Best political cartoon ever, "Bernanke for President" (thanks to Chuck Asay)

Assuming your unsupported claim is true, how does your contention of how the Fed uses it prove the CPI is a scam?

 

We know. You've been trolling all day.

 

So you figured out engaging with me is a losing battle huh?

 

It's a flawed measurement. A better "inflation" measurement would include not only foods and energy costs, but also the steady raising healthcare expenses and education/college costs. Ben's quantitative easing or printing, ZIRP and soon to be NIRP has a severe side effect. It does nothing to stimulate businesses/consumers spending. If anything, it forces fixed income grandpas and grandmas to save more due to losing of interest income and raising medical costs. Evidently, QE1, QE2, QE3, or QE to infinity has ZERO impact to the economy. But who cares....the pompous former Princeton professor will defend his stupid "wealth effect" theory to death.....As long as stock market goes up, everything will be okay. Seriously.

 

Yep....the increase in prices is directly linked to the FED and it's printing. They then claim they are too volatile to include in the CPI. So they don't include them. See how that works? Pretty sweet huh?

Dujac...just stop with the "FED doesn't print money" BS. You are intentionally trying to argue semantics in order to derail this and other threads. Iriemon has perfected this tactic with his "obama never promised unemployment would stay below X%) and now you are using the same tactic trying to derail a thread. Just stop it.

 

I see. You mean that food, energy and health care costs are not included in the CPI?

Does Ben calculate the CPI?

What is your analysis that the Fed's QE policies have had no effect on the economy?

 

Food and gas and health care are not included in the CPI?

 

I know. With our conservative friends, when their assertions are proven false it's just "semantics."

 

OK, dujac, I should know better by now, but I can't resist the temptation to give you stage, spotlight, and the perfect opportunity to explain to us why in the name of common sense Ben "Bailout" Bernanke and the Federal Reserve would decide to continue buying up debt now at the rate of FORTY BILLION DOLLARS EVERY MONTH?! As jaded as I am about Bernanke, I'm still absolutely stunned to see that this crazed Keynesian experimenter could dare to plunge this country into even more catastrophic levels of debt, and hurt the value of the American Dollar even more than he already has!

I'm NOT making this up; here are the links (and they're not blogs, either):

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...ersus-yen-after-fed-adds-to-monetary-stimulus

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...illion-in-mortgage-securities-each-month.html

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Fed-easing-bonds-jobs/2012/09/13/id/451719

http://business.time.com/2012/09/13...per-month-in-bonds-until-job-market-improves/

This piles reckless, irrational malfeasance on top of the fraud-balloon stupidity that Ben "Helicopter" Bernanke has been up to his neck in since August 2007, when his money-creation and debt-buying mania started.

But now, dujac, educate us all -- tell us why this is such a wonderful idea. The floor is yours....

 

Please explain how the Fed QE policy "plunge this country into even more catastrophic levels of debt"

How is it malfeasance?

 

for you and other liars like you it's a losing proposition

his brain is so full of misinformation he can't read


What goods and services does the CPI cover?

The CPI represents all goods and services purchased for consumption by the reference population…

TRANSPORTATION (new vehicles, airline fares, gasoline, motor vehicle insurance)

FOOD AND BEVERAGES (breakfast cereal, milk, coffee, chicken, wine, full service meals, snacks)

MEDICAL CARE (prescription drugs and medical supplies, physicians' services, eyeglasses and eye care, hospital services)

EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION (college tuition, postage, telephone services, computer software and accessories)


http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifaq.htm#Question_7

 

Most "conspiracy" movies don't have actual text from presidents from decades ago appologizing about what is happening today ^^

 

Oh, they all take bits of actual data and put them out of context to create distortions to support their claims.

 

I was going to give them the chance to clarify their positions, but they disappeared in any case when I asked them the question.

But I agree. It illustrates the degree that propaganda out their has misinformed so many that gullibly just believe so much of the nonsense they see. The CPI is one example. I don't know how many times I've seen people claim the CPI does not include gas and food costs, just illustrating the ignorance and misinformation.

This thread is just the latest example.

 

i'll repost this from page 12, since you missed it


zeitgeist is full of misinformation on the federal reserve

you really have to be naive to think it's accurate


here's one example

at 5:59 peter joseph says president wilson said, "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country."

it isn't true, wilson did not say that, in fact he was proud of the federal reserve act legislation


[video=youtube;_dmPchuXIXQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dmPchuXIXQ[/video]


FRIDAY, DEC 21, 2007

The unhappiness of Woodrow Wilson

Did the president lament the day he "unwittingly ruined" his country by creating the Federal Reserve?
BY ANDREW LEONARD


Did Woodrow Wilson bitterly regret his role in creating the Federal Reserve? Some readers of my post yesterday on Ron Paul and the Federal Reserve believe so. Two of them proffered an identical quote as evidence.

I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world -- no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.

On the hundreds of Web sites on which this quote appears, it is typically taken as proof of Wilson's remorse at handing over control of the nation's money supply to a cabal of Wall Street money men. A common framing: "Woodrow Wilson signed into effect the Federal Reserve Act on December 23, 1913. And said the following just six years later." Even the Wikipedia page for Woodrow Wilson includes the quote, as proof that "Historians generally agree that Wilson hated the Federal reserve, and it made him, by his own word, "a most unhappy man..."

Frequency of repetition doesn't make for reliable sourcing, however, and convincing documentary evidence that Wilson uttered such words, in reference to his role creating the Federal Reserve, is hard to come by. In fact, the available evidence suggests that the quote is an after-the-fact fabrication made by splicing together passages of different Wilson statements that have nothing at all to do with the Federal Reserve.
Two separate portions of the quote appear in The New Freedom: A Call for the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People," published in 1913. "The New Freedom" is a distillation of campaign speeches Wilson made while running for President in 1911.
On page 185 there is the following section:

A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.

And on page 201:

We are at the parting of the ways. We have, not one or two or three, but many, established and formidable monopolies in the United States. We have, not one or two, but many, fields of endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the independent man to enter. We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world -- no longer a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.

Now, this is all good rabble-rousing stuff, but its relevance to the creation of the Federal Reserve is nonexistent. The speeches these quotes were adapted from were delivered before the Federal Reserve was created. And as for the melodramatic utterance: "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country," well, so far, the sourcing well is coming up dry.

Some may question whether such historical nitpicking is relevant to the current presidential campaign. They may do so as they please. But if you want to engage in conspiracy theory, it's a good idea to get your facts straight.
UPDATE: Via e-mail, John M. Cooper, a professor of history at the University of Wisconsin, and the author of several books on Woodrow Wilson, writes:

"I can tell you categorically that this is not a statement of regret for having created the Federal Reserve. Wilson never had any regrets for having done that. It was an accomplishment in which he took great pride."


http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2007/12/21/woodrow_wilson_federal_reserve

 

His monetary based on "CORE" CPI, meaning, volatile items such as foods and energy are toss out. In that sense, yes he DOES manipulate the inflation.

What effects does his endless printing scheme since 2009 have on the economy?

 

obviously, you haven't ever taken a statistical analysis class



What is "core inflation," and why do economists use it instead of overall or general inflation to track changes in the overall price level?

The question of the correct way to measure inflation is an important one. Price stability over time, along with "maximum" sustainable economic output and employment, are the Federal Reserve's primary goals in making monetary policy. The maintenance of price stability—avoiding high inflation rates or deflation over time—is important because fluctuating prices distort the economy’s price signals and can result in the misallocation of resources. 1

The Federal Reserve carefully reviews and analyzes the available inflation measures to monitor how well it is achieving its price stability goal. One common way economists use inflation data is by looking at “core inflation,” which is generally defined as a chosen measure of inflation (e.g., the Consumer Price Index or CPI, the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index or PCEPI, or the Gross Domestic Product Deflator) that excludes the more volatile categories of food and energy prices.

Why are food and energy prices typically more volatile than other prices?

To understand why the categories of food and energy are more sensitive to price changes, consider environmental factors that can ravage a year’s crops, or fluctuations in the oil supply from the OPEC cartel. Each is an example of a supply shock that may affect the prices for that product. However, although the prices of those goods may frequently increase or decrease at rapid rates, the price disturbances may not be related to a trend change in the economy’s overall price level. Instead, changes in food and energy prices often are more likely related to temporary factors that may reverse themselves later.

To demonstrate just how volatile energy prices, for example, can be relative to other prices less food and energy, Chart 1 compares the fluctuations of these two measures over time.





Fluctuations in energy prices are illustrated by the red line, while a trend increase in general prices is represented by the less volatile blue line. 2

Fluctuations in energy prices reflect a change in those prices over time relative to other prices. This means, for example, that increases in the price of oil, an important input of many other goods, will make oil-dependent goods and services (e.g., automobiles) more expensive relative to less oil-intensive goods and services (e.g., bicycles). The important point to note is that the energy price fluctuations displayed by the red line in Chart 1 often resulted from factors other than an underlying trend increase in general prices (the blue line). Therefore, the changes in energy prices are not necessarily a sign of inflation and, when they are included, can distort a trend increase in general prices. By measuring core inflation, economists are attempting to isolate what is happening to general prices without distraction from spikes in volatile energy prices. 3

The PCEPI is another popular measure of inflation. This measure is based on Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE), which is the component of GDP that includes all consumer spending on durable goods, nondurable goods, and services. To illustrate the important difference between PCE and “core” PCE, the two inflation measures are displayed in Chart 2.




As you can see, the red line shows a bit more fluctuation than the blue line. In other words, leaving out the volatile categories of food and energy yields a more steady measure of inflation, and thus is more likely to reflect the overall trend change in the economy’s general price level.

Should food and energy prices ever be included in measures of inflation?

If economists were to look only at measures of inflation that include expenditures on food and energy, which would include their more-sensitive price fluctuations, they may be fooled into believing that general prices are rising or falling more rapidly than they really are. An additional argument for excluding changes in food and energy prices from measures of inflation is that, “although these prices have substantial effects on the overall index, they often are quickly reversed and so do not require a monetary policy response.” (Motley, 1997)

Having said this, measures of inflation that do incorporate food and energy prices are still useful in many circumstances and are closely followed by economists for clues to the behavior of the overall price level. For example, economists may view the sensitive nature of food and energy prices as a symptom of future overall price increases. “A rise in aggregate demand that might set off a period of higher inflation may initially show up in increases in certain sensitive prices that are set in more competitive markets. If these prices are ignored because they are ‘volatile,’ these early signals of inflation may be missed.” (Motley, 1997).

Determining when to use a core inflation measure versus an overall inflation measure can be a very complicated question. For more information on when and why more inclusive measures of inflation might be useful, please see the San Francisco Federal Reserve’s April 18, 1997 Economic Letter and Gavin and Mandal (2002). 4

Endnotes

1) To illustrate the importance of the price stability objective, note that the Federal Open Market Committee recently discussed the issue of inflation targeting, which is when a central bank’s monetary policy is set with the goal of maintaining a specific level of inflation (see the FOMC’s minutes of the February 2, 2005 meeting: http://www.federalreserve.gov/FOMC/minutes/20050202.htm). Most discussions of inflation targeting recommend targeting a core inflation rate.

2) Average increases over the entire twenty-year period shown in the Chart 1 were 3.2 percent for core CPI, but only 2.4 percent for energy prices. However, the annual change in all prices, shown as the blue line, was narrow, ranging from a low of 1 percent to a high of 6 percent, while the annual changes in energy prices were much larger, ranging from a low of nearly -20 percent to a high of nearly 24 percent.

3) Food and energy are significant components of overall price indexes. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, which calculates the CPI, publishes the weight, or relative importance, of each CPI component. In December of 2004, the general food category accounted for about 14.3% of the total CPI, and energy prices (i.e., the erratic jagged red line in Chart 1) accounted for about 8% of the total CPI. Together they were about 22.3% of the CPI’s “weight”! See Bureau of Labor Statistics: Relative importance of components in the Consumer Prices Indexes (ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiri_2004.txt).

4) Gavin and Mandal in the January 2002 Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis’s Regional Economist argue that food should no longer be excluded from inflation measures in the first place, under the rationale that food prices are not as volatile as they once were due to changing consumption patterns of American consumers.

http://www.frbsf.org/education/activities/drecon/2004/0410.html

 

My brain is perfectly okay. You can keep repeating every bs that the government is feeding you, it has zero effect on me.

 

there's where you went wrong.

 

Obviously, I'm better off by NOT taking any brainwashing materials from liberal education.

 

he is the government

 

just admit you don't know what you're talking about

i see that you choose ignorance over education

 

It's hilarious to see the dude keeps copying and pasting government bs to compensate for his zero critical thinking.

Comedy hour ya know.

 

I take my dog's opinion more serious than yours.

Give me a good reason why would choose progressive liberal brainwashing propaganda over anything?

 

it has been well demonstrated that you have extremely poor judgement