Pick a period and do a median-to-median comparison of income to expense. Rent/home price, tuition, groceries, direct item-to-item is usually bad.
Then consider the new expenses many people take on. A cell phone every few years, a laptop, the cost of recreation.
Most people are in a horrible position compared to any period in the last century.
Don't get me wrong, many many things have improved. But economic outlook is NOT one of them.
I don’t agree with putting home prices in cpi, because a small number of home sales would dramatically swing inflation, so yeah while it’s a really critical number for people looking to buy a home it is not a good litmus test for the average purchasing power when there are better imputed metrics like “owner cost or equivalent rent”.
Are you suggesting that the amount a person spends on housing doesn't impact their purchasing power? No wonder you don't think it's declining.
Rent has jumped by 100-200% every 20 years since the Great Depression.
Companies have started shifting to shrinkflation because they realized that raising their prices was so unpopular with their consumers.
All of these things need to be considered and don't get measured by CPI.
Housing costs are included in CPI. What I’m saying is i agree with the current methodology. Do you know what the current methodology is? It does make sense.
Yeah, "the economy" doesn't mean anything.
More commerce just means more money changing hands. Unemployment rate just measures jobs. None of this impacts the average person.
Buying power is down and has been dropping for longer than I've been alive. This especially impacts the low and vanishing middle class Americans.
Exactly. It all depends on which metrics you're looking at, and some are not even being looked at, conveniently enough for those with more money.
Buying power is not going down. Do you at least have a source for that?
I think you might be talking about the productivity-pay gap but it has nothing to do with purchasing power.
Inflation adjusted wages are going up: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q
The way cpi is measured makes it a flawed indicator. It's essentially been designed to minimize the appearance of inflation.
https://www.brightworkresearch.com/how-accurate-is-shadowstats-on-the-understatement-of-us-inflation-with-the-new-cpi/
Pick a period and do a median-to-median comparison of income to expense. Rent/home price, tuition, groceries, direct item-to-item is usually bad.
Then consider the new expenses many people take on. A cell phone every few years, a laptop, the cost of recreation.
Most people are in a horrible position compared to any period in the last century.
Don't get me wrong, many many things have improved. But economic outlook is NOT one of them.
I don’t agree with putting home prices in cpi, because a small number of home sales would dramatically swing inflation, so yeah while it’s a really critical number for people looking to buy a home it is not a good litmus test for the average purchasing power when there are better imputed metrics like “owner cost or equivalent rent”.
Are you suggesting that the amount a person spends on housing doesn't impact their purchasing power? No wonder you don't think it's declining.
Rent has jumped by 100-200% every 20 years since the Great Depression.
Companies have started shifting to shrinkflation because they realized that raising their prices was so unpopular with their consumers.
All of these things need to be considered and don't get measured by CPI.
Housing costs are included in CPI. What I’m saying is i agree with the current methodology. Do you know what the current methodology is? It does make sense.