Gold. GOLD!!!!! Gooooollllllllllddddddd!!!!!!!!

NoDrama said:
Those things are awesome, I get a Frisco Burger at Hardees every time I go to town.
Click to expand...

Those are good but I bought a half cow about year ago and still can pull meat out the deep freezer..Best savings ever... will try to get a whole cow next round if I can find someone who wants in on the other half..Should be even cheaper
 
londonfog said:
Those are good but I bought a half cow about year ago and still can pull meat out the deep freezer..Best savings ever... will try to get a whole cow next round if I can find someone who wants in on the other half..Should be even cheaper
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, buying in bulk is the way to go. A half side will save you almost 50% of the cost of buying individually.
I can get 15 pounds of thick cut hickory bacon for $28
I eat a lot of venison and game bird too. I just smacked a tom turkey yesterday with my truck, took it home and cleaned it and got it in the roaster as we speak. Better than just leaving it to rot on the roadside.
 
NoDrama said:
Oh yeah, buying in bulk is the way to go. A half side will save you almost 50% of the cost of buying individually.
I can get 15 pounds of thick cut hickory bacon for $28
I eat a lot of venison and game bird too. I just smacked a tom turkey yesterday with my truck, took it home and cleaned it and got it in the roaster as we speak. Better than just leaving it to rot on the roadside.
Click to expand...

Had a buddy of mine do that with a deer..lol

dude kept having deer chili parties with a keg of his home brew
 
tokeprep said:
I found flank steak for $7.79/pound versus filet mignon for $13.99/pound on a supermarket web site. I can't find average national prices, but I'm guessing your numbers are way off.
Click to expand...

No you didn't, or you would link it so you could provide proof.
 
NoDrama said:
I have a degree in finance, Graduated with honors, Summa Cum Laude. Member of Phi Beta Kappa.

I know more about broken economic theories and outright shams than you can shake a stick at. I can look at a Financial report and tell you whether or not that company will survive the next 3 years.

I made over a 1200% profit on average in the markets during the 2008-2009 crisis and my gold dollar value has multiplied by 500% and my silver by over 1000%.

What you got?

The substantiated has already been debunked by the very own authority you claim is telling the truth.

You think that's your money in that bank account? I know for a fact it is not.
Click to expand...

Me too! Anywhere nice? I'm also a quant who relishes playing with Excel; I also was making money trading back in the days when everything was going down, and I've consistently made plenty of good calls. I don't own any investments now, aside from what we'll call a substantial capital investment, but only time will tell who ends up doing better with their money. These qualifications mean nothing when we're so equal.

Of course, your claim to know "more about broken economic theories..." is questionable. You attributed the BLS's CPI to the Fed (which doesn't even use CPI at all), inaccurately described the BLS's substitution assumptions, claimed that rents were only added to the CPI in 2009, and criticized the CPI weights blindly with absolutely no substantiation. You didn't bother to address any of that, let alone substantively address any of it.

Since people can independently calculate inflation and question the methodology BLS uses to calculate it, where's the bombshell empirical evidence that everything is being manipulated? Why not use that instead of vague and inaccurate assertions?
 
tokeprep said:
I'm curious, doesn't your example of filet mignon versus flank steak suggest that CPI's substitution assumptions overstate inflation? I thought your thesis was that CPI understated inflation by hiding price increases that have eaten away at true purchasing power.
Click to expand...
Actually you have it exactly backwards. They state that people move into the one that went up in price the LEAST, so they use that measure. So if the price of filet mignon only goes up 2% and the price of Flank goes up by 10000000%, then they can show that prices only inflated 2%.

Get it?
 
NoDrama said:
You know what I was saying about going from Filet Mignon to Flank steak?

What do ya know, thats exactly how they do it.
Click to expand...

And here I thought you were just lazy.

Perhaps you should just stop while you are so behind, and let the adults work this stuff out, okay?
You obviously have no intent of raising your level of awareness on these matters.

And I don't believe you can fit more feet in your mouth (but I'm sure that won't keep you from trying).
 
NoDrama said:
Actually you have it exactly backwards. They state that people move into the one that went up in price the LEAST, so they use that measure. So if the price of filet mignon only goes up 2% and the price of Flank goes up by 10000000%, then they can show that prices only inflated 2%.

Get it?
Click to expand...

