PDA

View Full Version : I don't believe CPI data from the government


toxic
03-14-2008, 08:19 AM
I've seen the Dept of Labor lie about jobs and presume they are fudging the INFLATION data here too.

A couple weeks ago there was a show on PBS following a guy getting prices for the Consumer Price Index (CPI / Inflation) calculation.

He was looking for items like Hockey Glove prices in San Diego, CA. WTF. Why aren't they measuring the real items I buy that are going up 20% a year.

BTW, remember the USD$ has dropped in value 17% in the last 12 months.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080314/wall_street.html

Stock Futures Rise on Tame CPI
Friday March 14, 8:56 am ET
By Leslie Wines, AP Business Writer
Wall Street Poised for Higher Opening After Tamer-Than-Expected Consumer Prices Report


NEW YORK (AP) -- Wall Street appeared headed for a higher opening Friday, as investors were encouraged by a report that showed consumer-level inflation cooling down.

The Labor Department said the Consumer Price Index was flat in February, a milder result than the 0.3 percent advance projected by Thomson/IFR. And consumer prices, excluding volatile food and energy prices, also were flat. Analysts had expected a 0.2 percent rise in the core rate.

The report may reduce worries that inflation is heating up at the same time the economy is slowing. The prospect of simultaneous higher prices and lower economic activity is a worst-case scenario for the economy and the Federal Reserve. But the latest price report at least suggests the Fed may be free to focus on cutting rates to stimulate the economy -- and can put aside the question of raising rates to halt inflation for the time being.

President Bush is expected to tell a gathering of economists in New York that the economy is slowing but nonetheless is fundamentally sound and poised to return to higher growth. No new initiatives should be expected, according to the White House press office.

Ahead of the speech, the futures contract for the Dow Jones industrial average was up 70 points, or 0.58 percent, at 12,221. The futures contracts for the S&P 500 rose 10.30 point, or 0.78 percent, to 1325.60 while the Nasdaq 100 contract advanced 18 points, or 1.03 percent, to 1,773.75.

On Thursday, an anxious stock market rebounded from an early plunge after Standard & Poor's predicted financial companies are nearing the end of the massive asset write-downs that have pummeled the stock and credit markets for months. The S&P projection gave investors some hope that the seemingly unrelenting losses from the mortgage and credit crisis might indeed be bottoming out.

Stock market investors Friday will have to keep an eye on the dwindling dollar and events in the soaring commodities market, after both gold and oil futures set new records on Thursday and the dollar sank to record lows versus the euro.

There is mounting speculation in the currency markets that global central banks are set to intervene to prop up the ailing dollar. Many analysts are growing convinced that concerted intervention is the only remedy for the currency's continuing slide.

U.S. interest rates have been cut repeatedly since last fall and the Federal Reserve is widely expected to put in place yet another rate cut on Tuesday, adding more pressure on the dollar.

The rate reductions series make the dollar less attractive to investors than the higher-yield euro. On Thursday new consumer price data from the euro zone made it all but certain that the European Central Bank will not reduce rates any time soon.

Investors also will want to learn the latest news about Carlyle Group's $22 billion Carlyle Capital fund. On Thursday the fund moved closer to collapse and the co-founder of Carlyle Group, David Rubenstein, pledged to compensate investors.

In overseas trade, Tokyo's Nikkei closed down 1.54 percent. But there were gains by midday on European bourses, where London's FTSE 100 rose 0.45 percent, Frankfurt's DAX gained 0.57 percent and Paris' CAC advanced 0.53 percent.

jim
03-14-2008, 09:56 AM
The Communists called this country a "paper tiger" once.Well - so is the economy now: completely false. I can't say how long it will last but at this rate, it is headed for total collapse.:rooster...Es stoltiert noch, dem Hahn auf dem Jauchenhauffen. (The roosetr still struts on the dung heap):monkey:charge

Trueblue
03-14-2008, 03:57 PM
I think that they ignore food and energy when calculating the CPI-which is odd, considering those are the two things we can't do without.

issac the dragon
03-14-2008, 04:09 PM
There is a perfectly good reason for that omission. They would have to give way bigger cost of living increases to people on SSI. Instead of the 2.3% increase they get, they would get 6 or 8%. Budget buster. So they allow those people to slowly sink into a hole. As food, energy, and medicine get higher every month. The cost of living increase last year did not even cover the increase in Medicare payments.

jim
03-14-2008, 05:45 PM
There is a perfectly good reason for that omission. They would have to give way bigger cost of living increases to people on SSI. Instead of the 2.3% increase they get, they would get 6 or 8%. Budget buster. So they allow those people to slowly sink into a hole. As food, energy, and medicine get higher every month. The cost of living increase last year did not even cover the increase in Medicare payments.

