4 ms·

I don't see how a random person claiming something was shared with them in a phone call with another person, who probably has neither respect nor desire to talk

I don't see how a random person claiming something was shared with them in a phone call with another person, who probably has neither respect nor desire to talk to them is a geniune information. On top of that the person in question does not appear that trustworthy in my eyes. There is a serious possibility that he might be correct, but I would certainly not take it as established. On top of that, they have their methodology described on their website[1] and the charts match that. Here is another random quote from Wikipedia[2]: "Wikipedia is not a reliable source for citations elsewhere on Wikipedia. Because it can be edited by anyone at any time, any information it contains at a particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or just plain wrong" 1. http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-438-public-comment-on-inflation-measurement http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-438-public-comment-on-... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_r...

gruez 5y ago
>I don't see how a random person claiming something was shared with them in a phone call with another person, who probably has neither respect nor desire to talk to them is a geniune information. On top of that the person in question does not appear that trustworthy in my eyes. There is a serious possibility that he might be correct, but I would certainly not take it as established. The "random person" is a Professor of Economics at the University of California, San Diego. The "another person" is the owner of the site. >On top of that, they have their methodology described on their website[1] and the charts match that. So are you conceding that it's a constant number being added or not? It sure looks that way according to one of the tables in the page you linked. The "Cumulative Annual Inflation Shortfall" has been ~5.1% for more than a decade. Eyeballing the more recent figures (raw figures are paywalled) seems to confirm this as well.
- luciusdomitius 5y ago
  Paul Krugman is also a professor of economics and AOC is a graduate. Let's leave it at that. Beside, after having seen the table you should know very well that you're wrong and have some decency.
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    You should review the site guidelines about giving the best possible interpretation to others' posts, and avoiding personal attacks. You're out of line here.

gruez 5y ago

>I don't see how a random person claiming something was shared with them in a phone call with another person, who probably has neither respect nor desire to talk to them is a geniune information. On top of that the person in question does not appear that trustworthy in my eyes. There is a serious possibility that he might be correct, but I would certainly not take it as established. The "random person" is a Professor of Economics at the University of California, San Diego. The "another person" is the owner of the site. >On top of that, they have their methodology described on their website[1] and the charts match that. So are you conceding that it's a constant number being added or not? It sure looks that way according to one of the tables in the page you linked. The "Cumulative Annual Inflation Shortfall" has been ~5.1% for more than a decade. Eyeballing the more recent figures (raw figures are paywalled) seems to confirm this as well.

luciusdomitius 5y ago
Paul Krugman is also a professor of economics and AOC is a graduate. Let's leave it at that. Beside, after having seen the table you should know very well that you're wrong and have some decency.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  You should review the site guidelines about giving the best possible interpretation to others' posts, and avoiding personal attacks. You're out of line here.