Inflation 5% in May, most since 2008

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

We are a net exporter if you bothered to read the link I was nice enough to spoon feed you. Meaning some of what we refine we sell. If we did not do that we would have no issues refining all our own oil.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Good god even your own link says the only reason we don't do it all already is due to the type of oil. That determines the type of refining process needed and since its wouldn't be smart to make refineries to process oil which is a minority of the types we refine we send that oil to places which have refineries that specialize in it. For someone who's usually smart you're being rather dense today.

originally posted by: RickyD
We are a net exporter if you bothered to read the link...

Why would I care? That wasn't what was being discussed. Please, bring up more topics I wasn't discussing.

originally posted by: RickyD
Good god even your own link says the only reason we don't do it all already is due to the type of oil.

Yeah, I already said that and I even brought up Saudi light crude. Nice try though but a massive reading comprehension fail on your part.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Funny enough we actually make profit sending the light oil off as exports which is what a lot of our domestic oil is. The heavy oil is cheaper and is what we are setup to refine. Just admit you were wrong and shut up already...you look a fool and desperate not to admit it.

Edit: you realize when we are getting paid to send that oil out and take on the heavy oil that is not a dependency. No more so than our trade partners depend on us sending what they are setup to refine. For us its a profit for them its a dependency...

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
I think I've beat this horse to the ground...have a good one ya big snarky baby...

originally posted by: RickyD
Funny enough we actually make profit sending the light oil off as exports which is what a lot of our domestic oil is. The heavy oil is cheaper and is what we are setup to refine.

Funny enough that this is also irrelevant to what I was discussing.

Just admit you were wrong...

I said we were not 'oil independent' and that we could not refine all the oil we extracted. What was wrong about either of those statements since all your links said the same thing?

a reply to: RickyD

Yeah, ad hom and run off since you ran out of irrelevancies to post.

a reply to: pianopraze

From OP- "I don’t know how they get these numbers but it seems low to me."

IT seems low to you because it is , they do not factor in energy and food prices when they figure inflation, so they rig the numbers

Core Inflation is a subset of CPI that excludes Food and Energy

inflationdata.com...#:~:text=Core%20Inflation%20is%20a%20

originally posted by: HONROC
a reply to: pianopraze

From OP- "I don’t know how they get these numbers but it seems low to me."

IT seems low to you because it is , they do not factor in energy and food prices when they figure inflation, so they rig the numbers

Core Inflation is a subset of CPI that excludes Food and Energy

inflationdata.com...#:~:text=Core%20Inflation%20is%20a%20

The article in the OP refences CPI which includes food & energy costs.

The article you linked explains why it is removed from core inflation figures and it isn't to 'Rig the numbers'

originally posted by: Ahabstar
Let’s just go back to harpooning whales. We were pretty good at that. As a plus the super squeamish will quit driving on moral objections which works out great because they can’t drive work a crap anyway.

It’s like I say, if you can’t drive right you probably vote wrong too...all those Priuses (Prii?) with Obama-Biden stickers overwhelmingly pointed that out.

I'd enjoy working in the whaling industry. It's like fishing with a major flex.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Lucky you...I havent seen 1.50$ gas in a decade

Neither has he. His words are based on a different type of gas, as in he's talking out his ass to get a rise.

a reply to: pianopraze

They are low, very low. If the US calculated inflation as it did in 1990, we'd officially be seeing almost 10% inflation currently and would have reported 4%+ every year since the Great Recession with a few localized dips slightly below 4%. If it was calculated as it was pre-1980, it gets even worse... We'd be calling the present 15% inflation rate the worst the nation had seen since the entry days of the Great recession and every year since the GR we'd have recorded greater than 5% inflation.
www.shadowstats.com...

Any way you measure it, there's one major "Uh-Oh" associated with it... we've entered the territory where a notable market crash historically (like ALWAYS in history) follows the peak of the inflation spiral.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: pianopraze

They are low, very low. If the US calculated inflation as it did in 1990, we'd officially be seeing almost 10% inflation currently and would have reported 4%+ every year since the Great Recession with a few localized dips slightly below 4%. If it was calculated as it was pre-1980, it gets even worse... We'd be calling the present 15% inflation rate the worst the nation had seen since the entry days of the Great recession and every year since the GR we'd have recorded greater than 5% inflation.
www.shadowstats.com...

Any way you measure it, there's one major "Uh-Oh" associated with it... we've entered the territory where a notable market crash historically (like ALWAYS in history) follows the peak of the inflation spiral.

Isn't it odd how the shadowstats inflation figure has the exact same shape as the CPI figure just higher?

Almost like they are just adding an arbitury increase on to the official figures...

