have any effect on inflation? Yes. But it was far from the primary factor. The pandemic spending saved us from a recession. The pandemic spending allowed us to rebound faster than anyone thought possible. Inflation isn’t about the checks or the social spending to keep people healthy and salient. This administration is doing a fucking great job. If you can’t see that you’re purposely not seeing it or you’re dumb. Corporate profits and the proliferation of ultra wealthy .001% is the highest it’s ever been. Prices are going up faster than inflationary pressure. There is price fixing happening. They talk about it openly on their earnings calls. I mean, fuck. Are we so blinded by our hatred for trans kids that we can’t see who’s really fucking us over? Does a pronoun really mean that much to us?

I agree.

However, the US system is set up to create this issue.

When we are using the idea of market forces creating more competition to keep profits controlled along with too few companies in each market we end up with inflation.

No. Because that's not what inflation is.

Inflation is an increase in the money supply which devalues the currency. I know it's been the trend for the last 5-10 years but trying to redefine everything to fit the current political narrative isn't going to result in better outcomes.

Rocinante wrote:Our inflation issue is not because of spending. We should be spending more. Should the pandemic relief have been more targeted? Yes. Did it have any effect on inflation? Yes. But it was far from the primary factor. The pandemic spending saved us from a recession. The pandemic spending allowed us to rebound faster than anyone thought possible. Inflation isn’t about the checks or the social spending to keep people healthy and salient. This administration is doing a fucking great job. If you can’t see that you’re purposely not seeing it or you’re dumb. Corporate profits and the proliferation of ultra wealthy .001% is the highest it’s ever been. Prices are going up faster than inflationary pressure. There is price fixing happening. They talk about it openly on their earnings calls. I mean, fuck. Are we so blinded by our hatred for trans kids that we can’t see who’s really fucking us over? Does a pronoun really mean that much to us?

Where in god's name are you getting all of this?

Where did you study economics at and who was your professor?

Looks like we have RQA posing as a faux blackman

GRR Spartan wrote:Looks like we have RQA posing as a faux blackman

Would you like to join our conversation or are you just going to continue being you?

Many are so entranced by the beauty of their vision that they cannot see the ugly reality they are creating in the real world.

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

I agree.

However, the US system is set up to create this issue.

When we are using the idea of market forces creating more competition to keep profits controlled along with too few companies in each market we end up with inflation.

No. Because that's not what inflation is.

Inflation is an increase in the money supply which devalues the currency. I know it's been the trend for the last 5-10 years but trying to redefine everything to fit the current political narrative isn't going to result in better outcomes.

Inflation is when the price of goods & services increases but the value of the goods & services does not.

This can occur when the amount of legal tender is increased in an economy but increasing the amount of legal tender in an economy doesn't always cause this to occur.

Inflation can occur without an increase in legal tender through various mechanisms.

Also, the amount of legal tender can be increased without causing inflation.

The complexity of this is what causes inflation to be somewhat difficult to predict.

This is due to economic being more an argument about politics than an actual science of the economy.

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:Many are so entranced by the beauty of their vision that they cannot see the ugly reality they are creating in the real world.

I think we can put the people who believe in "ideal free markets" at the top of the heap of those that you speak of.

RQA wrote:Fed crushing the stock market by raising interest rates to fight inflation which Trapper says no longer exists.

Inflation is permanent. Technically it can be reversed but there is zero political will for deflation on either side of the aisle. We are in the "loot the treasury" phase of empire collapse.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:Many are so entranced by the beauty of their vision that they cannot see the ugly reality they are creating in the real world.

I think we can put the people who believe in "ideal free markets" at the top of the heap of those that you speak of.

Where have free markets lead to uglier outcomes?

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

No. Because that's not what inflation is.

Inflation is an increase in the money supply which devalues the currency. I know it's been the trend for the last 5-10 years but trying to redefine everything to fit the current political narrative isn't going to result in better outcomes.

Inflation is when the price of goods & services increases but the value of the goods & services does not.

This can occur when the amount of legal tender is increased in an economy but increasing the amount of legal tender in an economy doesn't always cause this to occur.

Inflation can occur without an increase in legal tender through various mechanisms.

Also, the amount of legal tender can be increased without causing inflation.

The complexity of this is what causes inflation to be somewhat difficult to predict.

This is due to economic being more an argument about politics than an actual science of the economy.

This only occurs when the value of the dollar decreases.

And yes, increasing the money supply always results in an increase in the prices of goods because there are more dollars chasing the same amount of goods.

Where has inflation occurred without money supply increases?

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Inflation is when the price of goods & services increases but the value of the goods & services does not.

This can occur when the amount of legal tender is increased in an economy but increasing the amount of legal tender in an economy doesn't always cause this to occur.

Inflation can occur without an increase in legal tender through various mechanisms.

Also, the amount of legal tender can be increased without causing inflation.

The complexity of this is what causes inflation to be somewhat difficult to predict.

This is due to economic being more an argument about politics than an actual science of the economy.

This only occurs when the value of the dollar decreases.

And yes, increasing the money supply always results in an increase in the prices of goods because there are more dollars chasing the same amount of goods.

Where has inflation occurred without money supply increases?

Using that statement "inflation only occurs when the value of the dollar decreases" absolutely tells us we do not have inflation right now, something I, and most people probably, don't agree with. There are still goods and services which are less expensive today than 6 months ago, which if the dollar were worth less would not be the case. Furthermore, the dollar as compared to other currencies, has been increasing in value. Thus, this definition does not capture what is ongoing.

As for more dollars chasing goods and services, if the goods and services increase at the same rate as the number of dollars then that is not true.

The oil crisis of the 1970's had a sudden increase in oil prices with the same number of dollars in circulation. It was political on the part of the suppliers, a sudden decrease in supply.

We have been seeing some similarity in the last 3 years. Basic supply and demand mismatches causing both price deflations and price inflations.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

This only occurs when the value of the dollar decreases.

And yes, increasing the money supply always results in an increase in the prices of goods because there are more dollars chasing the same amount of goods.

Where has inflation occurred without money supply increases?

Using that statement "inflation only occurs when the value of the dollar decreases" absolutely tells us we do not have inflation right now, something I, and most people probably, don't agree with. There are still goods and services which are less expensive today than 6 months ago, which if the dollar were worth less would not be the case. Furthermore, the dollar as compared to other currencies, has been increasing in value. Thus, this definition does not capture what is ongoing.

As for more dollars chasing goods and services, if the goods and services increase at the same rate as the number of dollars then that is not true.

The oil crisis of the 1970's had a sudden increase in oil prices with the same number of dollars in circulation. It was political on the part of the suppliers, a sudden decrease in supply.

We have been seeing some similarity in the last 3 years. Basic supply and demand mismatches causing both price deflations and price inflations.

What has the CPI been telling us? What would the CPI, using the pre-2002 parameters tell us? What would the CPI, using the pre 1989 parameters, tell us? It's not even putting as much emphasis on food/energy as it did pre 2002 and certainly pre 1989 and it's still showing over 8%. The real CPI is undoubtedly much higher if we were going by previous standards.

But our "people, not angels" would never, ever manipulate how we record and present a data point to the public in a manipulated manner for their own political/wealth ambitions, of course. The government is just an impartial referee who has no interest or investment in the outcome of market forces for personal gain.

You don't compare the dollar to other currencies to determine inflationary effects. That's just a relative comparison with other countries that are doing the same thing our Fed is to various degrees. You compare the dollar to itself over time to determine those effects.

Trapper Gus wrote:

The oil crisis of the 1970's had a sudden increase in oil prices with the same number of dollars in circulation. It was political on the part of the suppliers, a sudden decrease in supply.

We have been seeing some similarity in the last 3 years. Basic supply and demand mismatches causing both price deflations and price inflations.

Do you think the various states forcibly shutting wide swaths of this "free market" economy down for months on end, politicians picking and choosing who could continue operating and who couldn't might have a drastic effect beyond "political" on the supply chains?

In Feb 1970 the M2 growth rate was 2.25%. By Oct '71 it was at 13.44%. They were printing the entire time.

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Using that statement "inflation only occurs when the value of the dollar decreases" absolutely tells us we do not have inflation right now, something I, and most people probably, don't agree with.  There are still goods and services which are less expensive today than 6 months ago, which if the dollar were worth less would not be the case.  Furthermore, the dollar as compared to other currencies, has been increasing in value.  Thus, this definition does not capture what is ongoing.

As for more dollars chasing goods and services, if the goods and services increase at the same rate as the number of dollars then that is not true.

The oil crisis of the 1970's had a sudden increase in oil prices with the same number of dollars in circulation.  It was political on the part of the suppliers, a sudden decrease in supply.

