• the thieves who took away our prosperity continue to masquerade

    From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Sat Aug 12 20:40:33 2023
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/opinion/the-us-is-still-vexed-by-high-inflation-5459485

    That subject is a great line to close the linked article.

    It nails the attitude Stephen wants you to buy into.

    The idea is for the government to devastate you in one fell swoop and then let off a bit in order to make you grateful for the lessening of pain.

    and this

    an entire generation has already forgotten what it is like to live with falling prices in many sectors while incomes are steadily rising.

    The promise of America, a better life for your children has been broken.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 13 13:34:04 2023
    Poetic but deranged. Almost Dylanesque, if Dylan were a RWNJ.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Trevor Wilson@21:1/5 to ScottW on Mon Aug 14 09:13:09 2023
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/opinion/the-us-is-still-vexed-by-high-inflation-5459485

    That subject is a great line to close the linked article.

    It nails the attitude Stephen wants you to buy into.

    The idea is for the government to devastate you in one fell swoop and then let off a bit in order to make you grateful for the lessening of pain.

    and this

    an entire generation has already forgotten what it is like to live with falling prices in many sectors while incomes are steadily rising.

    The promise of America, a better life for your children has been broken.

    ScottW

    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering high-ish inflation.
    It is due to the Trump/Putin war in Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate

    You fucking moron.

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Art Sackman@21:1/5 to Trevor Wilson on Sun Aug 13 17:44:11 2023
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/opinion/the-us-is-still-vexed-by-high-inflation-5459485

    That subject is a great line to close the linked article.

    It nails the attitude Stephen wants you to buy into.

    The idea is for the government to devastate you in one fell swoop and then let off a bit in order to make you grateful for the lessening of pain.

    and this

    an entire generation has already forgotten what it is like to live with falling prices in many sectors while incomes are steadily rising.

    The promise of America, a better life for your children has been broken.

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering high-ish inflation.
    It is due to the Trump/Putin war in Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate


    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by country.
    talking about comparability is spreading misinformation.
    also, you picked a low month for the US
    Previously it was much higher.
    Those historic rates mater, because the ride in the cost of living did not subside.
    Only the rate of monthly increase subsided.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to Art Sackman on Mon Aug 14 07:44:50 2023
    On 8/13/23 7:44 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering high-ish inflation.
    It is due to the Trump/Putin war in Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate


    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by country.
    talking about comparability is spreading misinformation.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/27/cea-apples-to-apfel-recent-inflation-trends-in-the-g7/

    "In this blog post, the Council of Economic Advisers assembles and
    constructs harmonized inflation data for G7 countries, allowing for more apples-to-apples inflation comparisons. U.S. harmonized inflation
    generally rose and peaked earlier in the pandemic than the rest of the
    G7, measured on a 12-month basis. Though inflation remains elevated
    across all countries in this analysis, the U.S. now has the lowest
    12-month harmonized inflation in the G7, both for overall and core
    inflation. That said, inflation going forward remains considerably
    uncertain across all G7 nations, including the U.S.

    ...Put simply, “harmonizing” means using the same consumer basket in all countries...

    The result is close to a truly apples-to-apples inflation concept that
    allows for international comparisons, despite lacking some components
    with which many American inflation analysts are familiar.

    Importantly, BLS’s methodology of incorporating owner-equivalent rent is widely-acknowledged by economists as the approach most consistent with
    CPI’s explicit goal of measuring consumption prices over time... this approach is necessary to fairly compare U.S. inflation with that of
    other advanced economies."

    also, you picked a low month for the US
    Previously it was much higher.

    You're claiming the long trend is due to a single cherry-picked month?
    The Harmonized Headline HICP Inflation rate's been falling for a year.

    Those historic rates mater, because the ride in the cost of living did not subside.
    Only the rate of monthly increase subsided.

    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 14 08:18:24 2023
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 5:44:55 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/13/23 7:44 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering high-ish inflation. >> It is due to the Trump/Putin war in Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate


    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by country.
    talking about comparability is spreading misinformation.
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/27/cea-apples-to-apfel-recent-inflation-trends-in-the-g7/

    "In this blog post, the Council of Economic Advisers assembles and constructs harmonized inflation data for G7 countries, allowing for more apples-to-apples inflation comparisons. U.S. harmonized inflation
    generally rose and peaked earlier in the pandemic than the rest of the
    G7, measured on a 12-month basis. Though inflation remains elevated
    across all countries in this analysis, the U.S. now has the lowest
    12-month harmonized inflation in the G7, both for overall and core inflation. That said, inflation going forward remains considerably
    uncertain across all G7 nations, including the U.S.

    ...Put simply, “harmonizing” means using the same consumer basket in all countries...

    The result is close to a truly apples-to-apples inflation concept that allows for international comparisons, despite lacking some components
    with which many American inflation analysts are familiar.

    Importantly, BLS’s methodology of incorporating owner-equivalent rent is widely-acknowledged by economists as the approach most consistent with CPI’s explicit goal of measuring consumption prices over time... this approach is necessary to fairly compare U.S. inflation with that of
    other advanced economies."
    also, you picked a low month for the US
    Previously it was much higher.
    You're claiming the long trend is due to a single cherry-picked month?
    The Harmonized Headline HICP Inflation rate's been falling for a year.
    Those historic rates mater, because the ride in the cost of living did not subside.
    Only the rate of monthly increase subsided.
    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run gov't.

    You keep spinning this but the American consumer feels the raw painful truth every time they fill their gas tank or go shopping for food.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 14 08:16:48 2023
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 5:44:55 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/13/23 7:44 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering high-ish inflation. >> It is due to the Trump/Putin war in Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate


    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by country.
    talking about comparability is spreading misinformation.
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/27/cea-apples-to-apfel-recent-inflation-trends-in-the-g7/

    "In this blog post, the Council of Economic Advisers assembles and constructs harmonized inflation data for G7 countries, allowing for more apples-to-apples inflation comparisons. U.S. harmonized inflation
    generally rose and peaked earlier in the pandemic than the rest of the
    G7, measured on a 12-month basis. Though inflation remains elevated
    across all countries in this analysis, the U.S. now has the lowest
    12-month harmonized inflation in the G7, both for overall and core inflation. That said, inflation going forward remains considerably
    uncertain across all G7 nations, including the U.S.

    ...Put simply, “harmonizing” means using the same consumer basket in all countries...

    The result is close to a truly apples-to-apples inflation concept that allows for international comparisons, despite lacking some components
    with which many American inflation analysts are familiar.

    Importantly, BLS’s methodology of incorporating owner-equivalent rent is widely-acknowledged by economists as the approach most consistent with CPI’s explicit goal of measuring consumption prices over time... this approach is necessary to fairly compare U.S. inflation with that of
    other advanced economies."
    also, you picked a low month for the US
    Previously it was much higher.
    You're claiming the long trend is due to a single cherry-picked month?
    The Harmonized Headline HICP Inflation rate's been falling for a year.
    Those historic rates mater, because the ride in the cost of living did not subside.
    Only the rate of monthly increase subsided.
    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Mon Aug 14 10:44:22 2023
    On 8/14/23 10:18 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 5:44:55 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/13/23 7:44 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson
    wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering high-ish
    inflation. It is due to the Trump/Putin war in Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate

    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by country.
    talking about comparability is spreading misinformation.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/27/cea-apples-to-apfel-recent-inflation-trends-in-the-g7/

    <inflation>
    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run gov't.

    How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two, but it's also
    just one more.

    You keep spinning this but the American consumer feels the raw
    painful truth every time they fill their gas tank or go shopping for
    food.

    What's so great about 2% as a target?

    https://mises.org/power-market/origins-2-percent-inflation-target

    Gas is about $3.50/gallon here. Adjusted for inflation, that's about the
    same as it's been for decades.

    https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/gasoline-prices-adjusted-for-inflation/

    And while higher food prices might take some adjustment if you're sad
    you can't get pot pies three for a dollar anymore, there's an
    alternative that's worse:

    https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0311/the-dangers-of-deflation.aspx

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 14 08:47:57 2023
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 8:44:27 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/14/23 10:18 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 5:44:55 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/13/23 7:44 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson
    wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering high-ish
    inflation. It is due to the Trump/Putin war in Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate

    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by country.
    talking about comparability is spreading misinformation.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/27/cea-apples-to-apfel-recent-inflation-trends-in-the-g7/
    <inflation>
    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run gov't.
    How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two, but it's also
    just one more.
    You keep spinning this but the American consumer feels the raw
    painful truth every time they fill their gas tank or go shopping for
    food.
    What's so great about 2% as a target?

    You're right....it's too high.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Mon Aug 14 11:07:27 2023
    On 8/14/23 10:47 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 8:44:27 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

    What's so great about 2% as a target?

    You're right....it's too high.

    https://qz.com/2022696/where-did-the-feds-2-percent-inflation-target-come-from At least since 1996, the US Federal Reserve has used monetary policy
    with the aim of keeping inflation at 2%—a number that Ben Bernanke, the former Fed chair, made an explicit policy target in 2012. And it isn’t
    the only central bank in the developed world to shoot for 2%...

    But why did these banks uniformly gravitate to the 2% figure? And where
    did that number come from?

    From New Zealand, it turns out: specifically, from a finance minister
    who was put on the spot during a TV interview in 1988...

    At the time of [Roger] Douglas’ TV appearance, the inflation rate had
    just dipped below 10% for the first time in some years. Brash recalled
    that Douglas’ interviewer asked him: Was the government satisfied now,
    with this lower level of inflation?

    No, Douglas replied, adding that he’d ideally want an inflation rate of between 0 and 1%.

    The remark was entirely off the cuff, Brash said, but now that it had
    been made, the Reserve Bank had to work out what the inflation target
    should be. After Brash joined the Reserve Bank, he and his colleagues
    learned from the literature on cost-of-living estimates that there
    tended to be an “upward bias” to these calculations—that an inflation rate worked out to be 1.7%, say, might in reality be closer to 1% or 0.7%.

    Brash and his team estimated the bias for New Zealand to be around 0.75%
    and rounded it up to 1%, which gave them a maximum target boundary of
    2%. “It wasn’t ruthlessly scientific,” Michael Reddell, one of Brash’s colleagues at the Reserve Bank, admitted. But once the target was set,
    its gospel had to be spread, so that people could factor the 2% figure
    into their economic activities.

    End quote.

    https://www.marketplace.org/2023/08/03/mohamed-el-erian-on-feds-inflation-target-theres-nothing-scientific-about-2/

    "So imagine that you are at a stable 3% inflation rate. And the choices
    you have are the following: One is go to 2% and risk tipping the economy
    into recession or alternatively live with 3% and avoid a recession."

    Well, if you want a recession to make a president look bad, go ahead and overtighten.

    "So let’s talk about why pick 2%. It picked 2% because the other central banks picked 2%. And it then chose 2% because 2% seemed appropriate.
    There’s nothing scientific about 2%. This is a judgment. The reality is
    that the economy has changed, that the supply side has become more
    problematic and that a 2% inflation rate may be too low. The problem, as
    you rightly say, is how do you change your inflation target when you
    have not met it for such a long time? And I think the only way you can
    do that is by promising us 2% down the road for 2025, 2026, and seeing
    whether we can live with a stable inflation rate that is slightly higher."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 14 09:14:30 2023
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 9:07:30 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/14/23 10:47 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 8:44:27 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

    What's so great about 2% as a target?

    You're right....it's too high.
    https://qz.com/2022696/where-did-the-feds-2-percent-inflation-target-come-from
    At least since 1996, the US Federal Reserve has used monetary policy
    with the aim of keeping inflation at 2%—a number that Ben Bernanke, the former Fed chair, made an explicit policy target in 2012. And it isn’t
    the only central bank in the developed world to shoot for 2%...

    But why did these banks uniformly gravitate to the 2% figure? And where
    did that number come from?

    From New Zealand, it turns out: specifically, from a finance minister
    who was put on the spot during a TV interview in 1988...

    At the time of [Roger] Douglas’ TV appearance, the inflation rate had
    just dipped below 10% for the first time in some years. Brash recalled
    that Douglas’ interviewer asked him: Was the government satisfied now, with this lower level of inflation?

