Liberal Forum

Conservatives, to my relief, are less retarded than liberals when it comes to this issue - namely, what is the actual inflation rate YoY and how do you adjust for wages, prices, and other markers from one time to another?

(Credit to the DOTARD who said something resembling the truth for once - that is, the gubmint fudges the numbers, although the implication that Obama/the Democrats are solely responsible is false)

The last administration to report "honest" numbers, or at least mostly honest numbers, was the Carter administration. The Reagan administration, for example, needed to "prove" that supply-side economics was a "success" so their statisticians integrated military service members into the "among the employed" headcount and introduced "rental equivalence" (among other changes) into the calculation of CPI. 

Lower unemployment, lower CPI = success!     

Given that almost every change since 1980 to the CPI heuristics has resulted in downward revision (a lower calculation) of the inflation rate, I suppose one could be forgiven for thinking there were some kind of conspiracy to manipulate the (mostly retarded) American public as opposed to said changes being a genuine, honest attempt to increase the accuracy of said appraisals.   

=================== Adjusting Wages/NW Based on Time Period ===========================

These are rough calculations to give you an idea of how much you need to make (or what you need to own) in order to maintain an "equivalent" lifestyle to the past.

1. Slightly Upper Middle class

2000: $140,000/yr
2020: $350,000/yr

Multiple: 2.5x over 20 years

(Source: Dual income engineers in Silicon Valley whose lifestyles have remained approx. the same)

2. Minimum wage slaves

1965: $1.25/hr paid in JUNK SILVER (90%) quarters
2020: Approx $25/hr (the price of silver fluctuates)

Multiple: 20x over 55 yrs

(Source: some meme on the Internet)

3. Very wealthy (ultra-high net worth)

Oxfam defined UHNW individuals as having an excess of $30M+ back in 2015. However, I discovered the first year that this $30M benchmark was mentioned (on a prominent website) was in 2005 - a study conducted by Merrill Lynch/some consulting firm:

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna8158353

Credit Suisse (also in investment banking) in 2022 defined UHNW as in excess of $50M, which seems like an accurate update of the previous $30M benchmark.

2005: $30M
2022: $50M

Multiple: 1.67 over 17 years (defined by NW instead of income as the wealthy are not wagie slavies, contrary to retarded conservatives who think these people "work hard")

4. Barely Not Poor (BNP)

What is a BNP?

A: A BNP can afford a mortgage on a SFH or TH that isn't in some **** part of town and not eat ramen noodles or rice + beans every day. Can afford 1-3 small vacations per year, see the doctor if necessary without breaking the piggy bank, and can stash a small amount away every month in their 401K/IRA. Doesn't have to retire in Thailand, Mexico, or some third world country due to being priced out of domestic markets unlike certain people (DennisTheMenace)

1995: $20/hr = $40K/yr
2023: $50/hr = $100K/yr

Multiple: 2.5x over 18 years

(Source: People who lived and worked in both eras)

Note: Double these numbers for Silicon Valley, Miami, Boston, LA, and New York City. Multiply by 1.8x for DC, Denver, and Seattle.

========================================================================

So there you have it: REAL honest data about what DA MOOLAH is worth.  

 
 

Conservatives today are dumb sons of bitches that can’t read a certification of live birth without revealing what short bus retards they are.

The reason there’s a conservative bias on inflation numbers is those numbers are used for COLAS.

Too high and it makes actual inflation worse.

Bruce » 22 Sep 2023, 2:22 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Sep 2023, 2:22 pm

Conservatives today are dumb sons of bitches that can’t read a certification of live birth without revealing what short bus retards they are.

The reason there’s a conservative bias on inflation numbers is those numbers are used for COLAS.

Too high and it makes actual inflation worse.

**** DEMOCRATS LIE ABOUT THE NIMBERS

LowIQTrash » 22 Sep 2023, 2:02 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Sep 2023, 2:02 pm

Conservatives, to my relief, are less retarded than liberals when it comes to this issue - namely, what is the actual inflation rate YoY and how do you adjust for wages, prices, and other markers from one time to another?

(Credit to the DOTARD who said something resembling the truth for once - that is, the gubmint fudges the numbers, although the implication that Obama/the Democrats are solely responsible is false)

The last administration to report "honest" numbers, or at least mostly honest numbers, was the Carter administration. The Reagan administration, for example, needed to "prove" that supply-side economics was a "success" so their statisticians integrated military service members into the "among the employed" headcount and introduced "rental equivalence" (among other changes) into the calculation of CPI. 

Lower unemployment, lower CPI = success!     

Given that almost every change since 1980 to the CPI heuristics has resulted in downward revision (a lower calculation) of the inflation rate, I suppose one could be forgiven for thinking there were some kind of conspiracy to manipulate the (mostly retarded) American public as opposed to said changes being a genuine, honest attempt to increase the accuracy of said appraisals.   

