14 ms·
US Wholesale Inflation Rises by Most in 3 Years
- dcchambers 1y agoIt's been clear for years that the actual the majority of people are experiencing is well above the reported numbers.
- master_crab 1y agohttps://archive.is/JmMFk https://archive.is/JmMFk
- master_crab 1y agoUpdated version of the story: https://archive.is/xzohV https://archive.is/xzohV
- kylebenzle 1y ago[dead]
- isbwkisbakadqv 1y ago2.8% doesn’t seem that crazy to me? Don’t we target like 2-2.5?
- throw-qqqqq 1y agoIt’s the change/rise that is high, not the value itself. > The producer price index increased 0.9% from a month earlier, the largest advance since consumer inflation peaked in June 2022, according to a Bureau of Labor Statistics report out Thursday
- unreal37 1y agoA 0.9% month-over-month increase is significant.
- estearum 1y agoThe Fed targets 2% at PCE (consumer) whereas this is PPI (wholesale/producer). Not always 1 to 1 but in general you expect PPI to be a leading indicator for what's coming for PCE. Part of the attention is for sure people being vigilant to see the earliest effects of the tariffs and... here they are pretty unambiguously. The more significant concern it seems to me is the rate of increase. Nearly a full percentage point in a month seems like a lot, but I'm no expert.
- infecto 1y agoI think you mostly nailed it. I suspected this was going to happen to with this recent filing season having most companies recognize tariffs and already state they are mostly getting passed on.
- AnimalMuppet 1y agoThe question is, is that full percentage point in a month a trend, or is it a fluctuation? You can't tell much by one month in isolation, or even one month compared to the previous month. It's concerning. It's hard to say much more than that yet.
- throw0101a 1y ago2% "over the long run": * https://www.federalreserve.gov/economy-at-a-glance-inflation-pce.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/economy-at-a-glance-inflation... * https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/econ_focus/2024/q1_q2_federal_reserve https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/econ_focus...
- nimbius 1y agoAccording to the Federal Reserve, for many years, inflation in the United States has run below the 2 percent goal. higher prices for essential items, such as food, gasoline, and shelter, add to the burdens faced by many families, especially those struggling with lost jobs and incomes. At the same time, inflation that is too low can weaken the economy. When inflation runs well below its desired level, households and businesses will come to expect this over time, pushing expectations for inflation in the future below the Federal Reserve’s longer-run inflation goal. This can pull actual inflation even lower, resulting in a cycle of ever-lower inflation and inflation expectations. The fed argues that, If inflation expectations fall, interest rates would decline too. In turn, there would be less room to cut interest rates to boost employment during an economic downturn. this economics explanation feels like gaslighting every time i hear the fed mention it. the reserve literally pushed negative rates and quantitative easing for so long that people came to expect prosperity as a feature of the economic framework of the nation, and now that we have rampant inflation that cannot be controlled by normal means (prime rate) the fed somehow wants us all to understand its our fault for enjoying affordable burger meat.
- terminalshort 1y agoIt's our fault for voting in people that can't manage a budget.
- kevin_thibedeau 1y agoGasoline prices are not higher. Above $4 was commonplace across the country 20 years ago. Now that only exists in high tax states and large metros. Gas is cheap in the US.
- jjk166 1y ago20 years ago (ie mid 2000s) was a unique time of extremely high gas prices with 2008 being the all time high both adjusted for inflation and absolute. Adjusted for inflation, oil is currently higher than any point between 1990 and 2004, and in absolute terms since 2022 its been higher than any point outside of the 2006-2014 period.
- freddie_mercury 1y agoThe target is 2%, not 2-2.5. Being off by 40% is cause for alarm in almost any circumstance.
- aaronax 1y agoThat is the rise from one year ago in the "less-volatile PPI metric that excludes food, energy and trade services". This month was a 0.6% rise. So some people might think about how more months of 0.6% rise would cause the yearly one to increase gradually, up to 7.2% eventually if there are 12x 0.6% months. That would be pretty high. And then headline figure PPI was even higher at 0.9% for the month, 3.3% year.
- hvb2 1y ago0.6% of monthly inflation wouldn't be 7.2% you can't multiply like that. So the real number would be 1.006^12=7.44% And over 7% inflation is a bit more than 'pretty high' that's getting really scary if there's no clear outside reason for it
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- datadrivenangel 1y ago0.9% monthly annualizes to 11.3%
- jfengel 1y agoIn November 2024, inflation was at 2.7%. Inflation for the whole year was 2.9%. The public was so incensed that they threw out the government.
- Tesl 1y agoWe all know Trump voters didn't give two shits about the price of eggs. That's not why they vote for him.
- SV_BubbleTime 1y agoIf eggs were about inflation, why did the price drop back down?
- trenchpilgrim 1y agoEgg production is seasonal, there's way more supply during summer.
- righthand 1y agoEggs are still up 200% per dozen near me.
- SV_BubbleTime 1y agoI seem to remember “inflation is transitory”, but no, eggs aren’t up. Your dollar is down.
- jfengel 1y agoI'm less concerned with Trump voters (more or less the same people keep voting for him), and more with why ~10 million people didn't vote for his opponent (who had voted for her predecessor). I don't believe it had anything to do with the price of eggs, either. That was presented as the primary reason, and it's so clearly wrong that it makes me suspicious.
- 1y ago
- xnx 1y agoThat is 40% over the target.
- IAmGraydon 1y agoI mean no offense, but it's a bit surprising that someone on HN would not understand what's wrong with this statement. It takes a very basic understanding of math to know why the YoY says very little about rapidly changing inflation metrics. MoM is what you need to pay attention to.
- micromacrofoot 1y agothat 0.8% difference is probably in the area of 100 billion dollars — nearly $300 per American in a single month!
- BartjeD 1y agoAnd this is after they massaged the numbers, to avoid getting fired?
- mhh__ 1y agoNow we only get to hear if inflation is "Aladeen" or "Aladeen"
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- qzw 1y agoEmployment aladeen, inflation aladeen. Chances of stagflation looking very aladeen indeed.
- mrbombastic 1y ago:(…:)…:(
- mhh__ 1y agoIt makes our macro forecasting a bit less dimensional...
- pm90 1y agoI don't think any existing numbers were officially changed, just that the head of BLS was fired.
- hiddencost 1y agoThey fired the head of the BLS because they didn't like the numbers. Explicitly. You kinda have to conclude they're going to cook the books. Like they're doing everywhere else.
- jcranmer 1y agoApparently, they've decided to go with "just not report the numbers." (Source: https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/trumps-bls-pick-could-pause-monthly-jobs-report-over-accuracy-concerns https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/trumps-bls-pick-could-p...).
- mark_l_watson 1y agoOver the years I have read a few articles or blogs that make the argument that if government inflation figures in the US were calculated as they do in Europe, then our reported US inflation figures would be much higher. Can anyone here verify this? Our main problems involve under the table unreported to the public military expenditures. If you look at a map of our military bases, we have many bordering China. I think our total number is close to 900. Those costs are a bleeding hemorage to the middle class tax payer who aren’t getting a cut of military profiteering because they don’t own ‘defense’ stocks. Consumer debt is almost as much of a worry as government debt. Eventually countries that don't spend most of their treasure on their military will win. There has to be a balance between true defense spending and healthy spending like feeding and educating children, infrastructure, R&D that helps society, etc.
- andsoitis 1y ago> Over the years I have read a few articles or blogs that make the argument that if government inflation figures in the US were calculated as they do in Europe, then our reported US inflation figures would be much higher. Can anyone here verify this? Your question at the end suggests those blogs and articles didn’t include compelling evidence for the case they were making. If true, then it is worth reconsidering whether it makes sense to incorporate into your world view.
