"Actual" inflation is 2% only by completely juking the stats

Oldag2020 said:

---

Federal Reserve Board and Federal Open Market Committee release economic projections from the June 15-16 FOMC meeting: https://t.co/wQT9Tjb1PO

— Federal Reserve (@federalreserve) June 16, 2021

Fed does not change policy.
Fed raises gdp outlook to 7%
Fed maintains asset purchases at $120 b
Fed maintains belief current inflation is transitory

Actual inflation is currently 2%. Everything above is transitory.
Long term Inflation expectations are 3.4%. A far cry from the 6% many on this site were expecting.

---

I tend to agree with the transitory inflation comment. Living it in real time in the commodities market, lumber notably. Down 40% from May highs and effectively all pricing pressure is a product of supply-demand skew to the demand side and Covid related hiccups in supply chain. YoY stats being quoted as proof positive of dramatic inflation is just lying with statistics given what was happening last year.

That said, I don't know how they expect to add 30-40% to the money supply and not expect Structrual inflation >3.5%. Buncha dinguses.

Fitch said:

---

Oldag2020 said:

---

Federal Reserve Board and Federal Open Market Committee release economic projections from the June 15-16 FOMC meeting: https://t.co/wQT9Tjb1PO

— Federal Reserve (@federalreserve) June 16, 2021

Fed does not change policy.
Fed raises gdp outlook to 7%
Fed maintains asset purchases at $120 b
Fed maintains belief current inflation is transitory

Actual inflation is currently 2%. Everything above is transitory.
Long term Inflation expectations are 3.4%. A far cry from the 6% many on this site were expecting.

---

I tend to agree with the transitory inflation comment. Living it in real time in the commodities market, lumber notably. Down 40% from May highs and effectively all pricing pressure is a product of supply-demand skew to the demand side and Covid related hiccups in supply chain. YoY stats being quoted as proof positive of dramatic inflation is just lying with statistics given what was happening last year.

That said, I don't know how they expect to add 30-40% to the money supply and not expect Structrual inflation >3.5%. Buncha dinguses.

---

It's primarily because our productive capacity can keep up with the increases in demand. Simple as that. Thanks for backing the transitory comment!

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

Ding. Ding. Ding.

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

I love how you **** on investment advisors for convincing people that they can see the future, but when the fed makes an equally SWAG prediction, you treat it as if it's conversation-ending fact.

---

But it's the all knowing government and they are only here to help us

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

I love how you **** on investment advisors for convincing people that they can see the future, but when the fed makes an equally SWAG prediction, you treat it as if it's conversation-ending fact.

---

The fed is not solely using historical data to predict the future. They also use current and projected economic trends as the basis of their decisions.

Completely different than an investment advisor saying something like "inflation ran away in the 1970s for reason X. It will happen now simply because it happened then"

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

As I previously stated, trade deficits are good, and signal strong future economic growth. Nothing is anywhere close to the USD as the world reserve currency. That will not change in our lifetimes.

Never change, Slate. pic.twitter.com/5yvuWbesxX

— Drew Holden (@DrewHolden360) June 14, 2021

Oldag2020 said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

I love how you **** on investment advisors for convincing people that they can see the future, but when the fed makes an equally SWAG prediction, you treat it as if it's conversation-ending fact.

---

The fed is not solely using historical data to predict the future. They also use current and projected economic trends as the basis of their decisions.

Completely different than an investment advisor saying something like "inflation ran away in the 1970s for reason X. It will happen now simply because it happened then"

---

And they are wrong about their current and projected economic trends.

Investment advisors lose clients if they are wrong. Fed chairmen make excuses.

OldArmyBrent said:

---

Oldag2020 said:

---

Everything you listed is increasing in price due to temporary supply imbalances. ie it is transitory and will not continue for the foreseeable future.

Rule #1 don't fight the fed

The fed isn't worried and neither am I

---

Not sure if serious.

---

But certain of his competence..

Oldag2020 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

As I previously stated, trade deficits are good, and signal strong future economic growth. Nothing is anywhere close to the USD as the world reserve currency. That will not change in our lifetimes.

---

And you were as wrong then as you are now.

If you were right, then we'd have trade deficits during our economic booms and surpluses during our depressions. Yet we see the EXACT OPPOSITE. During good times (like the industrial revolution, and after WW2), we had huge trade surpluses. During our recessions, depressions, and panics the trade balance fell dramatically.

It's like you are trying to be as wrong as possible and see how long people bother responding to your posts.

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

You are conflating two issues that are not really interrelated. The national debt really doesn't have anything to do with the trade deficit, it has to do with runaway government spending. If we reduced the trade deficit to zero we would still have a huge national debt as spending far outstrips revenue. It is true that some of that may be offset by more production in the U.S. leading to higher revenues, but not nearly as much as you'd think.

Trade deficit is driven by the American public buying foreign made goods - mostly goods that aren't made here as Americans wont' work those jobs for that amount of pay.

National Debt is the the financing of the shortfall between what the government collects and what they spend, they play that hole with debt.

The only way the trade deficit impacts national debt is if the government is purchasing billions of $$ of foreign goods and borrowing to do it. Most of what the government spends $$ on is services and the tangible goods are mostly domestic, or even if foreign it is purchased from a domestic company / intermediary and yes that could affect both the trade deficit and the national debt to some extent. But the national debt is not driven by purchase of tangible goods, it is drive by programs, social services, non-tangible goods funding that we borrow to finance/fund.

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

Did you skip the lecture on comparative advantage?

Malibu2 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

Did you skip the lecture on comparative advantage?

---

It's not comparative if our government imposed regulations and regressive policies force companies to buy products from over seas.

Malibu2 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

Did you skip the lecture on comparative advantage?

---

No. The comparative advantage that they enjoy over us is that they don't have a government that stifles the free market like we do. That's the problem. And why liberalism sucks.

Malibu2 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

Did you skip the lecture on comparative advantage?

---

You mean like no minimum wage?

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Our productive capacity hasn't been able to keep up with our demand for decades. That is why we have a huge trade deficit. We have to depend on foreign production to get the stuff we need, and we pay for that crap by going into debt and printing money. The moment they stop accepting our IOUs, we will experience the inflation we should have been experiencing the entire time.

---

You are conflating two issues that are not really interrelated. The national debt really doesn't have anything to do with the trade deficit, it has to do with runaway government spending. If we reduced the trade deficit to zero we would still have a huge national debt as spending far outstrips revenue. It is true that some of that may be offset by more production in the U.S. leading to higher revenues, but not nearly as much as you'd think.

Trade deficit is driven by the American public buying foreign made goods - mostly goods that aren't made here as Americans wont' work those jobs for that amount of pay.

National Debt is the the financing of the shortfall between what the government collects and what they spend, they play that hole with debt.

The only way the trade deficit impacts national debt is if the government is purchasing billions of $$ of foreign goods and borrowing to do it. Most of what the government spends $$ on is services and the tangible goods are mostly domestic, or even if foreign it is purchased from a domestic company / intermediary and yes that could affect both the trade deficit and the national debt to some extent. But the national debt is not driven by purchase of tangible goods, it is drive by programs, social services, non-tangible goods funding that we borrow to finance/fund.

---

Government is printing money and buying it's own bonds with it. That money is then distributed to people through a bunch of mechanisms including stimulus checks, welfare, other government spending. Much of that easy money is then used by individuals to buy foreign goods. So in our case, they are connected. However, even if government was not expanding it's debt, we still would still have a trade surplus, it just would not be as much. Since our government regulations and taxes still make it difficult to produce stuff here.

If you you waved a magic wand and removed minimum wage the market clearing US price isn't bringing low skill manufacturing jobs back from Asia.

Malibu2 said:

---

If you you waved a magic wand and removed minimum wage the market clearing US price isn't bringing low skill manufacturing jobs back from Asia.

---

If we removed minimum wage and entitlement programs, reduced regulations to proper (much lower) levels, lowered taxes to pay for tiny government, then it would absolutely bring back low still manufacturing jobs.

And everybody would be better off too.

Malibu2 said:

---

If you you waved a magic wand and removed minimum wage the market clearing US price isn't bringing low skill manufacturing jobs back from Asia.

---

Funny, Trumps magic wand was starting to do just that.

aTmAg said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

If you you waved a magic wand and removed minimum wage the market clearing US price isn't bringing low skill manufacturing jobs back from Asia.

---

If we removed minimum wage and entitlement programs, reduced regulations to proper (much lower) levels, lowered taxes to pay for tiny government, then it would absolutely bring back low still manufacturing jobs.

And everybody would be better off too.

---

This is magical thinking. We can't compete with $2.50/hour. Nor should we. Especially when we can't fill openings right now.

mazag08 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

If you you waved a magic wand and removed minimum wage the market clearing US price isn't bringing low skill manufacturing jobs back from Asia.

---

Funny, Trumps magic wand was starting to do just that.

---

Trumps wand increased prices in specifically China via US government regulation. On the margins that act may have made it more profitable to stay or reshore very specific jobs, but more likely just padded margins as price increased and supply chains moved to other parts of Asia or Central America. .

Oldag2020 said:

---

The fed is not solely using historical data to predict the future. They also use current and projected economic trends as the basis of their decisions.

Completely different than an investment advisor saying something like "inflation ran away in the 1970s for reason X. It will happen now simply because it happened then"

---

Oh yea their approach is so much more accurate:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-reserve-meeting-interest-rates-bond-purchases-june-2021-11623777582?mod=mhp
"Prompting the policy shift is a much stronger economic rebound and hotter inflation than the Fed anticipated just a few months ago."

In other words, just a few months after making a prediction, they realized it was dead ass wrong and had to make a new, corrective one. But for some reason you think that this one is guaranteed to be accurate even though the last one, likely made using the exact same data collection and number crunching processes, sucked.

Malibu2 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

If you you waved a magic wand and removed minimum wage the market clearing US price isn't bringing low skill manufacturing jobs back from Asia.

---

If we removed minimum wage and entitlement programs, reduced regulations to proper (much lower) levels, lowered taxes to pay for tiny government, then it would absolutely bring back low still manufacturing jobs.

And everybody would be better off too.

---

This is magical thinking. We can't compete with $2.50/hour. Nor should we. Especially when we can't fill openings right now.

---

It's not magical thinking. The reason why we cannot compete with $2.50/hr and why we can't fill openings right now are one in the same: we pay people to not work. In short, government policy causes these problems.

Have you noticed that no matter how much we pay the poor in entitlement programs, that it never seems to be enough? If the poor in 1970 knew how much today's poor got in government benefits, they would assume that poverty has been eliminated. That every American was middle class or above. In reality, the poor today are no better off than they were 50 years ago. In fact, prior to covid, nearly 80% of Americans have been living paycheck to paycheck. That is worse than it was in the 70's. Why is that?

Imagine that today government benefits for the poor only added up to $1K/year. And with that, the poor couldn't get by. Meaning, that of X amount of goods produced, the poor simply wasn't getting enough. Now imagine that tomorrow, the government paid the poor $100K/year. Well guess what? Most people making less than $100K/year would no longer work. In fact, most people making less than $110K/year would stop working, because working 40 hours a week is not worth a measly additional $10K/year. Before, those people would have taken part in producing part of that X amount of goods. Now they are not anymore. So the amount of goods to distribute across all of America would be considerably less than X. Guess who can afford those goods, the rich or the poor? Obviously the rich, even though the poor is getting $100K/year. So prices would surge to at least $110K/year while the poor are only getting $100K/year. So they would be worse off. No matter what, the government is making the problem worse. They could hand out checks of $1B/second and our expenses would shoot up to beyond $1B/second. As they artificially push our salaries up, our expenses will always go higher.

For example, a Model-T cost $300 in 1920 while the Average salary was $3,269.40/year. So a new car cost less than 10% of the average American yearly salary back then. Today the average cost of a new car is $39,950 while the average salary is $74,378. So the average car costs 54% of our average salary today. I don't know about you, I'd rather make $3K per year if my car only cost $300 (and my other expenses were similarly cheap). And BTW, at 40 hours over 50 weeks $3,269.40/year equals $1.64/hour. Quite a bit lower than $2.50/hr. And yet our savings rate was through the roof back then rather than in the single digits like it is today.

So not only could we compete with $2.50/hour, we would THRIVE doing so if we cut back out government to 1920 levels.

No, this is still magical thinking. Take away all regulations and entitlements and the opportunity cost of our poor is Postmates or Amazon warehouse. In Asia it's still 14 hours of subsistence farming. We're as a country higher up the value chain. The marginal value of an unskilled persons labor is higher here than Asia. Which is why they make cheap stuff. It ain't coming back, nor should it unless automation makes labor costs in Asia comparatively more expensive.

Malibu2 said:

---

No, this is still magical thinking. Take away all regulations and entitlements and the opportunity cost of our poor is Postmates or Amazon warehouse. In Asia it's still 14 hours of subsistence farming. We're as a country higher up the value chain. The marginal value of an unskilled persons labor is higher here than Asia. Which is why they make cheap stuff. It ain't coming back, nor should it unless automation makes labor costs in Asia comparatively more expensive.

---

Again, you are wrong. You seriously think that people will starve to death passing over low skilled jobs while waiting for and Amazon factory job? First of all, today we have the luxury to do so because government comes to our rescue. In the economically sound scenario, government doesn't do this anymore because they finally recognize they are hurting rather than helping. So then it's either work, starve, or convince a private charity that they are really in need -- and healthy people who simply refuse to work are very unconvincing. Secondly, the salaries in those Amazon type jobs would fall dramatically to their natural levels anyway. So there would be no reason to hold out. It would be like holding out for a McDonalds job and passing over Burger King.

And you misdiagnose the reason for automation. In America, government has pushed the cost of labor so high that automation is the cheaper option. If government got out of the way, labor would be the cheaper option again just like it is in China. The number of low end jobs would explode and people would take them because $1.64/hour would actually be a living wage again. That would be because everything would become so cheap and our overall expenses would become very low. Despite the low wages in China, their savings rate is still 50% compared to single digits here (pre-covid).

It is government that is making everything so expensive making it "necessary" to provide welfare for unemployed, so that they hold out for higher paying jobs, which make things more expensive, etc. It is the policies you espouse that is causing this cycle to ruin. It is why our entitlements cost so much and why we are over or head in debt. It's going to cause a financial collapse and government will be unable to fund entitlements anymore. Then even more low skilled people will starve (a lot of homless die every year as it is). Either we winningly choose the free market, and minimize the pain (the sooner, the less the misery), or wait for collapse and have it forced on us suddenly down the road. It's happening either way. Whether or not you agree is irrelevant.

It would be better for the poor if more guys like you recognized the facts and voted for freedom to help the poor now, rather than watch them get screwed later. I doubt enough of you will, and we will have to watch people suffer over it. Crime will go through the roof too, so that will be fun and we will have liberalism to thank for that as well.

Malibu2 said:

---

mazag08 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

If you you waved a magic wand and removed minimum wage the market clearing US price isn't bringing low skill manufacturing jobs back from Asia.

---

Funny, Trumps magic wand was starting to do just that.

---

Trumps wand increased prices in specifically China via US government regulation. On the margins that act may have made it more profitable to stay or reshore very specific jobs, but more likely just padded margins as price increased and supply chains moved to other parts of Asia or Central America. .

---

LOL, what is Biden's magic wand up to?

"Officials (Fed) said that increases in interest rates could come as soon as after the 2022 midterms in 2023."

"JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warned that there is a very high likelihood that the inflation will not be temporary as the Biden administration has been trying to claim it will be."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-reserve-delivers-bad-news-about-expectations-for-inflation-raising-interest-rates-report

I literally just told someone the Fed would raise interest rates around or after the mid terms....this is political.

I've watched this happen before, and to see that petulant kid (whatever his username/handle was) trying to vomit the opinions of his professors on here is somewhat offensive. 1/10 would not employ.

After 08 people tried suing Appraisers claiming their homes were overvalued (true in some cases) after screaming to DORA that their home was supposedly undervalued any time they didn't agree with us. This is the exact same direction we are headed in again.

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

Oldag2020 said:

---

The fed is not solely using historical data to predict the future. They also use current and projected economic trends as the basis of their decisions.

Completely different than an investment advisor saying something like "inflation ran away in the 1970s for reason X. It will happen now simply because it happened then"

---

Oh yea their approach is so much more accurate:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-reserve-meeting-interest-rates-bond-purchases-june-2021-11623777582?mod=mhp
"Prompting the policy shift is a much stronger economic rebound and hotter inflation than the Fed anticipated just a few months ago."

In other words, just a few months after making a prediction, they realized it was dead ass wrong and had to make a new, corrective one. But for some reason you think that this one is guaranteed to be accurate even though the last one, likely made using the exact same data collection and number crunching processes, sucked.

---

Logic.

On another thread, oldag claimed that they have AI and big data and very powerful CPUs, so their predictions are so much more sophisticated and accurate now. I'm sure he'll say they've gotten a lot better in just the past few months. NOW they are right!

Dos Tasadores De TAMU said:

---

"Officials (Fed) said that increases in interest rates could come as soon as after the 2022 midterms in 2023."

"JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warned that there is a very high likelihood that the inflation will not be temporary as the Biden administration has been trying to claim it will be."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-reserve-delivers-bad-news-about-expectations-for-inflation-raising-interest-rates-report

I literally just told someone the Fed would raise interest rates around or after the mid terms....this is political.

I've watched this happen before, and to see that petulant kid (whatever his username/handle was) trying to vomit the opinions of his professors on here is somewhat offensive. 1/10 would not employ.

After 08 people tried suing Appraisers claiming their homes were overvalued (true in some cases) after screaming to DORA that their home was supposedly undervalued any time they didn't agree with us. This is the exact same direction we are headed in again.

---

Powell was raising rates like a mad man and killing QE when Trump was elected, with no sign of "abnormal" inflation whatsoever.

Of course its political!

Obama got 0% interest for 95% of his term with $4 trillion of printed money. Biden comes in, and he gets 0% and even more printed money, and stimulus the likes that we've never seen!.

Dos Tasadores De TAMU said:

---

"Officials (Fed) said that increases in interest rates could come as soon as after the 2022 midterms in 2023."

"JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warned that there is a very high likelihood that the inflation will not be temporary as the Biden administration has been trying to claim it will be."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-reserve-delivers-bad-news-about-expectations-for-inflation-raising-interest-rates-report

I literally just told someone the Fed would raise interest rates around or after the mid terms....this is political.

I've watched this happen before, and to see that petulant kid (whatever his username/handle was) trying to vomit the opinions of his professors on here is somewhat offensive. 1/10 would not employ.

After 08 people tried suing Appraisers claiming their homes were overvalued (true in some cases) after screaming to DORA that their home was supposedly undervalued any time they didn't agree with us. This is the exact same direction we are headed in again.

---

I'd put a lot of money on the fact that since you are spending a good chunk of your day on Texags, you are not in the position to hire anyone.

Oldag2020 said:

---

Dos Tasadores De TAMU said:

---

"Officials (Fed) said that increases in interest rates could come as soon as after the 2022 midterms in 2023."

"JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warned that there is a very high likelihood that the inflation will not be temporary as the Biden administration has been trying to claim it will be."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-reserve-delivers-bad-news-about-expectations-for-inflation-raising-interest-rates-report

I literally just told someone the Fed would raise interest rates around or after the mid terms....this is political.

I've watched this happen before, and to see that petulant kid (whatever his username/handle was) trying to vomit the opinions of his professors on here is somewhat offensive. 1/10 would not employ.

After 08 people tried suing Appraisers claiming their homes were overvalued (true in some cases) after screaming to DORA that their home was supposedly undervalued any time they didn't agree with us. This is the exact same direction we are headed in again.

---

I'd put a lot of money on the fact that since you are spending a good chunk of your day on Texags, you are not in the position to hire anyone. If you are, at the maximum, it's at a local credit union. The majority of my classmates, myself included, would gladly pass.

---

Stubborn in his poorly-informed viewpoint, an *******, and completely ignorant about the realities of office jobs. What a catch!

I'd put a lot of money that you have a nice looking resume that gets you a lot of interviews, but few offers.

You didn't address any part of my argument. You just repeated your same argument from last time with new numbers you pulled out of Narnia. We get it, you think if no government regs existed we'd have all the factories filled with all the workers and people here would thrive on $1/hour. It ignores comparative advantage, nor considers that an industrialized modernized economy should have better baseline alternatives for unskilled labor than subsistence farming like our Asian competitors.