Corker was on TV a night or two harping on what a "liability" Social Security is...What does this slimey son-of-a-bitch think of Bush's War:drevil:godzilla

Trueblue
03-14-2008, 06:01 PM
There is a perfectly good reason for that omission. They would have to give way bigger cost of living increases to people on SSI. Instead of the 2.3% increase they get, they would get 6 or 8%. Budget buster. So they allow those people to slowly sink into a hole. As food, energy, and medicine get higher every month. The cost of living increase last year did not even cover the increase in Medicare payments.

I'm sure that's right, they said it was because it was too "volatile".

Corker was on TV a night or two harping on what a "liability" Social Security is...What does this slimey son-of-a-bitch think of Bush's War:drevil:godzilla

Was he really? :no

Capitalist
03-14-2008, 06:11 PM
Corker was on TV a night or two harping on what a "liability" Social Security is...What does this slimey son-of-a-bitch think of Bush's War:drevil:godzilla

Un like the UNITED STATES war (almost all democrats voted to give the pres the authority and almost all have voted to continue to fund it) will eventually end. SS, along with medicare and medicaid will eventually bankrupt this country.

Capitalist
03-14-2008, 06:12 PM
I'm sure that's right, they said it was because it was too "volatile".



Was he really? :no

Tell me, is the calculation different today than it was frm 1992 to 2000?

If you claim it is, show me how?

Capitalist
03-14-2008, 06:12 PM
I'm sure that's right, they said it was because it was too "volatile".



Was he really? :no

Do you assert that SS amd medicare and medicaid are not massive liabilities as they are currently set up?

Trueblue
03-14-2008, 06:24 PM
I claim that the SS study from several years ago gave an effective method of dealing with the issue.

jim
03-14-2008, 06:58 PM
Un like the UNITED STATES war (almost all democrats voted to give the pres the authority and almost all have voted to continue to fund it) will eventually end. SS, along with medicare and medicaid will eventually bankrupt this country.

It is the criminal action of the Republicans that has bankrupted the country - Why the hell don't you accept reality. This ain't a Peter Pan story goin' on tight now:drevil:rooster. Der Hahn noch stoltiert...auf dem jauchenhaufen...The rooster is still strutting on the dung heap...ie. the Republican dung heap.

issac the dragon
03-14-2008, 08:41 PM
When the Republicans finally figured out that the people in America wouldn't allow them to abolish SSI, they simply set out to bankrupt it. They are succeeding too. I don't think that we will allow them to do it though. They are going to have to cough up the money. I suggest we start with a 90% tax on Haliburton.

Capitalist
03-15-2008, 01:01 AM
I claim that the SS study from several years ago gave an effective method of dealing with the issue.

Bullshit, it relies on a non existant 'trust fund'.

Tell me where is the money they will use to make up the difference between what is collected and what is paid out when that starts happening in about 10 to 12 years?

I know, they will just cash in those treasury securities that make up the trust fund, almost 3 trillion. But wait, how do they redeem those securities, they have to liquidate some. So they simply tell the treasury to give the cash (plus interest) to the Social Secuity department to pay those benefits.

But tell me, where is the treasury going to get the money, these securities are no invested in tangible assets that can be sold for the cash. They will have to get the cash the same place they get all their other money, either through higher taxes or borrowing.

I don't want to hear about how the republicans have allowed all that money to be spent because from the day the surplus in Social Security collections begane the money has been spent by the government. They are not allowed to invest in tangible hard assets, the only way they could actually save it would be to put the cash in a vault.

You have no idea of the train wreck coming down the tracks. I will be fine, I have the system beat, I will not live long enough to see the breakdown, but my children and future grand-children will. That is why I do all I can to counter fools like you.