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: pianopraze

They are low, very low. If the US calculated inflation as it did in 1990, we'd officially be seeing almost 10% inflation currently and would have reported 4%+ every year since the Great Recession with a few localized dips slightly below 4%. If it was calculated as it was pre-1980, it gets even worse... We'd be calling the present 15% inflation rate the worst the nation had seen since the entry days of the Great recession and every year since the GR we'd have recorded greater than 5% inflation.
www.shadowstats.com...

Any way you measure it, there's one major "Uh-Oh" associated with it... we've entered the territory where a notable market crash historically (like ALWAYS in history) follows the peak of the inflation spiral.

Isn't it odd how the shadowstats inflation figure has the exact same shape as the CPI figure just higher?

Almost like they are just adding an arbitury increase on to the official figures...

It reflects a removal of goods that used to be taken into consideration where inflation is concerned, so mathematically it shows what you'd expect it to show shape-wise. The current measure of inflation measures more what it costs to manufacture a good and rejects the consumer cost of food, energy, and pretty much anything considered a non-durable good. Now consider this. Manufacturers and retailers always set a percentage profit target on anything they manufacture and sell. If the official inflation measure eyeballs something earlier in the supply chain, it will always yield a lower number than the consumer actually has to deal with because of this. It doesn't cover the fact that the supplier and retailer are both applying inflation to their prices and it is the consumer who suffers from that double dip reality.

Also, the shadowstats figure is computed directly from the methodology the US government used in 1980 and in 1990 to compute inflation. If anything, the current way government computes inflation involves an arbitrary decrease from the real inflation figure.

As an aside, how long before someone in the Biden admin busts out the old "the fundamentals of this economy are strong" 6 months until collapse dog whistle we've seen from past admins overseeing pending fiscal systemic catastrophes?

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: pianopraze

They are low, very low. If the US calculated inflation as it did in 1990, we'd officially be seeing almost 10% inflation currently and would have reported 4%+ every year since the Great Recession with a few localized dips slightly below 4%. If it was calculated as it was pre-1980, it gets even worse... We'd be calling the present 15% inflation rate the worst the nation had seen since the entry days of the Great recession and every year since the GR we'd have recorded greater than 5% inflation.
www.shadowstats.com...

Any way you measure it, there's one major "Uh-Oh" associated with it... we've entered the territory where a notable market crash historically (like ALWAYS in history) follows the peak of the inflation spiral.

Isn't it odd how the shadowstats inflation figure has the exact same shape as the CPI figure just higher?

Almost like they are just adding an arbitury increase on to the official figures...

It reflects a removal of goods that used to be taken into consideration where inflation is concerned, so mathematically it shows what you'd expect it to show shape-wise. The current measure of inflation measures more what it costs to manufacture a good and rejects the consumer cost of food, energy, and pretty much anything considered a non-durable good. Now consider this. Manufacturers and retailers always set a percentage profit target on anything they manufacture and sell. If the official inflation measure eyeballs something earlier in the supply chain, it will always yield a lower number than the consumer actually has to deal with because of this. It doesn't cover the fact that the supplier and retailer are both applying inflation to their prices and it is the consumer who suffers from that double dip reality.

If you calculated it differently using different goods or weightings the shape would not be so consistent with the CPI.

CPI is a measure of consumer prices, not cost to manufacture (the clue is in the name). It does include food , energy etc.

a reply to: ScepticScot

I'm in no way convinced that's accurate anymore. CPI has gotten too close to the official core inflation since the Bush admin performed some alterations to how the official numbers were counted and reported and the gap between the two narrowed... there are only 2 ways that narrowing could have happened. Either Core Inflation returned to the 1980 methodology and considers costs of non durable goods and fuel, or the CPI stopped fully considering them.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Thats rich coming from you... Fact its we got paid for more for our oil than we pay for what we import I wouldn't exactly call that dependent and we have more oil than any other lone nation anyway. Not to mention we refine more than anyone other than China and they only ever took us barely this year. I don't think you had a clue what you were talking about and its was pretty apparent. I left because it was obvious you were never going to admit as much and going in circles with someone who appears ignorant on a topic is silly.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: ScepticScot

I'm in no way convinced that's accurate anymore. CPI has gotten too close to the official core inflation since the Bush admin performed some alterations to how the official numbers were counted and reported and the gap between the two narrowed... there are only 2 ways that narrowing could have happened. Either Core Inflation returned to the 1980 methodology and considers costs of non durable goods and fuel, or the CPI stopped fully considering them.

I wouldn't agree it's accurate today they have got closer over last twenty years.

fred.stlouisfed.org...

For periods they are more aligned is simply where there is less volatility in fuel price relative to the rest of the basket.