4 ms·

I think you picked a poor example, because inflation is hard to measure and hard to define. I know lots of people who argue with our current definition of infl

• dyno12345 13y ago
  Inflation is only hard to define for those who want there to be something called "inflation" that predicts recessions and is caused by the government. Naturally it's hard to find anything to nail down within those parameters. In the rest of the world inflation equals price increases and there are standard metrics that have been used for decades. Most economists would probably agree that those metrics have several well-known flaws. But we can agree that inflation according to the definitions and metrics that 99% of the world uses did or did not change by X or Y in a given time period.
  • jeffdavis 13y ago
    The fact that the existing metrics are flawed mean that it's perfectly reasonable for a person to both: (a) Believe one thing (b) Understand that the "accepted fact" contradicts their belief If no money is on the line, this reasonable person will state their belief. If money is on the line, they are more likely to state whatever they think the "accepted fact" is, regardless of their true belief. In politics, there are many things for which minor differences in interpretation can cause a "fact" to change between true, false, and unknown. Inflation is certainly one of those things.