=================== Adjusting Wages/NW Based on Time Period ===========================

These are rough calculations to give you an idea of how much you need to make (or what you need to own) in order to maintain an "equivalent" lifestyle to the past.

1. Slightly Upper Middle class

2000: $140,000/yr
2020: $350,000/yr

Multiple: 2.5x over 20 years

(Source: Dual income engineers in Silicon Valley whose lifestyles have remained approx. the same)

2. Minimum wage slaves

1965: $1.25/hr paid in JUNK SILVER (90%) quarters
2020: Approx $25/hr (the price of silver fluctuates)

Multiple: 20x over 55 yrs

(Source: some meme on the Internet)

3. Very wealthy (ultra-high net worth)

Oxfam defined UHNW individuals as having an excess of $30M+ back in 2015. However, I discovered the first year that this $30M benchmark was mentioned (on a prominent website) was in 2005 - a study conducted by Merrill Lynch/some consulting firm:

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna8158353

Credit Suisse (also in investment banking) in 2022 defined UHNW as in excess of $50M, which seems like an accurate update of the previous $30M benchmark.

2005: $30M
2022: $50M

Multiple: 1.67 over 17 years (defined by NW instead of income as the wealthy are not wagie slavies, contrary to retarded conservatives who think these people "work hard")

4. Barely Not Poor (BNP)

 

You can wipe your *** with those numbers, working Americans are not fooled....they know what everything cost under Trump and now they know what the price of things are under Biden.

 
 

Bruce » 22 Sep 2023, 2:22 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Sep 2023, 2:22 pm

Conservatives today are dumb sons of bitches that can’t read a certification of live birth without revealing what short bus retards they are.

The reason there’s a conservative bias on inflation numbers is those numbers are used for COLAS.

Too high and it makes actual inflation worse.

I understand not wanting to bankrupt the piggy bank by not overextending on SS yearly adjustments, but it is rather disappointing people still cite those numbers as if they were any more accurate than Chinese government #s.

Warcok » 22 Sep 2023, 6:53 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Sep 2023, 6:53 pm

Gasoline prices have historically been in the $2 range for decades until Jew Baby Biden declared war on our gasoline based economy.
The price of gasoline dictates what most everything else will cost in short order.
 

GHETTOBLASTER » 22 Sep 2023, 11:56 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Sep 2023, 11:56 pm

Gasoline prices have historically been in the $2 range for decades until Jew Baby Biden declared war on our gasoline based economy.
The price of gasoline dictates what most everything else will cost in short order.

Bush was the first prez to push gas over 2 bucks. It was high for most of his 8 years.
 

Cannonpointer » 23 Sep 2023, 12:33 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 12:33 am

Bush was the first prez to push gas over 2 bucks. It was high for most of his 8 years.

remember when gas went up two and a half fold during the oil embargo? Everyone's...

 

...and it was the day the Saudis realized they had us by the balls...
 
 
 

LowIQTrash » 22 Sep 2023, 2:02 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Sep 2023, 2:02 pm

Conservatives, to my relief, are less retarded than liberals when it comes to this issue - namely, what is the actual inflation rate YoY and how do you adjust for wages, prices, and other markers from one time to another?

(Credit to the DOTARD who said something resembling the truth for once - that is, the gubmint fudges the numbers, although the implication that Obama/the Democrats are solely responsible is false)


 
 

Hey educated idiot. When population in a country expands so does the number of people using same currency and that shouldn't inflate or deflate currency printing more money to fit the demand for goods and services so each person has equal access in the marketplace.

But when an international group plays stock exchange on world currencies, that group commands every nations population on the world market creating the illusions of deflation and inflation of individual nations.

Time to dissolve IMF, World Bank, UN, WHO.

ROG62 » 23 Sep 2023, 7:29 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 7:29 am

remember when gas went up two and a half fold during the oil embargo? Everyone's...

 

...and it was the day the Saudis realized they had us by the balls...

I remember some **** in the gulf of mexico causing that in the summer of 2006. I don't remember an embargo causing it.
 

Cannonpointer » 23 Sep 2023, 9:55 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 9:55 am

I remember some **** in the gulf of mexico causing that in the summer of 2006. I don't remember an embargo causing it.

1970s energy crisis - Wikipedia

Let's also not forget that gas rationing and higher gas prices triggered an epidemic of siphoning 

Cannonpointer » 23 Sep 2023, 9:55 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 9:55 am

I remember some **** in the gulf of mexico causing that in the summer of 2006. I don't remember an embargo causing it.

BP's Deepwater horizon oil spill which is still considered the worst oil spill to have ever occured in the gulf of Mexico......
and it did cause oil prices and gas prices to skyrocket in North America .....
 

Majik » 23 Sep 2023, 11:09 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 11:09 am

BP's Deepwater horizon oil spill which is still considered the worst oil spill to have ever occured in the gulf of Mexico......
and it did cause oil prices and gas prices to skyrocket in North America .....
 

that was 2010, not 2006. I know because I sent an anonymous suggestion to their website and 3 weeks later he leak was sealed a month ahead of schedule using my basic idea. I signed off on it Nostradamus' One Male.

Not a peep from anyone or any media, but someone else got the credit. I didn't care because it did stop the leak.

GHETTOBLASTER » 23 Sep 2023, 10:57 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 10:57 am

1970s energy crisis - Wikipedia

Oh, THAT ****. 

That **** is the most debunked **** on the planet. We used more oil in the 80s than had been used in every decade combined before the 80s. Then again in the 90s. Then the aughts. Then the teens. We're doing it again in the twenties. In every decade since we started using oil, we have used more oil than is all of previous history. 

There are literal oceans of oil underground - as much oil beneath as water above. 

And it is being continually produced. It is NOT "fossil" fuel. That's all a lie.

The "energy crisis" of the 70s was a rather byzantine fraud designed to bail out the pipeline boondoggle on the north slope, which had no chance of paying for itself ever. It involved bringing OPEC into the mix. The OPEC nations did not hold a gun to America's head - other than the gun we supplied them and ordered them to hold to our head. It was all a big sham.
 

Cannonpointer » 23 Sep 2023, 11:21 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 11:21 am

Oh, THAT ****. 

That **** is the most debunked **** on the planet. We used more oil in the 80s than had been used in every decade combined bfore the 80. Then again in the 90s. Then the aughts. Then the teens. We're doing it again in the twenties. In every decade since wa started using oil, we have used more oil than is all of previous history. 

There are literal oceans of oil underground - as much oil beneath as water above. 

And it is being continually produced. It is NOT "fossil" fuel. That's all a lie.

The "energy crisis" of the 70s was a rather byzantine fraud designed to bail out the pipeline boondoggle on the north slope, which had no chance of paying for itself ever. It involved bringing OPEC into the mix. The OPEC nations did not hold a gun to America's head - other than the gun we supplied them and ordered them to hold to our head. It was all a big sham.

It was also a good excuse to retool our Auto industry which was losing market share to the Asian subcompact which was cheaper to buy and had better fuel economy .....


 

Majik » 23 Sep 2023, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 11:28 am

It was also a good excuse to retool our Auto industry which was losing market share to the Asian subcompact which was cheaper to buy and had better fuel economy .....

And lasted three times longer without succumbing to planned obsolescence in America's junkyards. 
 

Cannonpointer » 23 Sep 2023, 11:21 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 11:21 am

Oh, THAT ****. 

That **** is the most debunked **** on the planet. We used more oil in the 80s than had been used in every decade combined before the 80s. Then again in the 90s. Then the aughts. Then the teens. We're doing it again in the twenties. In every decade since we started using oil, we have used more oil than is all of previous history. 

There are literal oceans of oil underground - as much oil beneath as water above. 

And it is being continually produced. It is NOT "fossil" fuel. That's all a lie.

The "energy crisis" of the 70s was a rather byzantine fraud designed to bail out the pipeline boondoggle on the north slope, which had no chance of paying for itself ever. It involved bringing OPEC into the mix. The OPEC nations did not hold a gun to America's head - other than the gun we supplied them and ordered them to hold to our head. It was all a big sham.

That's a comforting thought  IF the underground "assembly line" is able to keep up with demand. 
I imagine crude oil is much easier for Mother Nature to manufacture than lithium and all other exotic metals.

GHETTOBLASTER » 23 Sep 2023, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 12:05 pm

That's a comforting thought  IF the underground "assembly line" is able to keep up with demand. 
I imagine crude oil is much easier for Mother Nature to manufacture than lithium and all other exotic metals.

Well, it's hardly a mere "thought." The numbers I quoted are not disputed. We have for a fact used more oil every decade than in all decades previous, continuously and ongoingly and without exception. 

On top of THAT, we have finished every decade in history with more verified recoverable reserves than we started the decade with - in spite of record recoveries. So not only are we using more oil every decade, but we are finding more oil every decade. 

Peak oil is a canard - a topic that cannot legally be discussed unless the conversants are wearing tweed jackets with leather elbow patches, drinking pretentious beverages, and speaking with a mid-atlantic accent.

 
 

Cannonpointer » 23 Sep 2023, 9:55 am » wrote: ↑

23 Sep 2023, 9:55 am

I remember some **** in the gulf of mexico causing that in the summer of 2006. I don't remember an embargo causing it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis