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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Moominoid who wrote (58699)	1/17/2001 2:30:37 PM
From: KeepItSimple	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Look. The whole point of the BLS fraud regarding productivity statistics is they had to find SOMETHING, SOMEWHERE to counterbalance the actual real inflation levels which result from debasing the currency to the tune of 3 billion dollars a day of fed airdrops. They can't claim an automobile makes increases productivity by 50% a year for a decade, because that is just patently insane to even the stupidest investor. But if you pick a more obscure measurement, like a COMPUTER, then most people just scratch their heads and walk away, trusting that the brainiacs in the BLS know what they are doing. It's a complete fraud, used to prop up the currency, keep foreigner inflows coming into our country to cover over the trade deficit, and rob SS recipients of the REAL cost of living increases they should be receiving. We're not quibbling over a percentage here and a percentage here, we're pointing out a methodical conspiracy to manipulate currencies and the economy. Without the "factor" of computer-related productivity, our inflation levels are off the charts. It is no coincidence that the item that has the most effect on the numbers is computers- which is exactly the item that shows unbelievable productivity gains per year. >They don't make any difference in your example if I understood it right.

To: Moominoid who wrote (58699)	1/17/2001 2:35:36 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

<It's true that a lot of the recent measured productivity growth in the US is because of productivity improvements in the production of computers and the quantity of computers produced is quality adjusted.> Yes, hence double counting: <Do you really think that one PC produced today is exactly the same amount of output as an IBM PC from 1981? > Of course not, but no one needs to figure this out or 'adjust it' because raw sales numbers would already count it. <But in your example more computers were used for no output gain and so TFP would fall and using quality adjustments it would have fallen even more!> And yet the government is adjusting the computer sale to make Dell look more productive where mine gets written off over years...good point this will indeed be interesting when it moves in reverse! DAK