>> Nevertheless, the government statisticians have calculated a thing called “inflation”, they say that it was 0.8% in 2007Q3, and you think they are wrong, but you have no argument or facts whatsoever to array against them. <<
I’m curious. What would you consider facts against government statistics on inflation? If many people complain how food, housing, and energy prices all have gone up, and it is taken out of government statistics because those are “volatile” and no one else takes the effort to do a massive comparative consumer price survey, then do you just trust the government because they supposedly have the best data?
Broadly speaking,
1. critique the methodology of the thing they are calculating, or (similarly) explain why you think it's measuring the wrong thing; or
2. show that the numbers they are using, or the calculations they are doing with those numbers to get their stat, are incorrect somehow.
If many people complain how food, housing, and energy prices all have gone up, and it is taken out of government statistics because those are “volatile”
Sounds like you're trying approach #1. First of all, I don't know what you mean when you imply the government "takes out" certain things "because they are volatile".
Anyway, there's one problem here, which is: Just because the price of something has risen doesn't mean it was inflation. The price of energy has risen because the price of oil has risen, because the oil markets are pricing in the risk they perceive of oil supply problems caused by geopolitics.
This price rise has nothing to do with inflation. Merely observing this price rise, you have not found evidence of inflation. Inflation is about the money supply. Somethings prices of things actually just rise for reasons of supply and demand.
So when people see a government report on inflation and "complain" about prices rising, it's not clear to me that they're separating (a) supply-demand price rises from (b) actual inflation. Actually, it's clear to me that they aren't.
Anyway, the crazy thing here is that all you people are arguing "but prices have gone up so there must have been inflation!" when that is exactly what the government statistic says. The government statistic shows POSITIVE INFLATION. An astoundingly high number of people here seem to think it doesn't. 0.8% is a positive number. It's not a negative number. Note the lack of minus sign. So why are people even arguing?
The only reason can be if they "feel" sure that the number itself must be bigger than 0.8%. But why? Based on what? "feeling"? "anecdote"? That is not a real quantative rebuttal. And that's what I'm saying.
and no one else takes the effort to do a massive comparative consumer price survey,
I'm pretty sure there are several groups that try to do massive comparative consumer price surveys. Pick one to your liking. The subject bores me too much to delve into it too deeply.
then do you just trust the government because they supposedly have the best data?
For the zillion and first time, I don't "trust" the government. I am just identifying poor counterarguments.
Let's get something straight: I really don't care what the inflation number is. Seriously. Nor do I care if it is accurate. I mean, if it's "really" 3% and the government statistic is reported as 1% - or vice versa - I still don't care. Why would I care? Why do you? Why is it important?
Let's imagine that all of you proved your case that Yes, indeed, the inflation number in 2007Q3 "wasn't really" 0.8%, it was - oh, I don't know - 10.7%. Then what? What would you have proved? What would you have accomplished? Would it make you happy? Why?
Are you all senior citizens living on CPI-linked annuities or something? I mean really, I've never seen such a devoted, motivated constituency for Insisting That Inflation Was Bigger Than The Government Number.
All of which would be fine, I guess, if you actually had real arguments. Only thing is, you don't.