• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stocks pile on losses amid worries on economy

Disputatious71 said:
Amazing that is the same number I saw during the week of the Obama/Reid deficit circus! It is a shame that the biggest losers are the average Americans that have retirement money losing value thus making them less likely to retire anytime soon, of course the public sector employees are still retirement insured by the tax payers that must now work longer and harder to enjoy those same golden years... maybe...
Click to expand...

Obama/Reid were not the ones holding the economy hostage to raise the debt ceiling in order to pay our current obligations. :sun
 
SingleCellOrganism said:
The USA is toast and here is why:

Massive debt
Foreign wars
Wages are WAY too high compared to the rest of the world
Lazy, dumb generation of kids
Corrupt moronic political system

No way out.. no way out.
Click to expand...

Which country are you from?
 
1Perry said:
What does that have to do with what I said? The article claims to say why one measure is better than the other. It's nothing more than governmental gobbly gook. I said using the same formula as used in 1978, inflation a few months ago would have been measured around 10%. (from my recollection)

Are you saying that it wouldn't have been notably higher?
Click to expand...

As you probably know, the CPI Index calculations were changed, in 1995, to include an 'hedonics' fudge factor, which in essence is a big lie, and both 'Parties' benefit from the lie, so the farce goes on.

shadowstats.com has a graph somewhere in its site that has both pre-1995 CPI calculations and post-1995 calculations on the same graph for a comparison of the two methods. The old CPI calculations had their own flaws, that is another topic, but they were far closer to the truth than the post-1995 calculations.

It's worth noting that the Japanese and European banks consider the government's CPI numbers farcical and use their own estimates, not our government's, when making their decisions about the U.S. economy.

If anybody needs a 'source' for this, get your own subscription to The Economist. It's a fairly frequent topic in there.

Not relevant to the topic, but why do you like 1978 as a base year, or is that just the year your sources use? I think 1972 is a better base year, pre-Oil Crisis Hoax, but maybe the data isn't as extensive or something. A lot of these stats in newer books and articles only go back to 1980 or so, I've noticed.
 
Last edited:
Oberon said:
As you probably know, the CPI Index calculations were changed, in 1995, to include an 'hedonics' fudge factor, which in essence is a big lie, and both 'Parties' benefit from the lie, so the farce goes on.
Click to expand...

Yep, as I said somewhere else, I'm not blaming Obama for changing the numbers.

shadowstats.com has a graph somewhere in its site that has both pre-1995 CPI calculations and post-1995 calculations on the same graph for a comparison of the two methods. The old CPI calculations had their own flaws, that is another topic, but they were far closer to the truth than the post-1995 calculations.
Click to expand...

My point wasn't even that the old way was better. (I personally believe it was in many regards) but that wasn't my point.

It's worth noting that the Japanese and European banks consider the government's CPI numbers farcical and use their own estimates, not our government's, when making their decisions about the U.S. economy.

If anybody needs a 'source' for this, get your own subscription to The Economist. It's a fairly frequent topic in there.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I didn't know this.
 
Wages are WAY too high compared to the rest of the world
Click to expand...

Thanks for the sarcasm. Humor is always appreciated.
 
Catawba said:
Obama/Reid were not the ones holding the economy hostage to raise the debt ceiling in order to pay our current obligations. :sun
Click to expand...

Actually, they were.
 
1Perry said:
What does that have to do with what I said? The article claims to say why one measure is better than the other. It's nothing more than governmental gobbly gook. I said using the same formula as used in 1978, inflation a few months ago would have been measured around 10%. (from my recollection)

Are you saying that it wouldn't have been notably higher?
Click to expand...

I am saying that the formula used in 1978 provides a gross inaccuracy of the inflation situation. So much that it should not even be mentioned in this discussion.

I suggest you research how inflation is calculated before making invalid attempts at painting the current inflation situation as dire.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
I am saying that the formula used in 1978 provides a gross inaccuracy of the inflation situation. So much that it should not even be mentioned in this discussion.
Click to expand...

Saying that food and energy shouldn't be included is more accurate?

I suggest you research how inflation is calculated before making invalid attempts at painting the current inflation situation as dire.
Click to expand...

Dire? Did I say dire? Why do people do this? I simply said measured the same way as it was under Carter, inflation would be around 10%. We survived Carter. My arguement was used to note that "historically low" is irrelevant when it was measured differently before.
 
1Perry said:
Keeping the interest rates artificially low for so long was a contributor to our problems. No, we are doing no one a favor by making it so cheap to run up commodities.
Click to expand...

THEN WE SHOULD HAVE RAISED TAXES EARLY DURING THE WAR EFFORT especially when GWB took us to war with Iraq because the only buffer Treasury had to keep our economy afloat once income tax revenue started to decline was near zero interest bond rates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom