| ▲ | recursivedoubts a day ago |
| The neat part is that there is no inflation here: you just substituted a worse product for a better one and our friends in the govt call it good. |
|
| ▲ | gruez a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| >you just substituted a worse product for a better one and our friends in the govt call it good. I agree that somewhat distorts the effect of inflation, but at the same time it has to be done for inflation measures to make any sense. Otherwise we'd still be measuring the prices of heating coal and whale blubber. |
| |
| ▲ | Tadpole9181 a day ago | parent [-] | | Because those are our only two options? We ar perfectly capable of intelligently changing how we calculate inflation. And the current administration's idea that if an American stops buying something because they cannot afford it anymore, means inflation went down is delusional. | | |
| ▲ | gruez a day ago | parent | next [-] | | >We ar perfectly capable of intelligently changing how we calculate inflation. What do you propose then? All the places where the BLS is "intelligently changing how we calculate inflation" creates controversy: hedonic/quality adjustments, substitution/weight changes, owners equivalent rent, the list goes on and on. What it practically boils down to is that people have an agenda (ie. inflation is high or low), and if the official numbers doesn't seem right to them, they accuse the current administration of fudging it, even if there's no evidence of methodology change. | |
| ▲ | JohnFen a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | There isn't really one single measure of inflation, despite what is often implied. There are many. The reason for that is that every measurement methodology distorts some aspect of the economy, so you (should) choose the measure that distorts the least for the aspect you care about. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | JohnFen a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I very much disagree that it's a worse product. |
| |
| ▲ | Noaidi a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I knew a man who worked in the food industry for forty years. He told me to never eat U.S. pork the way it is processed today. | | |
| ▲ | stronglikedan a day ago | parent [-] | | Anyone that truly knows how the sausage is made, so to speak, will tell you that in any country. Meat processing isn't pretty in any form. |
| |
| ▲ | jLaForest a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | i mean that cant be true if you also admit to only buying it because your preferred product became too expensive. | | |
| ▲ | JohnFen 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | I never said beef was my preferred product, nor that I'm only buying pork because I can't justify buying beef. I like beef and pork equally, and have always bought both. What I said was that the price of beef reached a point where it's not worth the money for me, so I'm not buying it. I've mostly replaced it with pork (and to a lesser degree, chicken). Just to head off another potential misunderstanding, this also isn't a case of being unable to afford beef. I'm doing fine on the money front. It's a case of the cost/benefit ratio of beef no longer being favorable for me. |
| |
| ▲ | recursivedoubts a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | why weren't you always eating pork then? (I like both, prefer beef usually but buy pork often, dislike how hogs are treated tho compared to cows) | | | |
| ▲ | svachalek a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why were you buying beef before, then? Hasn't pork always been cheaper than beef? | | |
| ▲ | JohnFen a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Historically, I've always bought both. It's nice to have variety. The difference now is that I'm not buying both. | |
| ▲ | stronglikedan a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | because variety is the spice of life |
|
|
|
| ▲ | thijson a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think Greenspan called it hedonics. |
|
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |
