Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-09-2013, 04:14 AM
 
Location: Texas
37,949 posts, read 17,862,130 times
Reputation: 10371

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
What "cherry picked" charts?
Nearly EVERY chart on the tradingeconomics site (which shows ALL the major economic trends) shows improvement - in many case VAST improvement - from the crash, so apparently you have a "unique" definition of "cherry picked". The fact that YOU don't LIKE what the data SAYS is unimportant.
The data says what the data says.

Indicators for UNITED STATES

Ken
It is YOUR inability to understand the difference between numbers and meangful data. That's on YOU.

LMAO Vast improvement is it now. Just a few short days ago you said we are turning the corner and now it's vast improvement.

Again with your cherry picked charts.
Less money coming in to households. Prices rising. More people on food stamps along with people on unemployment compensation for a longer time this past year. All being paid for by a SMALLER participation of labor making LESS money, when you count ALL the people and not just those YOU deem worthy of being counted.
Country deeper and deeper into debt.

The fact that you add 1 and 1 and get 3 means you can't possible know what 1 and 2 equals.

Go sell your snake oil elsewhere.

Last edited by Loveshiscountry; 01-09-2013 at 04:28 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2013, 04:53 AM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
20,460 posts, read 26,330,678 times
Reputation: 7627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz View Post
http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/QR/QR2222.pdf


Want to conveniently let it roll off your back again???
Inflation rates:

1916: 7.64%
1917: 17.80%
1918: 17.26%
1919: 15.31%
1920: 15.90%

When did we go off the gold standard again?
Since leaving the gold standard we've NEVER had inflation that high again - EVER.

Historical Inflation Rate | InflationData.com

Ken

PS - From the summary of your OWN link:

"...Some may interpret our findings as demonstrating some
causal relationship between money and inflation or between
money and output. Such a conclusion is unwarranted..."


As I said - some folks here seem to erroneously think that being on the gold standard somehow prevents inflation. It does NOT. We had inflation even BEFORE we left the gold standard - and in fact the worst inflation we've ever had was back in the days of the gold standard.

Last edited by LordBalfor; 01-09-2013 at 05:12 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2013, 04:56 AM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
20,460 posts, read 26,330,678 times
Reputation: 7627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
It is YOUR inability to understand the difference between numbers and meangful data. That's on YOU.

LMAO Vast improvement is it now. Just a few short days ago you said we are turning the corner and now it's vast improvement.

Again with your cherry picked charts.
Less money coming in to households. Prices rising. More people on food stamps along with people on unemployment compensation for a longer time this past year. All being paid for by a SMALLER participation of labor making LESS money, when you count ALL the people and not just those YOU deem worthy of being counted.
Country deeper and deeper into debt.

The fact that you add 1 and 1 and get 3 means you can't possible know what 1 and 2 equals.

Go sell your snake oil elsewhere.
You're like a broken record - the same old nonsense over and over.
ALL people ARE counted.

Not "cherry picked" charts - nearly ALL charts.


Ken
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2013, 06:47 AM
 
Location: Texas
37,949 posts, read 17,862,130 times
Reputation: 10371
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
You're like a broken record - the same old nonsense over and over.
ALL people ARE counted.
Wrong yet again. The labor participation rate is not in your cherry picked charts. The reason? Because it is the truth and the truth is something you are not interested in because you cannot twist it to show your savior is clueless about how to manipulate the economy. Much like you are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
Not "cherry picked" charts - nearly ALL charts.

Ken
Your charts are meaningless drivel.
Trying to prove something with meaningless charts that don't show the workforce is at its lowest since ~ 1980. Charts that don't show household income has dropped 4 k in the last 4 years. Charts that doesn't show prices rising and therefore our purchasing power has dropped. Purchasing power is completely lost on you.

Continue to ignore those facts while slinging your snake oil.

Reminds me of Kevin Bacon in Animal House. Except that was a movie, the economic policies you foillow are a nightmare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2013, 08:59 AM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,417,223 times
Reputation: 4190
So 4% over ten years in this climate and demographic era with unfunded defined benefits in the trillions along with an emerging third-world willing to work for 35% of our wage not to mention an era of increased competition in the technical sector means nothing.

