Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (69474)	10/23/1999 7:47:00 PM
From: Les H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Barron's had an article about the CPI again this week. This time, he focused on Owner Rent Equivalent vs. Home Prices. Unfortunately, in his closing comparison, he still got it wrong since he chose to focus on just housing prices versus "rent equivalent". Some statistical aggregate of housing prices and actual rents would need to be compared to the "rent equivalent".

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (69474)	10/23/1999 10:06:00 PM
From: Don Lloyd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Wayne - (...Does anyone know what the real inflation rate is? There is such a wide range of opinions on substitution, assets, quality improvements, private vs. government services, taxes, etc...) If by inflation, you were to simply mean a time rate of change for the historical prices of a limited number of specific products, then an algorithm for calculating inflation could at least be defined, but the results would not be very useful due to a continuous product evolution in both characteristics and variety. If you instead take inflation to be a measurement of the purchasing power of money, it is a meaningless concept. All that can be observed is that consumer A exchanges $X for quantity Y of product Z at a particular time T. The entire information contained in this observation is that A subjectively values quantity Y of Z more than he values $X at time T. Nothing can be deduced about the degree to which A prefers a quantity Y of Z to $X. In fact, the degree of preference not only lacks an assignable amount, it doesn't even have a meaningful unit of measure. Nor will even interviewing A shed any real light. But this is just the start of the problems. From the law of diminishing marginal utility, we know that a consumer will place a lower and lower subjective value on cash as the amount possessed increases. The law also applies to all other goods desired and possessed, including good Z. Alternate possible exchanges involving other products also impact on the terms of exchange of Z. In the end, even if we were to limit our economy to a single unchanging good and a single consumer, the purchasing power of money would be unstable, as well as meaningless. Regards, Don