I was curious so I googled it and found this: http://www.shadowstats.com/article/consumer_price_index http://www.shadowstats.com/article/consumer_price_index A

I was curious so I googled it and found this: http://www.shadowstats.com/article/consumer_price_index http://www.shadowstats.com/article/consumer_price_index Apparently it happened early in the Clinton administration. Quoting: The Boskin/Greenspan argument was that when steak got too expensive, the consumer would substitute hamburger for the steak, and that the inflation measure should reflect the costs tied to buying hamburger versus steak, instead of steak versus steak. Of course, replacing hamburger for steak in the calculations would reduce the inflation rate, but it represented the rate of inflation in terms of maintaining a declining standard of living. Cost of living was being replaced by the cost of survival. The old system told you how much you had to increase your income in order to keep buying steak. The new system promised you hamburger, and then dog food, perhaps, after that.