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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GraceZ who wrote (129548)	8/2/2001 5:31:33 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 164684

>>It was obvious you were trying to explain hedonic pricing<< then why did you post a link on inflation adjustments? -lol- >>but you are using the term chained dollars incorrectly in trying to explain it<< please explain more fully. tell us all the truth about chained dollars in the hedonic pricing sense and how big bad skeeterbug has so grossly misled people with a patently false use of the term. ps - i bolded this so that others will know you saw this highlighted and still chose not to respond when you fail to answer this question. >>Not only that, you make little or no attempt to state the problems inherent in measurement of the GDP that brought about it's use.<< grace, the issue being discussed is which system is better - the old one or the new one. i've said that the old system wasn't perfect on several occasions, can't you read and comprehend? so, other than any benefit you derive from throwing stones here, i don't see the value. >>To you the government and AG specifically is on some kind of mission to screw around with the indicators for personal or political purposes. (according to Grand Pa it's to screw the pensioners by understating inflation) I don't think you fully appreciate the difficulty inherent in measuring output in an economy with technology that can be completely discontinuous from one year to the next whose prices drop with a rapidity unseen in previous decades.<< yes, i do. as i said on several occasions, the old system wasn't perfect. but at least one knew what it was and one knew what went into it better than now. >>You know the problems inherent in using the hedonic measurements but do you understand the problems inherent in not using some form of hedonic price adjustments?<< absolutely. grace, i said the old system wasn't perfect and had flaws. on several occasions. is anybody home? just b/c something isn't perfect doesn't mean someone ought to make it less perfect or, even worse, outright dangerous. i HOPE that isn't the logic you are using. the question being discussed is whether it makes sense to over ride the market on economic values. my opinion is no b/c i believe that is the greater of two evils, if you will. >>But most importantly you don't really care about being accurate because it doesn't fit your anti-Fed agenda.<< please point out an inaccuracy grace. you come off as the equivalent of a drive by flamer. you are great at throwing stones and making accusations and very poor at backing them up. your mo is to skip to the next volley of stones to throw w/o addressing any of your original allegations. this is tiresome, a waste of time and all too transparent. >>If you are going to blast the Fed at least blast them for their arrogance in thinking that anyone is smart enough to engineer the economy in the first place regardless of how flawed the yardsticks are.<< why? although gdp and productivity measures aren't perfect, i DO NOT AGREE THAT THEY ADD NO VALUE. the value may be limited, however, and we ought to understand and work within those limitations. unfortunately, imho, the current measurement method limited what can be gleaned from the metric even more than the old measurement method. worse yet, it created an illusion that allowed people to get fiscally stupid to a degree that they otherwise would not have. now we get to pay the piper. >>The yardsticks are always flawed, the most you can do is choose one set of problems over another.<< grace, hello?!?!?! what the heck do you think is being discussed here? i choose the old system ex the bogus gdp adder b/c i believe it increases the gap between reality and the metric and i don't believe that is good. you appear confused. on the one hand, you argue i'm wrong to be mad at alan.com for choosing to worsen the productivity metric's meaning b/c the issue isn't which method one uses, it is the "arrogance" of trying to measure a dynamic reality. on the other, you say the issue is which method to choose. hello?!?! you sound confused. which is it, grace? make up your mind before you confuse everyone else! wrt to you pooh poohing the idea leaders like greenspan don't act in their own vested self interest... do you believe condit got together with all those chicks to "get a closer feel for his constituents?" -lol- that sounds awful naive. a little skepticism is not a bad thing.