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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (85385)	1/1/2012 5:43:54 AM
From: TobagoJack	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217917

let's just leave the bls data at below: (i) i do not for one fraction of a nano second believe that inflation of living cost has been snail-creep at 1.5% per annum over the past 20 years, terrible year after horrible 12-months; i think 8-12% per annum is a fairer description (ii) i doubt that the quality of private earnings has been going up, from the wonderful days of internet this and fantastic nights of housing that, and before, the fantabulous 24-hours around-the-world globalization, 20 years and going strong; i believe gentle sloping down is a better take (iii) i have my doubts that private savings has been growing relative what is needed for retirement down the ever-lengthening road; i reckon folks are generally falling behind, being pulled down, or simply crushed, but only the realization-lag awaits (iv) gdp growth? incremental debt per gdp growth? savings-funded debt per gdp growth? un-sustainability-induced printathon-monetization of un-savings-funded debt per gdp growth? we shall simply have to see because we have little choice this is what the 1930s great depression (i) looked like in nominal dollar terms when the dollar was fixed to gold (not adjusted for the one-off devaluation of dollar vs gold) (v) just because we are not on a Gold Standard capitalized does not mean we cannot use uncapitalized gold standard as a measure, and by that measure, the truth reveals itself in too many ways - this below is what the great depression (ii) looks like, so far below is a longterm view of a perfect fraud that started in 1913 the truth re how the fraud worked is somewhere on the desk top per below and the truth is digestible and is good roughage (vi) we in hong kong use something called 'the hong kong dollar' and it is death-grib pegged to something known as 'the usa dollar' the hong kong real estate price is supposedly a bubble, but interestingly the nominal price is barely at 1997 level even as the purchasing power the the dollar did you-know-what. 95% of my holdings were purchased starting in 1999, including my own residence - lucky macro, but i note that even the fantabulous hong kong real estate has not kept pace w/ gold, because of the truth i see more of the same going forward, except at progressively increased second, third, and fourth derivatives on velocity.

To: KyrosL who wrote (85385)	1/1/2012 9:06:05 AM
From: bart13	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217917

All I know is that the implications of the shadowstats numbers are ridiculous. For example, that the US has been in a deep recession almost continuously for the last 20 years. That's not what the data shows. Wherever your data came from is highly suspect at best. Even with a CPI w/o lies adjustment, GDP was positive through the huge majority of the 90s. You can also easily find out that CPI is way too low, just based simply on what happens to the standard of living of seniors who are on SS for a while. The Boskin Commission adjustments didn't help, and the data and spin is there is their report should you care to look it up. And all the rest like OER, hedonics, the lack of reverse hedonics, geometric weighting etc. do exist whether you choose to look or not... and even just a CPI-U adjustment for the minimum wage rate shows that it peaked in the late '60s at around $8.00 and is now around $5.50. And then there are the "special" GDP revisions over the last 6+ years for which I posted a chart a few days ago. Those are straight data directly from government stats and completely unadjusted. When honest apples to apples comparisons are done, based on how it was calculated in 1982, the lies are obvious. When consumers switch to chicken and away from beef because beef prices went up substantially, that's an inflationary effect... but the BLS massages it away via weighting changes (also known as selection bias) and that's just plain wrong - much like the convenient weighting of medical at ~6.5% of CPI when its almost 18% of GDP. There are many other examples too, and not just in the U.S..