- mark_l_watson 1y agoGood point. How do you gather information? I split my time about half each reading US news and news from other countries. There are a few people I find believable like Dr. Jeffrey Sachs and retired congressman Ron Paul (these two guys are quite different politically) and I will listen to each of them once or twice a month, just to occasionally get non-mainstream news viewpoints.
- jack_h 1y agoIf you're truly curious I would say the best way to start is to get a basic understanding of economics and how our current system actually operates. It's also important to look up the data as it actually exists rather than consuming conclusions from commentators without investigating further. For instance your initial post seems to imply that we aren't balancing our defense vs social spending and are spending way too much on the former. However, that doesn't align with our current outlays. If you check out the latest US Treasury report the outlays for the current fiscal year shows $1314bn for Social Security, $841bn for interest payments on the debt, $823bn for medicare, $805bn for health, and $758bn for defense. The primary driver of debt in the future will be the entitlement programs and interest. Of course the unfortunate reality is that most people do not have the time to learn about everything and do their own research so we will always rely on others to some extent for our information. The danger is when your world view fills in the gaps of knowledge you lack combined with the facts you believe you know taken from someone else who may be mistaken, misleading, or outright lying.
- throw0101a 1y agoThe surge in services costs seems to be a bit of a surprise (?): > Services inflation provided much of the push higher, moving 1.1% higher in July for the largest gain also since March 2022. Trade services margins rose 2%, coming amid ongoing developments in President Donald Trump’s tariff implementations. > In addition, 30% of the increase in services came from a 3.8% increase in machinery and equipment wholesaling. Also, portfolio management fees surged 5.8% and airline passenger services prices rose 1%. * https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/14/ppi-inflation-report-july-2025-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/14/ppi-inflation-report-july-20... > The government on Tuesday reported a mild increase in consumer prices in July, though rising costs for services like dental care and airline tickets caused a measure of underlying inflation to post its largest gain in six months. > While financial markets have priced in an interest rate cut from the Federal Reserve next month, rising services inflation and the expectation tariffs could still significantly boost goods prices left some economists doubtful of a resumption in policy easing in the absence of labor market deterioration. * https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-producer-prices-accelerate-july-costs-services-goods-surge-2025-08-14/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-producer-prices-accelera... When it comes to (Fed) policy, the other thing they look at besides inflation/PCE is employment, which appears to be softening (see recent revisions which caused recent Trump-BLS turmoil). The US risk for stagflation seems to be growing: * https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stagflation.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stagflation.asp * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation * https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/its-beginning-to-smell-a-lot-like https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/its-beginning-to-smell-a-... (check out the music video link at the end)
- tim333 1y agoThe current policies seem almost designed for that. Choke real growth with unpredictable tariffs and print lots of money.
- Cuuugi 1y agoTarrif's will do that...
- ivape 1y ago[flagged]
- Majromax 1y ago> I dont think it’s the tariffs. I really think the entire category of merchants looked at each other and figured it was fine to raise prices. Those statements aren't contradictory. Pricing in non-commodity goods is always a human phenomenon, driven ultimately by the idea that a business can 'get away with it' without losing too many customers to competitors. Tariffs, on the other hand, provide a good reason/excuse to raise prices. Affected firms see their cost structures blown up, so they have to raise prices at least somewhat. Unaffected firms see that their competitors are raising / must raise prices, so they know that they can raise their own prices in the now less-competitive market. That's how and why tariffs work: they give domestic firms protection to have profits in excess of what they would have under a free trade counterfactual. Any argument that tariffs don't raise prices is a very long-term one, relying on the idea that it will be easy to open new firms and expand domestic production to ultimately return to a competitive market. This has nearly no effect on short-term pricing, and it's why the least-damaging changes to tariff policies are long-run and well-telegraphed plans, slowly implemented.