Capitalist
03-15-2008, 01:03 AM
It is the criminal action of the Republicans that has bankrupted the country - Why the hell don't you accept reality. This ain't a Peter Pan story goin' on tight now:drevil:rooster. Der Hahn noch stoltiert...auf dem jauchenhaufen...The rooster is still strutting on the dung heap...ie. the Republican dung heap.

Show me a link to these crimes or try to get through the fog of your Alzheimer's long enough to explain what the fuck you are talking about.

Capitalist
03-15-2008, 01:04 AM
When the Republicans finally figured out that the people in America wouldn't allow them to abolish SSI, they simply set out to bankrupt it. They are succeeding too. I don't think that we will allow them to do it though. They are going to have to cough up the money. I suggest we start with a 90% tax on Haliburton.

There is a real intelligent solution. Buzzwords and bullshit is all people like you have to offer.

SS is an intergenerational PONZI scheme and cannot survive as it is constituted.

Leave it to the democrats to claim they want change while clinging to programs started in the 1930's!

jim
03-15-2008, 05:47 AM
Show me a link to these crimes or try to get through the fog of your Alzheimer's long enough to explain what the fuck you are talking about.

Show a link hell...If you need a link you don't have the intelligence to understand any I would present. Senile huh??? You run out of thinking ability before I can find anything worth my effort to think about... :hotdog:ohyeah:lol:lol:lol

Trueblue
03-15-2008, 06:16 AM
Bullshit, it relies on a non existant 'trust fund'.

Tell me where is the money they will use to make up the difference between what is collected and what is paid out when that starts happening in about 10 to 12 years?

I know, they will just cash in those treasury securities that make up the trust fund, almost 3 trillion. But wait, how do they redeem those securities, they have to liquidate some. So they simply tell the treasury to give the cash (plus interest) to the Social Secuity department to pay those benefits.

But tell me, where is the treasury going to get the money, these securities are no invested in tangible assets that can be sold for the cash. They will have to get the cash the same place they get all their other money, either through higher taxes or borrowing.

I don't want to hear about how the republicans have allowed all that money to be spent because from the day the surplus in Social Security collections begane the money has been spent by the government. They are not allowed to invest in tangible hard assets, the only way they could actually save it would be to put the cash in a vault.

You have no idea of the train wreck coming down the tracks. I will be fine, I have the system beat, I will not live long enough to see the breakdown, but my children and future grand-children will. That is why I do all I can to counter fools like you.

Bullshit yourself. There are good ideas out there, all we have to do is make sure that people actually hear them over the constant drone of "the only solution is private accounts". Here;s a recommendation from an actual Publican, so maybe you'll give it a look.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aP8QJAPwknww&refer=columnist_shlaes

Many Americans believe that shift is important -- catastrophic even. They also think that there's nothing they can do but watch.

This is wrong. Fixing Social Security is doable. The task isn't as pointless as trying to stop the movement of tides. It's the equivalent of putting a new drain in a swimming pool.

Though you might have missed it, the best method for such a fix was offered by Fred Thompson this month in the Republican presidential candidates' debate. In Michigan, Thompson said that ``one of the things that could be done would be to index benefits to inflation. Index benefits to inflation for future retirees.''

Thompson's phrasing wasn't clear, but his idea is. Under the current system, seniors' base pension, the number that they start with when they are at the point of Casey-Kirschling, is calculated to reflect not only inflation but also real increases in the average wage over their careers. Real wages in the U.S. tend to rise over time -- dramatically, lately. Growing productivity gives workers this reward.


More at the link.

Viki
03-15-2008, 07:09 AM
Un like the UNITED STATES war (almost all democrats voted to give the pres the authority and almost all have voted to continue to fund it) will eventually end. SS, along with medicare and medicaid will eventually bankrupt this country.

I'm no liberal, but I submit that what would bankrupt this country is having millions of people sick and homeless, living on the streets.

Trueblue
03-15-2008, 07:11 AM
I'm no liberal, but I submit that what would bankrupt this country is having millions of people sick and homeless, living on the streets.

:werd

Economies are complex beasts.

