Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"I don't play this game, my background, as well as yours, is irrelevant. I only discuss these things when they are relevant."
I must disagree, one's background is quite relevant to the discussion. Mine is there for anyone's consideration. Reasonable folks might want to know what experience and background one brings to the discussion. Absent your disclosure, what can we assume of your credence other than chattering?
it is nice to know someones background but the fact they might not have a degree or work in the field doesnt mean they arent experts at some things.
if you dont count filing and answering the phone for an investment company while going to college then i never spent one day in the business. but investing has always been a big interest of mine since im about 18 and im 58 now.
i have been quoted more times in the wall street journal and appeared in more financial publications including money magazine and fidelity investment magazine then most people who spend a lifetime in the business.
the point is when something is someones love they can know more about it then those that work at it or are degreed in it.
im thinking of doing something in the financial field finally when i decide to retire early in a year or 2. i think i can do quite well selling certain financial products by putting more modern spins on them
Last edited by mathjak107; 11-22-2010 at 03:30 AM..
the proof is in the pudding that its way off of reality because im sure there will be very few who say over the last decade those cpi results are close to what reality was.
You keep asserting this, but you've not shown anything that demonstrates that it is "way off from reality". Your personal experiences don't matter, CPI is an macroeconomic measure, its not meant as a personal cost-of-living indicator.
But the proof is in the puddling, if the index was indeed "way off from reality" you'd never see it used in the business world, but it is used and there is no legitimate alternate that grossly conflicts with it.
Lastly, the changes were made over a decade ago, but now its going to take another decade for everyone to realize its not "reality"?
nope we wont have to wait another decade. those changes are widley believed to have dropped the index even lower so all that should happen is the numbers going forward will be even more out of whack.
its not like some economists said the adjustment raised the index higher then it should be, this isnt even a debated fact with them. they mostley claim it forced it lower
its not like some economists said the adjustment raised the index higher then it should be, this isnt even a debated fact with them. they mostley claim it forced it lower
Right, the methodology was updated because there was a growing consensus that the previous methodology was over-stating consumer price increases.
There were numerous pieces of research that supported that view, again the index was changed in response to research, not with some desire to manipulate it downward.
Manipulation is obvious, but who in the Gov is the manipulator? How do we identify the individual and hold him/her responsible?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who in the Gov?