- ericmay 1y agoI think it’s a combination of a number of things: Tariffs Price gouging and folks continuing to pay Lack of alternatives - have a garden? Know how to work on a car? Etc. Genuine competition for resources around the world and increased demand for those resources
- whoiskevin 1y agoYou don't think it is the one thing being wielded as a personal enrichment device by a giant man child that cheats at golf is the cause? Well okay good luck with that.
- ivape 1y agoNo. The price creep has been happening for years even under Biden. As someone mentioned, tariffs were just an excuse to accelerate it. The things in your grocery store are domestic goods. We can look for mythical technical explanations as to what’s happening, but all things used to explain anything in our society is just to describe the state of your fellow man. Your fellow man is greedy. There.
- yalogin 1y agoOh no someone is getting fired again. This poor soul forgot that telling the truth is forbidden
- swarnie 1y agoMaybe these are the numbers after they were fudged to save a job?
- yalogin 1y agoWith a d———- there is no nuance. You don’t get credit for fudging them and making them less bad, you save your job by releasing a positive number, the more positive the better. Truth be damned
- projectazorian 1y agoThe problem the admin has is that economists at the BLS by and large aren't scared of getting fired. That work experience is gold in the private sector - most of them can easily get a job in finance and 3x-4x their comp.
- troyvit 1y agoI'm not being sarcastic when I say it probably looks great on an economist's resume to say they were fired by the Trump admin.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- Havoc 1y agoAre there inflation indicators that aren’t government controlled? Don’t think anything coming out of trump influenced bodies is worth the paper it’s on anymore
- elzbardico 1y ago[flagged]
- epistasis 1y agoHonesty would require admitting that the parties are different. They are not the same, they have different values, and we can see that by who gains and loses power in the party. Which actions are unacceptable, and which actions are rewarded. The difference is stark!
- elzbardico 1y ago[flagged]
- elzbardico 1y ago"We have no political system at all, we have a sort of corporate party with two wings, both financed by the national security state..." -Gore Vidal All the other stuff, all the heady discourses, all the piety about the downtrodden, be then the minorities from one side, or the poor rural white man from the other, it is just a fucking smoking mirror, just tools to have loyal soldiers to their cause.
- lovich 1y agoHe is just lying. His edit shows that he isn’t actually focused on both sides but is trying to muddy the waters to blame specifically democrats. He couldn’t even keep the mask on for two statements
- elzbardico 1y agoYou assume a lot my boy
- buyucu 1y agoThis is what happens when the same item now has a %20 tariff on it.
- monkeyelite 1y agoThen they use an alternative which will raise the price less than 20%.
- elzbardico 1y agoFrankly, I haven't seen a single country where I spent any significant amount of time, where official inflation numbers were not seeing as a complete joke by the common folks. And my experience usually matched it. There's plenty of space to hide reality when building a price index. Price index do not capture the reality of most people cost of living. They don't capture the family that have to buy margarine instead of butter, because butter became too expensive, while margarine became cheaper, Weight both items as the same, and voilá! no inflation, increases in the price of butter were cancelled by cheaper margarine, fuck you if you prefer butter. We can also do the same with housing: Capture prices as the average of a basket of cities. In reality, some cities will have absurd price increases while others are in decadence. The average prices increase of a disputed locality like NYC metro area will probably be masked by the fact that houses in BeltRustAssEnd, MI are becoming increasingly cheap. But, for the real person, what the fuck matters if BeltRustAssEnd houses are cheap as bananas? Who can get a job there? And of course, a single number cannot capture the subtleties of reality like the fact that while it is great that 80" TVs are now so cheap that they can be bought by the commoner, this fact means fucking nothing if having a roof over your head in a place where you don't need to spend most of your live commuting is becoming increasingly too expensive for a lot of the same folks. Too bad the commoner is just a paycheck away from being in the streets as he cannot pay for a house! He now has a TV that not even Queen Elisabeth could have just a few years ago!
- jahnu 1y ago> Frankly, I haven't seen a single country where I spent any significant amount of time, where official inflation numbers were not seeing as a complete joke by the common folks. The public in general can be really bad at perceiving the truth. I might take note of people's feelings to go and recheck something but I would not trust peoples feelings with stuff like this to make any sort of conclusion. Verifiable metrics* are the only way to get any sort of objective handle on this. * Edit: I replied below that I should have said verifiable metrics and context with discussion. Verifiable metrics are necessary but not sufficient.
- ferguess_k 1y agoNo. It's more like the elites don't GaF about the ordinary people, and then there is no trust between the two.
- flanked-evergl 1y agoIn Norway our food prices has gone up by more than 4 in one month while we are destroying any capacity for local production while we have protectionism that would make Trump blush. How is that not newsworthy, but this is?
- Nicook 1y agoamerica/trump obsession
- Workaccount2 1y agoNorway has a population half that of New York City.
- celsoazevedo 1y agoIt's probably newsworthy, but this is an American website and Norway isn't exactly on the same level as the US. I wouldn't expect the same level of attention, at least internationally.
- dragontamer 1y agoIn the USA, food prices are non-core inflation and most volatile indeed. Food prices go up because of random weather events (or locus or disease). USA beef prices are skyrocketing because of some new disease for example. Anyone who says that a monthly food price change is an underlying indicator of overall inflation is simply lying to you.
- flanked-evergl 1y agoFood prices in Norway are going up because the government keeps importing people who do not want to work, and then they give those people our tax money so that they can compete with us in the labour and food markets, which are heavily restricted. It has 0 things to do with the weather or some disease. The main change is that the central bank dropped interest rates while inflation was already way above target (about twice the target inflation rate), and they did that to help the socialist party in govenment win the election, the problem is that dropping interest rates while inflation is already high and then while you still import more tax leeches results in a massive spike in inflation.
- jaybrendansmith 1y ago[flagged]
- chasd00 1y ago[flagged]
- IAmGraydon 1y ago>weren't we suppose to be staring at empty shelves, house arrest, fire and brimstone / dogs and cats living together by now? What are you even talking about?
- chasd00 1y agoEverything everywhere since late 2015 or so.
- amanaplanacanal 1y agoDuring Trump's first term there were still adults in the room, mostly keeping him from doing anything completely crazy. This time they have all been replaced by toadies and yes men. It's a completely different time.
- frankbreetz 1y agoAre you suggesting that this is the fault of the people who said tariff's are a bad idea?
- IAmGraydon 1y agoYou're forgetting that a lot of tariffs didn't kick in until August 1, and aren't included in this. So it's likely that we'll be seeing inflation far higher in the future. I'm guessing we're going to over 20% YoY, and even that may be a lowball.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- neuroelectron 1y agoWhatever the problem is, it's everything but unicorn funding. We can be sure of that on this forum.
- Buttons840 1y agoWhen I was about 20 I started listening to Sean Hannity, and while I no longer agree with anything he says, I do appreciate the glimpse I got into his way of thinking. I mention this because... I can't tell you how many times I've heard the idea that success in free market capitalism comes from offering goods and services to customers with the right balance between quality and price, and that good quality and price is assured because of competition in the market. But now I see that the true path to success is to first gain favor from those who already have wealth and power, and then use their wealth and power to reduce or eliminate competition.
- jjice 1y agoI see what you mean, but I believe that's more so directed towards the massive scale businesses. Companies that get measured in billions and not millions. At a smaller scale (the majority of business, but maybe not the majority of revenue), that existing wealth and power is often much smaller and eliminating competition is much less feasible. Like a local coffee shop, for example. Or a small industry specific software company. Maybe they matter less in the grand scheme, but they're still a big part of things. But I do agree with the idea that VC subsidized services to then grip the market and wring them later seem counter productive to a "free market".
