Pages:
Author

Topic: The Tomato Soup Index - Inflation Sucks - page 2. (Read 9581 times)

legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1026
Mining since 2010 & Hosting since 2012
September 26, 2012, 01:16:51 PM
#33

You guys don't understand inflation, okay. You can't just go by one single item to calculate a consumer price index. You see, you've got to use item replacement because as tomato soup gets more expensive, people will switch to something else, like a boiling pot of cherry Kool-aid, which only costs about $.10. That plus the fact that you can get a first generation iPhone on ebay for $50, a 90% reduction in cost, means we're spiraling into a deflationary liquidity trap we at the Fed call "con-flation." So, we're cranking up the printers and buying all the homes in America. It won't cause a bubble: Trust Us(tm).

/Bernanke.


Bottom-line is that inflation will always be under-reporting because that is the best thing to do politically.  We take out things like food and gas even though most of our extra incomes goes into these items.   Inflation has been rising and it doesn't matter if LCD TVs are $100 if you don't have $100 to spend on them.   You don't deploy trillions of dollars into the economy and then tell people truthfully it is not causing inflation.   

The really boogie monster all status-quo supporters fears is DEFLATION.   Why, because it hurts creditors and god forbid a creditor takes a hit.   It started with Confidential of Illinois in 1984 when we bailed out the creditors and sense then, that is how we operate.   Risk is imaginary unless your not connected to the establishment.   People who decry class warfare are the same people perpetrating it on a daily basis.  Once the majority of people realize this and wake up to do something, that will be the day things CHANGE.
kjj
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1026
September 24, 2012, 09:08:31 PM
#31

You guys don't understand inflation, okay. You can't just go by one single item to calculate a consumer price index. You see, you've got to use item replacement because as tomato soup gets more expensive, people will switch to something else, like a boiling pot of cherry Kool-aid, which only costs about $.10. That plus the fact that you can get a first generation iPhone on ebay for $50, a 90% reduction in cost, means we're spiraling into a deflationary liquidity trap we at the Fed call "con-flation." So, we're cranking up the printers and buying all the homes in America. It won't cause a bubble: Trust Us(tm).

/Bernanke.

Is that a real quote from Bernanke?

A paraphrase.  And he isn't really responsible for the CPI manipulation, BLS does most of that.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
September 24, 2012, 08:39:40 PM
#30

You guys don't understand inflation, okay. You can't just go by one single item to calculate a consumer price index. You see, you've got to use item replacement because as tomato soup gets more expensive, people will switch to something else, like a boiling pot of cherry Kool-aid, which only costs about $.10. That plus the fact that you can get a first generation iPhone on ebay for $50, a 90% reduction in cost, means we're spiraling into a deflationary liquidity trap we at the Fed call "con-flation." So, we're cranking up the printers and buying all the homes in America. It won't cause a bubble: Trust Us(tm).

/Bernanke.

Is that a real quote from Bernanke?
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
firstbits.com/1kznfw
September 24, 2012, 04:32:15 PM
#29

You guys don't understand inflation, okay. You can't just go by one single item to calculate a consumer price index. You see, you've got to use item replacement because as tomato soup gets more expensive, people will switch to something else, like a boiling pot of cherry Kool-aid, which only costs about $.10. That plus the fact that you can get a first generation iPhone on ebay for $50, a 90% reduction in cost, means we're spiraling into a deflationary liquidity trap we at the Fed call "con-flation." So, we're cranking up the printers and buying all the homes in America. It won't cause a bubble: Trust Us(tm).

/Bernanke.
sr. member
Activity: 342
Merit: 250
September 24, 2012, 04:19:15 PM
#28
That purchasing power has to come from somewhere. And it does. It comes from everyone else holding that currency.
No, it comes from there being lots people who have something they want to sell.
This sounds like a case of, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
Do you think Grinder is Bernanke, Geithner, or Krugman?
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
September 24, 2012, 04:13:21 PM
#27
That purchasing power has to come from somewhere. And it does. It comes from everyone else holding that currency.
No, it comes from there being lots people who have something they want to sell.
This sounds like a case of, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
sr. member
Activity: 342
Merit: 250
September 24, 2012, 04:12:32 PM
#26
That purchasing power has to come from somewhere. And it does. It comes from everyone else holding that currency.
No, it comes from there being lots people who have something they want to sell. Deflation discourages that, because it's easier to just hold on to the money than to invest them to create something new, or buying something so others can create something new. The evidence is that that's pretty much what you say you want to do with your dime.
Right, it's easier (and safer) to just hold onto the money. It's also less profitable. And yes, I'd prefer to invest most of my money for a higher rate of return (even with a deflationary currency). So would most people. Gold is (sort of) available today as a deflationary currency that can be used for "pure savings" (despite unfair tax treatment). But most people don't just hoard gold, and the capital markets haven't ceased to function (yet, and if they do, it won't be gold's fault). So where's the problem?
legendary
Activity: 1284
Merit: 1001
September 24, 2012, 03:58:27 PM
#25
That purchasing power has to come from somewhere. And it does. It comes from everyone else holding that currency.
No, it comes from there being lots people who have something they want to sell. Deflation discourages that, because it's easier to just hold on to the money than to invest them to create something new, or buying something so others can create something new. The evidence is that that's pretty much what you say you want to do with your dime.
sr. member
Activity: 342
Merit: 250
September 24, 2012, 03:48:35 PM
#24
You could buy a can of tomato soup in 1950 for a dime. I :'(on 2012, you can buy somewhere between 2.5 and 3 cans of tomato soup for a dime. Oh, but it has to be the same dime. (The current melt value of a 1950 silver dime is around $2.50.) It occurs to me that people see inflation and get angry, but most of them don't see the deflation that would have occurred if people were freely allowed to use a sound currency. The theft is bigger than you thought.
Not really when it's so easy to adapt. If you put it in a savings account you would could buy just under 2, and if you put it in 1 year bonds you could buy about 5 after taxes. If you put it in an S&P index fund you could buy more than 50. Why anyone would want a system that would discourage people from investing and creating such a fantastic wealth increase is beyond me.
Apples and tomatoes. You can't compare the return on savings in a deflationary currency with the return on riskier investments in an inflationary currency. As I pointed out in another thread, when you simply save your money (e.g., in a safe), you're making a "loan" of that money's purchasing power to the rest of the economy, but it's a kind of loan with no risk of default and that can be recalled at any time. The fact that you can tread water or do slightly better than that return in an inflationary currency by making riskier, less flexible loans is hardly surprising. Nor does it prove anything. Because you could do EVEN BETTER THAN THAT in a deflationary currency by making similar investments. There's just no getting around the fact that when a government or central bank prints new money, it gives the recipients of that new money real purchasing power without  creating corresponding value. That purchasing power has to come from somewhere. And it does. It comes from everyone else holding that currency. Some people call that "inflation." Some call it "theft." (But I see that as sort of a "tomato" / "tomahto" thing.  Smiley)
legendary
Activity: 1284
Merit: 1001
September 24, 2012, 03:04:33 PM
#23
You could buy a can of tomato soup in 1950 for a dime. In 2012, you can buy somewhere between 2.5 and 3 cans of tomato soup for a dime. Oh, but it has to be the same dime. (The current melt value of a 1950 silver dime is around $2.50.) It occurs to me that people see inflation and get angry, but most of them don't see the deflation that would have occurred if people were freely allowed to use a sound currency. The theft is bigger than you thought.
Not really when it's so easy to adapt. If you put it in a savings account you would could buy just under 2, and if you put it in 1 year bonds you could buy about 5 after taxes. If you put it in an S&P index fund you could buy more than 50. Why anyone would want a system that would discourage people from investing and creating such a fantastic wealth increase is beyond me.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1026
Mining since 2010 & Hosting since 2012
September 24, 2012, 12:17:30 PM
#22
You could buy a can of tomato soup in 1950 for a dime. In 2012, you can buy somewhere between 2.5 and 3 cans of tomato soup for a dime. Oh, but it has to be the same dime. (The current melt value of a 1950 silver dime is around $2.50.) It occurs to me that people see inflation and get angry, but most of them don't see the deflation that would have occurred if people were freely allowed to use a sound currency. The theft is bigger than yoou thought.