We have been seeing some similarity in the last 3 years.  Basic supply and demand mismatches causing both price deflations and price inflations.

What has the CPI been telling us? What would the CPI, using the pre-2002 parameters tell us? What would the CPI, using the pre 1989 parameters, tell us? It's not even putting as much emphasis on food/energy as it did pre 2002 and certainly pre 1989 and it's still showing over 8%. The real CPI is undoubtedly much higher if we were going by previous standards.

But our "people, not angels" would never, ever manipulate how we record and present a data point to the public in a manipulated manner for their own political/wealth ambitions, of course. The government is just an impartial referee who has no interest or investment in the outcome of market forces for personal gain.

You don't compare the dollar to other currencies to determine inflationary effects. That's just a relative comparison with other countries that are doing the same thing our Fed is to various degrees. You compare the dollar to itself over time to determine those effects.

The CPI calculations are adjusted from time to time to match what people are buying, and as research is done to match what the costs for the average person are, such as in housing.  This argument of it not being a gold standard is a canard.

We have done what can be done to have honest numbers.  The BLS is a bureaucracy staffed with professionals whose work is transparent for those who have the will and skill to understand it.  Yes, Trump wants to change that so he can have the numbers he wants to see, but for the most part the system defeated his efforts.  People who blindly make accusations without knowledge, are just ignorant.

So now the value of the dollar, as measured by probably the most accurate market regarding its value, doesn't count.  I disagree.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

What has the CPI been telling us? What would the CPI, using the pre-2002 parameters tell us? What would the CPI, using the pre 1989 parameters, tell us? It's not even putting as much emphasis on food/energy as it did pre 2002 and certainly pre 1989 and it's still showing over 8%. The real CPI is undoubtedly much higher if we were going by previous standards.

But our "people, not angels" would never, ever manipulate how we record and present a data point to the public in a manipulated manner for their own political/wealth ambitions, of course. The government is just an impartial referee who has no interest or investment in the outcome of market forces for personal gain.

You don't compare the dollar to other currencies to determine inflationary effects. That's just a relative comparison with other countries that are doing the same thing our Fed is to various degrees. You compare the dollar to itself over time to determine those effects.

The CPI calculations are adjusted from time to time to match what people are buying, and as research is done to match what the costs for the average person are, such as in housing.  This argument of it not being a gold standard is a canard.

We have done what can be done to have honest numbers.  The BLS is a bureaucracy staffed with professionals whose work is transparent for those who have the will and skill to understand it.  Yes, Trump wants to change that so he can have the numbers he wants to see, but for the most part the system defeated his efforts.  People who blindly make accusations without knowledge, are just ignorant.

So now the value of the dollar, as measured by probably the most accurate market regarding its value, doesn't count.  I disagree.

Your blind acceptance that public sector bureaucrats aren't motivated by incentives while everyone else is, is ignorant.

What is that kinder, gentler, more palatable CPI telling us, then? If it's a mix of prices increasing and decreasing, even without putting the weight on food and energy that it used to, it should be flat or "near target," right?

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

The oil crisis of the 1970's had a sudden increase in oil prices with the same number of dollars in circulation. It was political on the part of the suppliers, a sudden decrease in supply.

We have been seeing some similarity in the last 3 years. Basic supply and demand mismatches causing both price deflations and price inflations.

Do you think the various states forcibly shutting wide swaths of this "free market" economy down for months on end, politicians picking and choosing who could continue operating and who couldn't might have a drastic effect beyond "political" on the supply chains?

In Feb 1970 the M2 growth rate was 2.25%. By Oct '71 it was at 13.44%. They were printing the entire time.

However, the oil embargo didn't happen until February 1973, which is when inflation went up.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Do you think the various states forcibly shutting wide swaths of this "free market" economy down for months on end, politicians picking and choosing who could continue operating and who couldn't might have a drastic effect beyond "political" on the supply chains?

In Feb 1970 the M2 growth rate was 2.25%. By Oct '71 it was at 13.44%. They were printing the entire time.

However, the oil embargo didn't happen until February 1973, which is when inflation went up.

The upward inflation trajectory started in Feb 1972 and remained consistent until Oct '74.

Edit: Slight misspeak; remained consistent as in it's trajectory.

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:


The CPI calculations are adjusted from time to time to match what people are buying, and as research is done to match what the costs for the average person are, such as in housing.  This argument of it not being a gold standard is a canard.

We have done what can be done to have honest numbers.  The BLS is a bureaucracy staffed with professionals whose work is transparent for those who have the will and skill to understand it.  Yes, Trump wants to change that so he can have the numbers he wants to see, but for the most part the system defeated his efforts.  People who blindly make accusations without knowledge, are just ignorant.

So now the value of the dollar, as measured by probably the most accurate market regarding its value, doesn't count.  I disagree.

Your blind acceptance that public sector bureaucrats aren't motivated by incentives while everyone else is, is ignorant.

What is that kinder, gentler, more palatable CPI telling us, then? If it's a mix of prices increasing and decreasing, even without putting the weight on food and energy that it used to, it should be flat or "near target," right?

Their work is transparent and discussed almost endlessly in academic journals where the different points of view on proper measurement is fought out. The numbers they produce and the methods they use to produce them are not done by whim, if they are shading the numbers, they are doing it in plain sight and other people would be pointing that out. So, no one is blindly accepting their numbers, these numbers are checked and double checked by all sorts of people.

The CPI is telling us that the "average" consumer in an urban setting is experiencing on average this increase or decrease in the prices of what they buy on a daily basis. To get into the details of a consumer in say, Detroit, you need to go to the BLS web site and look it up, as those are calculated by the BLS, too.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Your blind acceptance that public sector bureaucrats aren't motivated by incentives while everyone else is, is ignorant.

What is that kinder, gentler, more palatable CPI telling us, then? If it's a mix of prices increasing and decreasing, even without putting the weight on food and energy that it used to, it should be flat or "near target," right?

Their work is transparent and discussed almost endlessly in academic journals where the different points of view on proper measurement is fought out. The numbers they produce and the methods they use to produce them are not done by whim, if they are shading the numbers, they are doing it in plain sight and other people would be pointing that out. So, no one is blindly accepting their numbers, these numbers are checked and double checked by all sorts of people.

The CPI is telling us that the "average" consumer in an urban setting is experiencing on average this increase or decrease in the prices of what they buy on a daily basis. To get into the details of a consumer in say, Detroit, you need to go to the BLS web site and look it up, as those are calculated by the BLS, too.

I didn't suggest they were hiding it.

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

However, the oil embargo didn't happen until February 1973, which is when inflation went up.

The upward inflation trajectory started in Feb 1972 and remained consistent until Oct '74.

Edit: Slight misspeak; remained consistent as in it's trajectory.

To seriously go deeper you and I will have to agree on the method of measurement.

Here is the year-to-year inflation, it does not support your statement.

Furthermore, you pointed out that the M2 was increasing two years prior, so the connection between money and inflation is pretty weak.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

The upward inflation trajectory started in Feb 1972 and remained consistent until Oct '74.

Edit: Slight misspeak; remained consistent as in it's trajectory.

To seriously go deeper you and I will have to agree on the method of measurement.

Here is the year-to-year inflation, it does not support your statement.

Furthermore, you pointed out that the M2 was increasing two years prior, so the connection between money and inflation is pretty weak.

Get a higher resolution.

longtermtrends.net/m2-money-supply-vs-inflation/

Edit: I'm not allowed to post outside links for a week or so.

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Their work is transparent and discussed almost endlessly in academic journals where the different points of view on proper measurement is fought out.  The numbers they produce and the methods they use to produce them are not done by whim, if they are shading the numbers, they are doing it in plain sight and other people would be pointing that out.  So, no one is blindly accepting their numbers, these numbers are checked and double checked by all sorts of people.

The CPI is telling us that the "average" consumer in an urban setting is experiencing on average this increase or decrease in the prices of what they buy on a daily basis.  To get into the details of a consumer in say, Detroit, you need to go to the BLS web site and look it up, as those are calculated by the BLS, too.

I didn't suggest they were hiding it.

Sorry. The words "blind acceptance" suggests otherwise, but I accept you didn't mean what you typed.

Okay, here is the chart from the link.



It does not make the case for the M2 causing inflation, snidely I would say it seems to be making to opposite case.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

I didn't suggest they were hiding it.

Sorry. The words "blind acceptance" suggests otherwise, but I accept you didn't mean what you typed.

I don't think they're hiding anything. They don't need to. They do things that barely anyone pays attention to let alone would understand even if they did. This is where we get the 81% of people you reference above type headlines.

You'll take positions that lead me to believe we're in the same boat (hatred for corporations, for example) but then advocate for their enablers, defenders and allies to take more control over the system they've never had this much control over and continue to exercise more and more control over.
Why do corporations donate as much money as they have to Democrats and Republicans? What is the purpose of that exchange, do you think?

Trapper Gus wrote:Okay, here is the chart from the link.



It does not make the case for the M2 causing inflation, snidely I would say it seems to be making to opposite case.

I gave you the exact numbers from each historical data point I referenced. These are rates, mind you. Inflation following slightly behind money supply increases.

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:Okay, here is the chart from the link.



It does not make the case for the M2 causing inflation, snidely I would say it seems to be making to opposite case.

I gave you the exact numbers from each historical data point I referenced. These are rates, mind you. Inflation following slightly behind money supply increases.

Another 2621 shtick. Are the mods this clueless?

PennSpartan wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

I gave you the exact numbers from each historical data point I referenced. These are rates, mind you. Inflation following slightly behind money supply increases.

Another 2621 shtick. Are the mods this clueless?

First I was RQA and now I'm a numbered schtick?

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:


Sorry. The words "blind acceptance" suggests otherwise, but I accept you didn't mean what you typed.

I don't think they're hiding anything. They don't need to. They do things that barely anyone pays attention to let alone would understand even if they did. This is where we get the 81% of people you reference above type headlines.

You'll take positions that lead me to believe we're in the same boat (hatred for corporations, for example) but then advocate for their enablers, defenders and allies to take more control over the system they've never had this much control over and continue to exercise more and more control over.
Why do corporations donate as much money as they have to Democrats and Republicans? What is the purpose of that exchange, do you think?

The CPI numbers are what they are.  The best attempt that the BLS can create to track the "cost of living".  They don't change the way they are calculated all that often, minor changes every few years, major changes, such as how they calculate housing maybe about once every 20 years or so.  From month to month and year to year they are using the same inputs and formula to create the index.  They are not "shading" it each time for political purposes. If they were they would be called out on it by the exerts who are watching them.

We are in the current situation because of a very long-term effort by a group of very wealthy people, the membership of who those are, has changed, somewhat, but that is still the group who created this mess.

Their major win was the election of Reagan.  In the Reagan administration their taxes were slashed & the rules on how much they could control (regulations) were hugely reduced, thus ever since they have been able to control more and more of the companies in the economy.

Biden is the first President since FDR who has been working to undo some of this damage to our society, and really in his administration the people who Senator Warren asked him to appoint to those position.

Here are two links to some information on what Reagan et al did to us.

https://hartmannreport.com/p/dear-republicans-we-tried-your-way

https://hartmannreport.com/p/why-the-reagan-revolution-scheme

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:Okay, here is the chart from the link.



It does not make the case for the M2 causing inflation, snidely I would say it seems to be making to opposite case.

I gave you the exact numbers from each historical data point I referenced. These are rates, mind you. Inflation following slightly behind money supply increases.

Yes, you did, however on the graph when the M2 goes up inflation stays low, and the inflation goes up when M2 goes down.  Not seeing the correlation between M2 and inflation.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jacques D'Gatineaux wrote:

I don't think they're hiding anything. They don't need to. They do things that barely anyone pays attention to let alone would understand even if they did. This is where we get the 81% of people you reference above type headlines.

You'll take positions that lead me to believe we're in the same boat (hatred for corporations, for example) but then advocate for their enablers, defenders and allies to take more control over the system they've never had this much control over and continue to exercise more and more control over.
Why do corporations donate as much money as they have to Democrats and Republicans? What is the purpose of that exchange, do you think?

The CPI numbers are what they are.  The best attempt that the BLS can create to track the "cost of living".  They don't change the way they are calculated all that often, minor changes every few years, major changes, such as how they calculate housing maybe about once every 20 years or so.  From month to month and year to year they are using the same inputs and formula to create the index.  They are nor "shading" it each time for political purposes.

We are in the current situation because of a very long-term effort by a group of very wealthy people, the membership of who those are, has changed, somewhat, but that is still the group who created this mess.

Their major win was the election of Reagan.  In the Reagan administration their taxes were slashed & the rules on how much they could control (regulations) were hugely reduced, thus ever since they have been able to control more and more of the companies in the economy.

Biden is the first President since FDR who has been working to undo some of this damage to our society, and really in his administration the people who Senator Warren asked him to appoint to those position.

Here are two links to some information on what Reagan et al did to us.

I wouldn't argue everything was hunky dory before Reagan.

Woodrow Wilson was far more damaging than Reagan ever was.