- whimsicalism 1y agoIf you can see why the former narrative is inherently appealing to the rich, you should also be able to see why > But now I see that the true path to success is to first gain favor from those who already have wealth and power, and then use their wealth and power to reduce or eliminate competition. is attractive to the disaffected (as Nietzsche wrote on). narratives that say the whole thing is rigged are going to be appealing because they offer a non-intrinsic explanation for underperformance.
- 1y ago
- zombiwoof 1y ago[dead]
- almog 1y agoYou can read the actual BLS PPI release here: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ppi.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ppi.pdf Another thing to watch for is the BLS import prices which show prices excluding tariffs. If these remain flat for July as they did for June, it would be another data point suggesting tariffs induced inflation.
- SV_BubbleTime 1y agoI’m always shocked at how many economics experts there are on a tech forum!
- monkeyelite 1y agoThis one isn’t surprising at all though. It’s a technical subject with everyday relevance and lots of material to learn about it. Unless you’re implying special credentials should be required to comment.
- amanaplanacanal 1y agoYeah this stuff is not expert-only level economics, this is pretty basic.
- fragmede 1y agoIs anti-intellectualism really the look you're going for?
- SV_BubbleTime 1y agoThat’s funny, I’m looking for intellectual honesty. And honestly admitting no one here really has any fucking clue about global trade, economic effects, and policy would be a good start. Nah.. “I’m an intellectual, I read tech blogs and listen to NPR… I’ve never made anything outside of a computer program, but listen to my opinion on tariffs that happens to align with all my media sources!”
- fragmede 1y agoBeing and intellectual and having credentials are two separate things. There are plenty of people here who build things in the "real" world, eg chips, trading systems, distributed infra, biotech. They still want to discuss policy because those policies shape what gets built and where. It’s fine to call out overconfidence, but dismissing everyone as clueless is just another flavor of anti-intellectualism. The real intellectual honesty is admitting: 1. We’re all partial amateurs outside our domains. 2. Policy and trade affect everyone, not just specialists. 3. Listening and engaging beats sneering at “NPR readers.” If you think most opinions here are shallow, good for you! You set the scene though, so maybe contributing depth instead of punching down?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- steveBK123 1y agoSo if you tax imported raw materials, intermediary goods, and other inputs, then producer prices go up... who would have known!
- altairprime 1y agoNot necessarily! If you implement a tiered tax credit on gross regenue earned for wages paid, that decreases exponentially from the lowest-paid worker percentile to the highest, then producers could offset the tax on imported materials by paying an increased share of the revenue to their lowest-paid workers rather than raising prices. The government wins because household buying power and taxes paid increase, the household wins because buying power increases are decoupled from price increases, and shareholders win because wage increases shift the domestic demand outward (rightward), compensating for downward shift along the demand curve from price increases. Setting the refund rate to (the target inflation rate minus the current inflation rate) times a constant defined by the Fed alongside the reserve rate also provides the Fed a long-term lever of financial incentive: for firms to increase wages paid rather than profits paid, when the Fed raises the constant to combat price inflation, and to increase profits paid rather than wages paid when the Fed lowers the constant to combat price stagnation. It also offers a control against layoffs for profit by specifying such that reduction in workforce in each percentile reduces the target inflation rate in the above equation; a layoff of the entire lowest-paid percentile to avoid lowering prices would result in a significant tax penalty charged at the next higher percentile’s rates, unless prices were so stagnant (or decreasing!) that the Fed’s target had been adjusted to allow it. That this isn’t coded into today’s U.S. monetary policy is certainly true; but it merely requires an act of Congress to resolve. It’s important not to take for granted that what we’re used to is therefore what must be.
- owebmaster 1y agothat's not even close to what the government did. Less taxes for the rich and more for the workers won't help inflation
- altairprime 1y ago
- RandomUser4976 1y agoWholesale prices for fresh and dry vegetables rose a whopping 38.9% month over month. Source: 5th row in the following table. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ppi.t02.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ppi.t02.htm
- alpha_trion 1y agoAnd still this administration is pushing for rate cuts.