Saguaro
03-15-2008, 08:24 AM
Show me a link to these crimes or try to get through the fog of your Alzheimer's long enough to explain what the fuck you are talking about.

Refrain from the insults

jim
03-15-2008, 08:26 AM
I'm no liberal, but I submit that what would bankrupt this country is having millions of people sick and homeless, living on the streets.

I ain't a Liberal either...I'm a moderate and I agree with you here...:):ohyeah

toxic
03-15-2008, 10:59 AM
Tell me, is the calculation different today than it was frm 1992 to 2000?

If you claim it is, show me how?

Bush and DOL Chan rewrote the "unemployment calculations" for all years back to 1929 to get a more favorable "number".

I suspect Bushies have done similar for CPI/Inflation but I couldn't prove it today. It would follow the Bush trend.

toxic
03-15-2008, 11:04 AM
Do you assert that SS amd medicare and medicaid are not massive liabilities as they are currently set up?

The Republicans claimed a few years ago it would cost an unacceptable $1 Trillion to balance Social Security for the baby boom retirees.

Since that time Bush has pissed away $1 Trillion in Irag, increased the Nation Debt by $5 Trillion and increased the National Account (Trade) Debt by $5 Trillion.

Much of that Debt was created by Republican spending unfunded by taxes, due to Bush tax cuts.

The Republican argument unravelled by their own behavior.

toxic
03-15-2008, 11:21 AM
There is a real intelligent solution. Buzzwords and bullshit is all people like you have to offer.

SS is an intergenerational PONZI scheme and cannot survive as it is constituted.

Leave it to the democrats to claim they want change while clinging to programs started in the 1930's!

We had this argument in about 1985 and several plans were put in place.

This was necessary to reduce the HUGE National Debt that Ronald Reagan and GWH Bush had created. Also, it was forward planning for the eventual SS bubble seen coming.

http://blogs.usask.ca/the_bolt/images/usa_debt_versus_gdp.gif

The Gramm (R) Rudman (R) [Hollings (D)] Bill was created to balance the books and get a headstart on a surplus to load the frontend of Baby Boomer retirements.

This plan, with PAYGO and others helped bring spending under control UNTIL BUSH WAS ELECTED AND THE REPUBLICANS CONTROLLED ALL 3 BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

THEN THE FUCKING REPUBLICANS STARTED SPENDING LIKE DRUNKEN WHORES. They dropped PAYGO and every year voted to raise the National Debt limits imposed by the Gramm Rudman Bill.

Sorry but Republicans screwed this pooch. No whining is allowed by them.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Rudman

http://jimbuie.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/10/05/natl_debt_chart_2006_2.gif

jim
03-15-2008, 12:31 PM
The Republicans claimed a few years ago it would cost an unacceptable $1 Trillion to balance Social Security for the baby boom retirees.

Since that time Bush has pissed away $1 Trillion in Irag, increased the Nation Debt by $5 Trillion and increased the National Account (Trade) Debt by $5 Trillion.

Much of that Debt was created by Republican spending unfunded by taxes, due to Bush tax cuts.

The Republican argument unravelled by their own behavior.

All true.:rooster

jim
03-15-2008, 12:32 PM
We had this argument in about 1985 and several plans were put in place.

This was necessary to reduce the HUGE National Debt that Ronald Reagan and GWH Bush had created. Also, it was forward planning for the eventual SS bubble seen coming.

http://blogs.usask.ca/the_bolt/images/usa_debt_versus_gdp.gif

The Gramm (R) Rudman (R) [Hollings (D)] Bill was created to balance the books and get a headstart on a surplus to load the frontend of Baby Boomer retirements.

This plan, with PAYGO and others helped bring spending under control UNTIL BUSH WAS ELECTED AND THE REPUBLICANS CONTROLLED ALL 3 BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

THEN THE FUCKING REPUBLICANS STARTED SPENDING LIKE DRUNKEN WHORES. They dropped PAYGO and every year voted to raise the National Debt limits imposed by the Gramm Rudman Bill.

Sorry but Republicans screwed this pooch. No whining is allowed by them.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Rudman

http://jimbuie.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/10/05/natl_debt_chart_2006_2.gif

I remember.:hotdog:devil