5 ms·

No proof at all, just anecdotes from everyone I know and everyone I interact with online who doesn't work in high finance, medicine, or tech. You seem awfully

by boppo1 3y ago

No proof at all, just anecdotes from everyone I know and everyone I interact with online who doesn't work in high finance, medicine, or tech. You seem awfully confident in the official data. What proof do you have?

syndicatedjelly 3y ago
You seem awfully confident in the official data. What makes you say that?
- boppo1 3y ago
  You don't seem to have any doubt. When I broach this subject, it always goes one of two ways (so far): 1. Other party either agrees or doesn't agree entirely but acknowledges the disparity between common experience and economic reports 2. Other party is an economist and believes the official data is more-or-less beyond reproach. Maybe I jumped the gun. I figured since you were demanding proof, you are likely to belong to the latter option.
  - syndicatedjelly 3y ago
    I'm just asking questions. I apologize if the first one was a bit leading. I'm genuinely curious if you have proof that this type of data is massaged, as you say.
SideQuark 3y ago
You can take the official inflation values for decades, compute compound growth, and then check old prices to see if the rates were lies. Hint. They're not. I've done this,and sometimes convince people like you that are convinced rates are lies to do this carefully, and such people then either believe the evidence they checked, or continue believing nonsense supported only by selection bias. This is the proof. Go do the work, and if you want to claim things are wrong, present the data and calculation.
- hnfong 3y ago
  I didn't read the original comment as saying the data was fraudulent. They were just doubting that "these metrics are a meaningful representation of economic reality", which includes buying a house. If I'm not mistaken, property prices are not part of the CPI, which makes your comment and the original comment both true. I don't think it's controversial that asset prices have been rising faster than wage growth in general. I'm no expert on the matter, but sometimes I speculate that the discrepancy between the "data" and the anecdotal experiences is that instead of wages keeping up with inflation, it's more like the core necessities (food, etc.) that comprise the bulk of the inflation index has gotten much cheaper. Which makes buying things outside that group of mass produced stuff feel more expensive. And then there's also the wage gap between different types of jobs. IIRC lawyers/doctors didn't earn as much more than blue collar jobs in the past. So while in the past a hard working blue collar worker could live a somewhat middle-class life, the pay discrepancy today might not enable them to do so. As I said, this doesn't mean the official data is wrong, just a matter of how we're "interpreting" them.

by boppo1 3y ago

syndicatedjelly 3y ago

You seem awfully confident in the official data. What makes you say that?

boppo1 3y ago
You don't seem to have any doubt. When I broach this subject, it always goes one of two ways (so far): 1. Other party either agrees or doesn't agree entirely but acknowledges the disparity between common experience and economic reports 2. Other party is an economist and believes the official data is more-or-less beyond reproach. Maybe I jumped the gun. I figured since you were demanding proof, you are likely to belong to the latter option.
- syndicatedjelly 3y ago
  I'm just asking questions. I apologize if the first one was a bit leading. I'm genuinely curious if you have proof that this type of data is massaged, as you say.

SideQuark 3y ago

You can take the official inflation values for decades, compute compound growth, and then check old prices to see if the rates were lies. Hint. They're not. I've done this,and sometimes convince people like you that are convinced rates are lies to do this carefully, and such people then either believe the evidence they checked, or continue believing nonsense supported only by selection bias. This is the proof. Go do the work, and if you want to claim things are wrong, present the data and calculation.

hnfong 3y ago
I didn't read the original comment as saying the data was fraudulent. They were just doubting that "these metrics are a meaningful representation of economic reality", which includes buying a house. If I'm not mistaken, property prices are not part of the CPI, which makes your comment and the original comment both true. I don't think it's controversial that asset prices have been rising faster than wage growth in general. I'm no expert on the matter, but sometimes I speculate that the discrepancy between the "data" and the anecdotal experiences is that instead of wages keeping up with inflation, it's more like the core necessities (food, etc.) that comprise the bulk of the inflation index has gotten much cheaper. Which makes buying things outside that group of mass produced stuff feel more expensive. And then there's also the wage gap between different types of jobs. IIRC lawyers/doctors didn't earn as much more than blue collar jobs in the past. So while in the past a hard working blue collar worker could live a somewhat middle-class life, the pay discrepancy today might not enable them to do so. As I said, this doesn't mean the official data is wrong, just a matter of how we're "interpreting" them.