24 Mar 13
Originally posted by Metal BrainYour argument reminds me of religious people's objections to evolution. "I have found perceived minor flaw in the theory X, therefore wild and completely unfounded assumptions A, B and C must be true". Of course, libertarianism and Austrian School economics being religious cults, the analogy is more than appropriate.
You have discarded all of the evidence I have provided you that the CPI is flawed. Shameful for somebody who claims to be a man of science. If the CPI is flawed so is the "so called" empirical evidence.
You are clearly not interested in examining anything. I'll bet you didn't even read the link I provided. It is no mystery why you have accomplished l ...[text shortened]... should read "The Trouble With Physics" by Lee Smolin. You could learn something from him.
24 Mar 13
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI'd be grateful if you could say how exactly Austrian School economics discards empirical evidence a priori.
A theory that a priori discards empirical evidence, as Austrian School economics does, can be immediately placed in the category of pseudoscience. Empirical science should rely on empirical evidence.
What does it work with if not physical evidence?
24 Mar 13
Originally posted by no1marauderUnchanging basket of goods?
Your blog article doesn't really show that the CPI is "flawed"; it just argues that because there have been changes in its methodology that this "proves" some sort of government conspiracy. Actually it does nothing of the kind; there has been a longstanding debate in economics about the methodology of the CPI which is based on an unchanging basket of goo ...[text shortened]... ts there isn't much difference in results over time between it and any version of the CPI.
Do you seriously think that substituting hamburger for steak is unchanging????
You clearly did not read the article all the way through.
24 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraActually you and no1marauder remind me of a religious person who refuses to read Darwin and claims to know what they are talking about.
Your argument reminds me of religious people's objections to evolution. "I have found perceived minor flaw in the theory X, therefore wild and completely unfounded assumptions A, B and C must be true". Of course, libertarianism and Austrian School economics being religious cults, the analogy is more than appropriate.
Try reading the article. You obviously did not.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/19/1172060/-Understating-the-CPI-101-or-Starving-Grandma#
Better yet put "hamburger steak greenspan" in a search engine and do some meaningful research. If you 2 numbnuts seriously think that substituting hamburger for steak to measure inflation is merely a "perceived minor flaw" you both need to stop drinking the cool aid.
🙄
24 Mar 13
Originally posted by Bosse de NageIf I went into your refrigerator and replaced your steak with an equal weight of hamburger would you be okay with that?
I'd be grateful if you could say how exactly Austrian School economics discards empirical evidence a priori.
What does it work with if not physical evidence?
Fair trade?
25 Mar 13
Originally posted by Metal BrainI strongly suggest you actually do some research and try to understand what the CPI is. You quite obviously don't know yet. Your answer to my post is borderline moronic.
Unchanging basket of goods?
Do you seriously think that substituting hamburger for steak is unchanging????
You clearly did not read the article all the way through.
25 Mar 13
Originally posted by no1marauderDo you think that what people buy is unchanging? Unchanging based on income or perhaps even decade?
I strongly suggest you actually do some research and try to understand what the CPI is. You quite obviously don't know yet. Your answer to my post is borderline moronic.
The CPI, just like any other measure of statistics, isn't exactly perfect.
25 Mar 13
Originally posted by Metal BrainYou're not making the slightest effort to understand basic economic principles. Hiding that by bluster isn't very impressive.
Actually you and no1marauder remind me of a religious person who refuses to read Darwin and claims to know what they are talking about.
Try reading the article. You obviously did not.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/19/1172060/-Understating-the-CPI-101-or-Starving-Grandma#
Better yet put "hamburger steak greenspan" in a search engine and d ...[text shortened]... nflation is merely a "perceived minor flaw" you both need to stop drinking the cool aid.
🙄
25 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by EladarThat is why the CPI was changed. People who aren't economically illiterate understand this. Please review my entire post at the end of the last page.
Do you think that what people buy is unchanging? Unchanging based on income or perhaps even decade?
The CPI, just like any other measure of statistics, isn't exactly perfect.
EDIT: For your convenience:
Your blog article doesn't really show that the CPI is "flawed"; it just argues that because there have been changes in its methodology that this "proves" some sort of government conspiracy. Actually it does nothing of the kind; there has been a longstanding debate in economics about the methodology of the CPI which is based on an unchanging basket of goods even though we know what consumers buy varies over time. There is a different measure of price inflation called the GNP deflator which is based on overall spending in the economy. You can use that if you want, but disappointingly for conspiracy theorists there isn't much difference in results over time between it and any version of the CPI.
25 Mar 13
Originally posted by no1marauderYah, well the very idea of the CPI is flawed. If you want to talk about specific things like, I don't know, fuel? You have something valid. Try to come up with some combined inflation just doesn't reflect reality.
That is why the CPI was changed. People who aren't economically illiterate understand this. Please review my entire post at the end of the last page.
EDIT: For your convenience:
Your blog article doesn't really show that the CPI is "flawed"; it just argues that because there have been changes in its methodology that this "proves" some sort of gover ...[text shortened]... s there isn't much difference in results over time between it and any version of the CPI.
25 Mar 13
If the price of hamburger rises relative to the price of steak, people will buy more steak. If the price of steak rises relative to the cost of hamburger, people will buy more hamburger. The CPI used to not take into account changes in consumer buying habits. Most economists realized that this was a methodological flaw. Fixing it does not equal an evil conspiracy to starve Grandma to death.
Study this brief wiki article, MB, if you really can't grasp this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_elasticity_of_demand
25 Mar 13
Originally posted by EladarRidiculous. Of course, the concept of measuring the overall increases in prices makes sense.
Yah, well the very idea of the CPI is flawed. If you want to talk about specific things like, I don't know, fuel? You have something valid. Try to come up with some combined inflation just doesn't reflect reality.