    No, Douglas replied, adding that he’d ideally want an inflation rate of between 0 and 1%.

    The remark was entirely off the cuff, Brash said, but now that it had
    been made, the Reserve Bank had to work out what the inflation target
    should be. After Brash joined the Reserve Bank, he and his colleagues learned from the literature on cost-of-living estimates that there
    tended to be an “upward bias” to these calculations—that an inflation rate worked out to be 1.7%, say, might in reality be closer to 1% or 0.7%.

    Brash and his team estimated the bias for New Zealand to be around 0.75%
    and rounded it up to 1%, which gave them a maximum target boundary of
    2%. “It wasn’t ruthlessly scientific,” Michael Reddell, one of Brash’s
    colleagues at the Reserve Bank, admitted. But once the target was set,
    its gospel had to be spread, so that people could factor the 2% figure
    into their economic activities.

    End quote.

    https://www.marketplace.org/2023/08/03/mohamed-el-erian-on-feds-inflation-target-theres-nothing-scientific-about-2/

    "So imagine that you are at a stable 3% inflation rate. And the choices
    you have are the following: One is go to 2% and risk tipping the economy into recession or alternatively live with 3% and avoid a recession."

    Well, if you want a recession to make a president look bad, go ahead and overtighten.

    "So let’s talk about why pick 2%. It picked 2% because the other central banks picked 2%. And it then chose 2% because 2% seemed appropriate. There’s nothing scientific about 2%. This is a judgment. The reality is that the economy has changed, that the supply side has become more problematic

    That's fancy talk for we need to lower people's standards of living.

    Cuz you know...the planet.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Mon Aug 14 12:30:27 2023
    On 8/14/23 11:14 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 9:07:30 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/14/23 10:47 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 8:44:27 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

    What's so great about 2% as a target?

    You're right....it's too high.

    https://qz.com/2022696/where-did-the-feds-2-percent-inflation-target-come-from

    End quote.

    https://www.marketplace.org/2023/08/03/mohamed-el-erian-on-feds-inflation-target-theres-nothing-scientific-about-2/

    "So imagine that you are at a stable 3% inflation rate. And the choices
    you have are the following: One is go to 2% and risk tipping the economy
    into recession or alternatively live with 3% and avoid a recession."

    Well, if you want a recession to make a president look bad, go ahead and
    overtighten.

    "So let’s talk about why pick 2%. It picked 2% because the other central >> banks picked 2%. And it then chose 2% because 2% seemed appropriate.
    There’s nothing scientific about 2%. This is a judgment. The reality is
    that the economy has changed, that the supply side has become more
    problematic

    That's fancy talk for we need to lower people's standards of living.

    Cuz you know...the planet.

    How do you lower standards of living by providing more manufacturing
    jobs? If that were your goal, you'd do something like this:

    During remarks before the London School of Economics, Summers declared
    that “we need five years of unemployment above 5 percent to contain
    inflation — in other words, we need two years of 7.5 percent
    unemployment or five years of 6 percent unemployment or one year of 10
    percent unemployment.”

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/06/larry-summers-was-wrong-about-inflation.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 14 16:29:26 2023
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 8:44:27 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/14/23 10:18 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 5:44:55 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/13/23 7:44 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson
    wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering high-ish
    inflation. It is due to the Trump/Putin war in Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate

    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by country.
    talking about comparability is spreading misinformation.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/27/cea-apples-to-apfel-recent-inflation-trends-in-the-g7/
    <inflation>
    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run gov't.
    How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two, but it's also
    just one more.


    Let's calculate how broke Stephen would be if there was only 1 more percent
    of inflation every year of his life.

    Every dollar he earns today would only be worth 36c compared to what it would be without that additional 1% of inflation (assuming he's 50 years young....which I doubt)

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Tue Aug 15 07:25:57 2023
    On 8/14/23 6:29 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 8:44:27 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/14/23 10:18 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 5:44:55 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/13/23 7:44 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor
    Wilson wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering
    high-ish inflation. It is due to the Trump/Putin war in
    Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate

    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by
    country. talking about comparability is spreading
    misinformation.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/27/cea-apples-to-apfel-recent-inflation-trends-in-the-g7/


    <inflation>
    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run gov't.
    How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two, but it's
    also just one more.


    Let's calculate how broke Stephen would be if there was only 1 more
    percent of inflation every year of his life.

    Every dollar he earns today would only be worth 36c compared to what
    it would be without that additional 1% of inflation (assuming he's 50
    years young....which I doubt)

    Wages and fees go up too. This mechanical view does explain why you
    complained about inflation back when it was under 2%, but I applaud you
    for never raising your rents to compensate.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 15 09:23:36 2023
    On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 5:26:01 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/14/23 6:29 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 8:44:27 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/14/23 10:18 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 5:44:55 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/13/23 7:44 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 7:13:12 PM UTC-4, Trevor
    Wilson wrote:
    On 13/08/2023 1:40 pm, ScottW wrote:

    ScottW
    **You fucking moron. Most of the planet is suffering
    high-ish inflation. It is due to the Trump/Putin war in
    Ukraine.

    The US is not doing too bad:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate

    Inflation rates are calculated differently country by
    country. talking about comparability is spreading
    misinformation.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/27/cea-apples-to-apfel-recent-inflation-trends-in-the-g7/


    <inflation>
    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run gov't.
    How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two, but it's
    also just one more.


    Let's calculate how broke Stephen would be if there was only 1 more percent of inflation every year of his life.

    Every dollar he earns today would only be worth 36c compared to what
    it would be without that additional 1% of inflation (assuming he's 50 years young....which I doubt)
    Wages and fees go up too.

    Not enough.

    You're too stupid to realize why gov't might want to set a higher target inflation and are inflating propaganda balloons for morons like you. It's not because it's in your best interest or to protect or improve your standard of living.
    It's to deflate gov't debt and keep the money spickets flowing that dems need to retain power.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fascist Flea@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 15 09:31:01 2023
    The mutt's "motor" is rattling and wheezing like mad.

    keep the money spickets flowing

    <snicker>
    You hit another sticky wicket there, Pooch.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Tue Aug 15 12:34:34 2023
    On 8/15/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 5:26:01 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

    <inflation>

    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run
    gov't.
    How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two, but
    it's also just one more.


    Let's calculate how broke Stephen would be if there was only 1
    more percent of inflation every year of his life.

    Every dollar he earns today would only be worth 36c compared to
    what it would be without that additional 1% of inflation
    (assuming he's 50 years young....which I doubt)
    Wages and fees go up too.

    Not enough.

    What's "enough"? It's not zero as in the calculation you just argued.

    Looking over my bank accounts, instead of the usual interest payments
    too small to notice, my Roth is yielding discernible amounts.

    You're too stupid to realize why gov't might want to set a higher
    target inflation and are inflating propaganda balloons for morons
    like you. It's not because it's in your best interest or to protect
    or improve your standard of living. It's to deflate gov't debt and
    keep the money spickets flowing that dems need to retain power.

    You've shown your hand: your criticisms are strictly partisan
    anti-Democratic attacks.

    BTW, "money spickets" = investment = sustained growth

    If Republicans provided a similar improvement in the standard of living,
    I'd be all for it, but not enough to overlook their civil rights positions.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 15 11:26:53 2023
    On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:34:38 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/15/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 5:26:01 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

    <inflation>

    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run
    gov't.
    How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two, but
    it's also just one more.


    Let's calculate how broke Stephen would be if there was only 1
    more percent of inflation every year of his life.

    Every dollar he earns today would only be worth 36c compared to
    what it would be without that additional 1% of inflation
    (assuming he's 50 years young....which I doubt)
    Wages and fees go up too.

    Not enough.
    What's "enough"? It's not zero as in the calculation you just argued.

    It's your premise....you asked for an extra 1% of inflation above current target.
    You offer no proof that that this "Stephen's Inflation" will be offset by any additional rise in wages.
    I'm just pointing out your complete ignorance of the long term impact of even 1%
    inflation.

    Looking over my bank accounts, instead of the usual interest payments
    too small to notice, my Roth is yielding discernible amounts.

    Stock markets been on a roll. But if you were in treasuries you certainly took
    a big hit the last couple years as your bonds market values plunged.

    Meanwhile....your luxury of a Roth savings account isn't enjoyed by the millions
    living paycheck to paycheck who don't have the luxury of ignoring the harsh bite of inflation
    on their budgets.
    You just want people to suffer while your party rules to no benefit at all for even you.

    You're too stupid to realize why gov't might want to set a higher
    target inflation and are inflating propaganda balloons for morons
    like you. It's not because it's in your best interest or to protect
    or improve your standard of living. It's to deflate gov't debt and
    keep the money spickets flowing that dems need to retain power.
    You've shown your hand: your criticisms are strictly partisan anti-Democratic attacks.

    BTW, "money spickets" = investment = sustained growth

    If Republicans provided a similar improvement in the standard of living,

    Look at real wages under Trump before covid.

    If you ran a Bill Clinton policy of "the era of big gov't is over" I'd give it full consideration.
    But I'm not holding my breath.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Tue Aug 15 16:38:24 2023
    On 8/15/23 1:26 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:34:38 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 8/15/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 5:26:01 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

    <inflation>

    It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.

    Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run
    gov't.
    How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two,
    but it's also just one more.


    Let's calculate how broke Stephen would be if there was only
    1 more percent of inflation every year of his life.

    Every dollar he earns today would only be worth 36c compared
    to what it would be without that additional 1% of inflation
    (assuming he's 50 years young....which I doubt)
    Wages and fees go up too.

    Not enough.
    What's "enough"? It's not zero as in the calculation you just
    argued.

    It's your premise....you asked for an extra 1% of inflation above
    current target.

    No, I didn't. I showed the target is arbitrary.

    You offer no proof that that this "Stephen's Inflation" will be
    offset by any additional rise in wages. I'm just pointing out your
    complete ignorance of the long term impact of even 1% inflation.

    When wages start growing, the Fed raises interest rates for fear of
    inflation. This raises housing costs and unemployment which is worse for
    those you claim I don't care about.

    Deflation is a bad thing. Also bad, low inflation makes interest rates
    so low it's hard for the Fed to apply stimulus by lowering them.

    Looking over my bank accounts, instead of the usual interest
    payments too small to notice, my Roth is yielding discernible
    amounts.

    Stock markets been on a roll. But if you were in treasuries you
    certainly took a big hit the last couple years as your bonds market
    values plunged.

    Only if you expected the peak of the pandemic level to continue. Long
    term investors know not to buy high.

    Meanwhile....your luxury of a Roth savings account isn't enjoyed by
    the millions living paycheck to paycheck who don't have the luxury
    of ignoring the harsh bite of inflation on their budgets. You just
    want people to suffer while your party rules to no benefit at all for
    even you.

    While you're happy to blame me for their problems, you haven't actually
    shown concern for those people.

    The low income paycheck people have actually done okay:

    https://www.dallasfed.org/cd/communities/2022/0808

    "Consumer price index from the BLS suggest overall inflation of 10
    percent in the period of study—between fourth quarter 2019 and first
    quarter 2022. Using this measure, earnings growth for the four lower
    quintiles outpaced inflation, though only narrowly for the 40–60 and
    60–80 percentile earners."

    Please show me if the last year is very different than that trend.

    You're too stupid to realize why gov't might want to set a higher
    target inflation and are inflating propaganda balloons for morons
    like you. It's not because it's in your best interest or to
    protect or improve your standard of living. It's to deflate gov't
    debt and keep the money spickets flowing that dems need to retain
    power.
    You've shown your hand: your criticisms are strictly partisan
    anti-Democratic attacks.

    BTW, "money spickets" = investment = sustained growth

    If Republicans provided a similar improvement in the standard of
    living,

    Look at real wages under Trump before covid.

    Yes, he didn't interrupt the Obama recovery.

    If you ran a Bill Clinton policy of "the era of big gov't is over"
    I'd give it full consideration. But I'm not holding my breath.

    Yes, the "budget surpluses are bad, actually" era. BTW, the neolibs are thoroughly discredited on economics.

    A typical view:

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/14/the-fatal-flaw-of-neoliberalism-its-bad-economics

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)