You might be good at making and posting pretty pictures, but stop and put all the puzzle pieces together and think 15 years down the road. Heck, think 10 years down the road.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2013, 09:07 AM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,461,121 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
Even assuming your theory is correct, a 4% to 5% inflation rate is roughly equivalent to that of the last 2 years of Ronald Reagan's presidency or the first couple of Bush 41' - which were not exactly "terrible" years from an inflation standpoint. - so again, no disaster. Sounds like a pretty soft exit actually.

Historical Inflation Rate | InflationData.com

Ken
Or they could abandon the "target" interest rate and instead go back to the 70's target of a certain UE rate...

Quote:
WASHINGTON — The Federal Reserve made it plain on Wednesday that job creation had become its primary focus, announcing that it planned to continue suppressing interest rates so long as the unemployment rate remained above 6.5 percent.

“Imagine that inflation was running at 5 percent against our inflation objective of 2 percent,” Mr. Evans said in a September 2011 speech first describing the proposal. “Is there a doubt that any central banker worth their salt would be reacting strongly to fight this high inflation rate? No, there isn’t any doubt. They would be acting as if their hair was on fire. We should be similarly energized about improving conditions in the labor market.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/13/bu...ying.html?_r=0

We went over all that in the other thread. So this is simply a balance point. Is 7% UE rate not good even in the face of 5% or higher inflation or is 5%+ inflation okay when we reach near the 6.5% target for the UE rate?

There choices in that regard will be very important and their ability to predict the economy will be even more important. With nearly $5 trillion on their balance sheets by their estimate of mid to late 2015 only hampers their ability to control inflation quickly without a interest rate drag on the economy.

They're simply going to have to make all the predictions accurately or UE rate goes up right along with inflation. In other words they've taken a time machine back into the 70's...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2013, 11:04 AM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,117,467 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
Wrong yet again. The labor participation rate is not in your cherry picked charts. The reason? Because it is the truth and the truth is something you are not interested in because you cannot twist it to show your savior is clueless about how to manipulate the economy. Much like you are.

Your charts are meaningless drivel.
Trying to prove something with meaningless charts that don't show the workforce is at its lowest since ~ 1980. Charts that don't show household income has dropped 4 k in the last 4 years. Charts that doesn't show prices rising and therefore our purchasing power has dropped. Purchasing power is completely lost on you.

Continue to ignore those facts while slinging your snake oil.
By all means, please post your charts and data to support your position.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2013, 09:58 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,949 posts, read 17,862,130 times
Reputation: 10371
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
By all means, please post your charts and data to support your position.
How can you not know this? Is your head buried in the sand that deep?

The August 2012 median annual household income of $50,678 was 5.7 percent lower than the median of
$53,718 in June 2009, the end of the recent recession and beginning of the “economic recovery.” The August 2012 median was 8.1 percent lower than the median of $55,131 in December 2007, the beginning month of the recession that occurred more than four years ago.
http://www.sentierresearch.com/repor...2_09_25_12.pdf

In 2012, the average food costs for a family of four were $2,055 higher than the previous trend line. For the average person it was $514 higher.
Study: Consumer Food Costs Rising, Reversing 55-Year Trend | Consumer Trends content from Supermarket News

Any more research I can do for you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2013, 11:13 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,117,467 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
How can you not know this? Is your head buried in the sand that deep?

The August 2012 median annual household income of $50,678 was 5.7 percent lower than the median of
$53,718 in June 2009, the end of the recent recession and beginning of the “economic recovery.” The August 2012 median was 8.1 percent lower than the median of $55,131 in December 2007, the beginning month of the recession that occurred more than four years ago.
http://www.sentierresearch.com/repor...2_09_25_12.pdf

In 2012, the average food costs for a family of four were $2,055 higher than the previous trend line. For the average person it was $514 higher.
Study: Consumer Food Costs Rising, Reversing 55-Year Trend | Consumer Trends content from Supermarket News

Any more research I can do for you?
Yes considering your research so far has yielded these conclusions from your own links....

Quote:
The study cites expanded use of corn for ethanol as the biggest factor in food price increases, while high fuel costs also played a role.

Read More: Study: Consumer Food Costs Rising, Reversing 55-Year Trend | Consumer Trends content from Supermarket News
So ethanol and high fuel costs are the reason based on your links. And your chart and the charts in your links show that at the very least the economy isn't in free fall.....

Last edited by dv1033; 01-10-2013 at 11:23 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2013, 11:16 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,117,467 times
Reputation: 2037
Seems recent grads can see rise in their starting salaries now that the economy isn't in the toilet.

Starting salaries rise for new graduates - Jan. 10, 2013
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top