This is what you said: They got you to think that if the price of filet Mignon goes from $30 a pound to $32 a pound ( a 7% increase) and the price of Flank goes from $2.89 a pound to $4 a pound ( a 72% increase) that you will instead by the Filet Mignon.

You seemed to say that BLS assumes that a consumer faced with a 7% increase in filet mignon and a 72% increase in flank steak would choose filet mignon. The filet costs $32; the flank costs $4. If their substitution assumption is that consumers picked the filet mignon, because the price increase was smaller, then the consumer in your example spent an extra $28 in the beefsteak category. You'll have to correct me if I'm not parsing your words in the right way. You seemed to see the same thing above: BLS assumes the consumer substitutes for the lowest percentage price increase.
 
tokeprep said:
This is what you said: They got you to think that if the price of filet Mignon goes from $30 a pound to $32 a pound ( a 7% increase) and the price of Flank goes from $2.89 a pound to $4 a pound ( a 72% increase) that you will instead by the Filet Mignon.

You seemed to say that BLS assumes that a consumer faced with a 7% increase in filet mignon and a 72% increase in flank steak would choose filet mignon. The filet costs $32; the flank costs $4. If their substitution assumption is that consumers picked the filet mignon, because the price increase was smaller, then the consumer in your example spent an extra $28 in the beefsteak category. You'll have to correct me if I'm not parsing your words in the right way. You seemed to see the same thing above: BLS assumes the consumer substitutes for the lowest percentage price increase.
Click to expand...

Within the beefsteak category, the CPI implicitly assumes that, on average, consumers would shift up from flank steak toward filet mignon if flank steak prices rose by a greater amount (or fell by a lesser amount) than filet mignon prices.
Click to expand...

How do you interpret this?

Note that this is not assumed, it is implicitly assumed.
 
NoDrama said:
That second one for the filet mignon is not PER POUND its PER EACH. Know why? Cuz that shit is spendy stuff. If you order that steak let me know if its a 4 ounce or 6 ounce steak would you?

Nice try with the wool pulling, you should run for political office.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have actually tried ordering the steak. It says 1 each, you're right, but it doesn't specify the weight. If you add it to your cart, you'll see that the price of filet is $13.99/pound. The 1 each is 1 pound.

It's this kind of shallow investigation--uncovered with a single extra click--that makes me disregard the credentials you claim.
 
NoDrama said:
How do you interpret this?

Note that this is not assumed, it is implicitly assumed.
Click to expand...

In the ice cream example, they talk about relative prices, which suggested to me that the choice wasn't made by the pure percentage terms you worked out in your example but instead with some kind of adjustment to make the prices relative. Otherwise, as we've discovered, your conclusion is that inflation is being overstated, not understated.

Realistically, though, doesn't every cow have the same parts? If the prices of individual cuts of beef are increasing/decreasing relative to each other, doesn't that suggest supply and demand versus inflation, since you would expect inflation to increase the price of whole cow? (Someone who knows more about meat may have insight otherwise.)

Edit: Obviously BLS measures different numbers. My point is that this probably isn't a very good example of the case you want to make about CPI masking the true erosion of the dollar's purchasing power.
 
tokeprep said:
Maybe you should have actually tried ordering the steak. It says 1 each, you're right, but it doesn't specify the weight. If you add it to your cart, you'll see that the price of filet is $13.99/pound. The 1 each is 1 pound.

It's this kind of shallow investigation--uncovered with a single extra click--that makes me disregard the credentials you claim.
Click to expand...
thats the cheapest filet mignon I have ever seen per pound and some of the most expensive Flank I have ever seen.

Here the prices are plain decent and their tenderloins cost twice as much as your online retailer. Skirt steak is only $8, filets are $25 http://www.texasgrassfedbeef.com/grass_fed_beef_online_store.htm

Are you sure its Beef? Maybe Kangaroo.

I guess I didn't realize just how much prices on beef have actually gone up, a half side of beef lasts us over a year.

Wow there sure is a shitload of inflation going on.


BTW, where did I say it was the fed that gives out the CPI numbers? Are you sure I just wasn't blaming the fed for the inflation?
 
tokeprep said:
Otherwise, as we've discovered, your conclusion is that inflation is being overstated, not understated.
Click to expand...

It would be understated, not sure how you get that it would be overstated. If they use the one that goes up the least, then its understated, its a really really simple concept to figure out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top