Jim Rogers: Government ‘Always' Lies, Tweaks Inflation and Jobless Data Read more on

I'm going much further. I'm suggesting that your argument is on a par with a lizard people conspiracy theory. Icke just does it with some entertainment

 

or you could use John William's figures.
http://www.shadowstats.com/

 

LOL - this from a guy who cannot even answer the following question:

'Are unemployment and inflation numbers fudged - yes or no'?

 

So you dont think money buys influence?

 

You still cannot answer a simple 'yes or no' question, huh?

Noted.


Have a nice day.

 

Your notion that independent journals, accompanied by rational individuals motivated by maximising research output, won't generate a research process that would test inflation measures isn't cunning.

 

I will make the question to Reiver more specific:

Reiver...

do you believe the formula the U.S. government uses to tabulate the inflation rate is in any way deliberately designed to portray that rate as lower then it actually is?

Yes or no?

 

I've already referred to your 'conspiracy theory' reaction to inflation measurement and your inability to refer to evidence in support. Why are you asking for repetition? Seems just a little silly!

 

Because the other question was asking for a 'yes or no' answer to two different things (unemployment and inflation).
I wanted to specify.



Once again folks...he gives no answer.

This time to an even more specific question.

He asks for 'scholarly evidence' and yet cannot even bother/fathom to answer a straightforward 'yes' or 'no' question.

 

Why are you making things up? I've referred to how you are referring to 'fixed' inflation rates and, as you cannot support it with credible evidence, you are pursuing nothing more than an empty conspiracy theory.

 

I am?

Then what was your answer to my straightforward question...

...do you believe the formula the U.S. government uses to tabulate the inflation rate is in any way deliberately designed to portray that rate as lower then it actually is?

Yes or no?

 

Yep. Use some basic English skills.

I've referred to how you are referring to 'fixed' inflation rates and, as you cannot support it with credible evidence, you are pursuing nothing more than an empty conspiracy theory.

 

So once again you fail to answer a straightforward 'yes' or 'no' question.

Noted.


Have a nice day.

 

I go much further. I've accused you of pushing a conspiracy theory and, given your inability to deny it, every empty post you provide represents a salute to my validity

 

And still my 'yes' or 'no' question goes unanswered...

BTW - if you are undecided...I will accept that as well.



Well, you let me know when you can get it together enough to answer it.

Until then, I will withdraw from this particular discussion with you as it is just cluttering the thread.


Have a nice day.

 

And another post where you deliberately ignore that I've accused you, in this thread, of supporting nothing more than an inflation conspiracy theory

 

So that is all you wanted?

Okay...I acknowledge your accusation.



Now will you answer my question?

Do you believe the formula the U.S. government uses to tabulate the inflation rate is in any way deliberately designed to portray that rate as lower then it actually is?

Yes or no?



I am STRONGLY guessing he will not.

 

Obviously you don't, otherwise you would realise your question is redundant. Ignoring simple facts is of course consistent with conspiracy theorising

 

Once again folks...he refuses to answer.

Well, this was a nice waste of time.

I give up...for now.

 

Get your English right. Once again I demonstrate that the question is redundant as it has been asked by someone supporting an unsupportable conspiracy theory

 

So a question (in your opinion) is 'redundant' if the person asking it supports an 'unsupportable theory'?

Holy crap Reiver!

If you are dead serious (and I assume you are) about this then I have WAY over rated your overall intellectual abilities.

But it does explain a lot about you.


I sincerely hope you have a good night.

 

Since there are some problems with using an unemployment rate, such as the existence of hidden unemployed or counting someone as unemployed when they've left the labor force, would anyone favor using an employment rate instead? my only concern is we use the unemployment rate to determine how close to capacity an economy is running (usually, as less wasted labor resources usually means less wasted resources) and an employment rate would make this less useful.

 

The government doesn't do much tweeking. It's more the broadcast media and those who benifit financially from it. You know the market movers, and talking heads. If you want to know what happened a month ago with MF global you can see it 2 months from now on the cable finance shows. they are always too late to allow people to move before they do.

 

Its that issue of hidden unemployment that reduces the value of the employment rate. As you correctly note, we're interested in giving a proxy to determine how far away the economy is from production possibility frontier. However, employment is corrupted by underemployment (where we have wasted human capital which, like with unemployment, can be eventually destroyed)