Bottom-line is that inflation and continual reduction of your purchasing power is baked into the cake.  Our leaders have decided this is the proper way to run economies.  Unless you change our system from debt based into asset based, this will happen over and over again.  No debating that, it is basic math.  This is why I think Bitcoin is so interesting and worth the risk.  At this point, we can not create more Bitcoins so it can preserve wealth (purchasing power) so BTC is in the initial stages of becoming a wealth reserve asset.
sr. member
Activity: 342
Merit: 250
September 24, 2012, 11:12:40 AM
#21
You could buy a can of tomato soup in 1950 for a dime. In 2012, you can buy somewhere between 2.5 and 3 cans of tomato soup for a dime. Oh, but it has to be the same dime. (The current melt value of a 1950 silver dime is around $2.50.) It occurs to me that people see inflation and get angry, but most of them don't see the deflation that would have occurred if people were freely allowed to use a sound currency. The theft is bigger than you thought.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
September 24, 2012, 10:23:22 AM
#20
I knew on a subconscious and later conscious level that my savings were being eaten up. Like running to stay in the same place.
That's because inflation is a tax on you to enrich the apparatchik and their cronies and to bribe the dependent classes.
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
September 24, 2012, 09:25:34 AM
#19
+1

Deflation feels soooo good  Grin
So true.

HONESTLY before BTC I was fucking depressed: I knew on a subconscious and later conscious level that my savings were being eaten up. Like running to stay in the same place.

Now I can look at my clown politicians and ECB fucking up and just not give a shit.

So refreshing.
It's exactly how I feel.


You can't compare a 1950's can of tomato soup with a 2012 can! That's apples and tomatoes!  There have been massive improvements in tomato soup technology in the past 60 years that have dramatically improved its flavor and nutritional content. In the 1950's, Campbell's tomato soup was basically a glorified can of watery ketchup.  And now it's... uh... better.  So sure, you pay a little more today, but you also get more. That's why the price has gone up. Wink

Isn't it weird though, electronics also keep getting better and better and yet they are cheaper than ever. What gives?
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1026
Mining since 2010 & Hosting since 2012
September 24, 2012, 09:00:56 AM
#18
But...but..National Public Radio keeps telling me that Inflation is under two percent per year.

Yes if I can make the numbers I report to you based on an index and can swap beef for dog food, 2% inflation can be true.  No one cares about integrity anyone it seems.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
September 24, 2012, 07:06:11 AM
#17
But...but..National Public Radio keeps telling me that Inflation is under two percent per year.
sr. member
Activity: 342
Merit: 250
September 24, 2012, 06:41:11 AM
#16
You can't compare a 1950's can of tomato soup with a 2012 can! That's apples and tomatoes!  There have been massive improvements in tomato soup technology in the past 60 years that have dramatically improved its flavor and nutritional content. In the 1950's, Campbell's tomato soup was basically a glorified can of watery ketchup.  And now it's... uh... better.  So sure, you pay a little more today, but you also get more. That's why the price has gone up. Wink
donator
Activity: 674
Merit: 523
September 24, 2012, 06:04:05 AM
#15
HONESTLY before BTC I was fucking depressed

sooooo +1
legendary
Activity: 1284
Merit: 1001
September 24, 2012, 05:00:16 AM
#14
You mean the global food shortage that was the result of farmers switching from food crops to oil crops because the profit is higher? Meanwhile overproduction, food stockpiling and grants for farmers not to produce into an already flooded market continue in other areas of food production.
You can blame it on any conspiracy theory you'd like, it's still not because of the money printing.
Pages:
Jump to: