# So where's the inflation, fucktards? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 16, 2010, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932 "2010-07-16T16:40:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 10:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/21 "2010-07-17T10:20:45Z")
I don’t want to prolong this “dialog” but a response with as many misconceptions as yours necessitates rejoinder. > [@Trom](#): > > I don’t really know what right-wingers believe. You’re going to have to ask one. Sorry! (Maybe you were complaining about Greenspan’s stupid monetary policies a decade ago, etc.!) But when I see someone who walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, you’ll forgive me for suspecting he’s a duck! I don’t know how many Nobel Prizes your “more intelligent commentators” have but when someone worries about a meager fiscal stimulus in the face of the biggest deflation threat since the 1930’s, “right-winger” is the most polite label which comes to mind. > [@Trom](#): > > I don’t understand what your point is in pointing out that long bonds are yielding more than short maturities. That’s normal. Duhhh … the only point is that the spread isn’t bigger. I can see why you’re confused if you thought your role here was to teach junior-high level economics. And your implication that the “bond bears” are happy to leave treasuries way over-priced for two years before making their move shows a misunderstanding of how markets work. ---
**Author:** ![Trom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/958977/32.png) [@Trom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trom)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/22 "2010-07-17T15:05:47Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I don’t want to prolong this “dialog” but a response with as many misconceptions as yours necessitates rejoinder. > > Sorry! (Maybe you were complaining about Greenspan’s stupid monetary policies a decade ago, etc.!) But when I see someone who walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, you’ll forgive me for suspecting he’s a duck! I don’t know how many Nobel Prizes your “more intelligent commentators” have but when someone worries about a meager fiscal stimulus in the face of the biggest deflation threat since the 1930’s, “right-winger” is the most polite label which comes to mind. I’m sorry, I know you really, really want me to be a duck, but I’m not. It know it would be much easier for you to have an archetypal villian here, but… I’m _IN FAVOR_ of the stimulus! I am _concerned_ that their could be unforeseen consequences down the road due to policies enacted in response to the financial crisis- one of which _could_ be inflation. Why do I think it’s OK to be concerned? Because what is being done has never been done before. I’m not arrogant enough to claim I _know_ what will happen. I guess I’m just a skeptical person. How many Nobel Prizes on the mantle of the specific commentator I was mostly thinking about? None. Though, he has put his money where his mouth is and actually ran a $6 billion fund and has [outperformed the market by more than 40%](http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=HSGFX+Interactive#chart2:symbol=hsgfx;range=my;compare=%5Egspc;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined) since its inception. > [@septimus](#): > > Duhhh … the only point is that the spread isn’t bigger. I can see why you’re confused if you thought your role here was to teach junior-high level economics. You clearly want the amount of respectful interpersonal dialogue to be on a junior-high level. Whatever. Go for it, poopypants! > [@](#): > > And your implication that the “bond bears” are happy to leave treasuries way over-priced for two years before making their move shows a misunderstanding of how markets work. No. I’m saying there might come a time when a short Treasury position will look like a good idea. Now is not the time. How hard is that to understand? ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/23 "2010-07-17T15:10:21Z")
> [@Trom](#): > > I think most of the more intelligent commentators that bring up inflation are more concerned about 3+ years from now. Well, most of the commentary warning of inflation I’ve seen suggested that it was imminent. Admittedly, this precludes them from being described as “intelligent.” ---
**Author:** ![Trom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/958977/32.png) [@Trom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trom)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/24 "2010-07-17T15:26:37Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > Well, most of the commentary warning of inflation I’ve seen suggested that it was imminent. Admittedly, this precludes them from being described as “intelligent.” I realize that this thread was meant to make fun of the gold bug, imminent death of the dollar, New World Order/Amero currency crowd. Whatever, get on with it… ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/25 "2010-07-17T16:24:20Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > During and after the passage of the stimulus bill, there was an incessant chant from right-wingers and the mainstream financial analysts\* about inflation and the devaluing of the dollar. The birther/teabagger crowd of course glommed onto this meme. > > Krugman and others warned that the opposite was true: the stimulus was insufficient to induce demand, and the real danger was deflation. > > Now, we’re getting [stories](http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6a768626-90d3-11df-85a7-00144feab49a.html?ftcamp=rss)about the [possibility](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100716/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy) of deflation. > \*Of course, it’s not surprising that they would. The American aristocracy’s assets are better off with deflation, since they don’t actually spend much. This is just bullshit. I’m a portfolio manager, and I have access to an extremely broad spectrum of research and analysis. Krugman wasn’t saying anything that about half of Wall Street was saying. There was nothing particularly controversial or sensational about it. It’s well understood that two possible nasty consequences of our Governments’ efforts to provide stimulus are a long term high inflation environment, or a long term deflationary environment. So far we have **neither**. Hopefully we will not have **either**. At the moment we are slightly deflationary. A few months ago we were slightly inflationary. The European situation increased the relative value of the dollar as the de facto secure currency and US Treasuries as the riskless asset. That was likely to be a very temporary thing. The jury is still out on the long term trend. Deflation is certainly the larger danger. Those are the facts. That being the case I hate ignorant revisionist idiots who play games with the truth for political purposes. You don’t know what you are talking about, so you should shut up. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/26 "2010-07-17T16:26:09Z")
> [@Trom](#): > > I think most of the more intelligent commentators that bring up inflation are more concerned about 3+ years from now. Now, I only went as far in economics to get a minor in it so I’m far from an expert, but I’m having trouble understanding by which mechanism stimulus spending today is going to cause inflation three years from now. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/27 "2010-07-17T18:46:27Z")
> [@Trom](#): > > I’m _IN FAVOR_ of the stimulus! I am _concerned_ that their could be unforeseen consequences down the road … Inflation results from either internal supply limits of, e.g. labor (that is _not_ presently a problem!) or external supply limits, e.g. oil price shock. While a near-term jump in oil prices may be unlikely (because they’re already high!) some other unforeseen shock is possible, _but probably not because of the stimulus_. When the economy recovers, increases in taxes and/or interest rates may be necessary but politically unpalatable but, _the “problem” of a recovered economy is the **purpose** of the stimulus_, and it seems odd to view it as a dangerous side-effect. > [@Trom](#): > > I’m saying there might come a time when a short Treasury position will look like a good idea. Now is not the time. How hard is that to understand? With your inflation assumption, paper now selling for $107 will be selling for $90 in just a few years and _those dollars will be worth less than current dollars_. If the market agreed with your inflation forecast, buyers wouldn’t be maintaining that $107 price. How hard is that to understand? Hope this helps. ---
**Author:** ![Trom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/958977/32.png) [@Trom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trom)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/28 "2010-07-17T20:17:03Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Inflation results from either internal supply limits of, e.g. labor (that is _not_ presently a problem!) or external supply limits, e.g. oil price shock. While a near-term jump in oil prices may be unlikely (because they’re already high!) some other unforeseen shock is possible, _but probably not because of the stimulus_. When the economy recovers, increases in taxes and/or interest rates may be necessary but politically unpalatable but, _the “problem” of a recovered economy is the **purpose** of the stimulus_, and it seems odd to view it as a dangerous side-effect. For fuck’s sake. Are you really this dense? I haven’t even brought up what I think _might_ cause problems in the future. You really, really, really, really want me to argue that large government spending will always cause inflation and THE SKY IS FALLING! Go ahead and keep trying to play “gotcha” along those lines. You’ve got the wrong guy. > [@septimus](#): > > With your inflation assumption, paper now selling for $107 will be selling for $90 in just a few years and _those dollars will be worth less than current dollars_. If the market agreed with your inflation forecast, buyers wouldn’t be maintaining that $107 price. How hard is that to understand? > > Hope this helps. What’s my inflation assumption? You’re making shit up here. edit: Scylla nailed it. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/29 "2010-07-18T02:30:29Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > It’s interesting that you’re complaining about something, but you don’t seem to understand the actual factual information about it. > > Why don’t you take a look at this graph and get back to us? > > [http://stevensonblog.blogs.tuscaloosanews.com/13004/the-bikini-graph-redux/](http://stevensonblog.blogs.tuscaloosanews.com/13004/the-bikini-graph-redux/) That graph doesn’t show what you seem to think it shows. It only shows that the rate of job loss has slowed down and there have been some job gains very recently. That’s still a very far cry from what many stimulus advocates were touting, such as a steep reduction in the unemployment rate. Also, much of the reason for the reduction in job loss were public sector jobs (the creation of which is hardly anything to crow about). Here’s a link that explains what the graph shows: [http://blueollie.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/the-obama-stimulus-job-loss-graph-the-mathematics/](http://blueollie.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/the-obama-stimulus-job-loss-graph-the-mathematics/) ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/30 "2010-07-18T02:54:52Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > That graph doesn’t show what you seem to think it shows. It only shows that the rate of job loss has slowed down and there have been some job gains very recently. That’s still a very far cry from what many stimulus advocates were touting, such as a steep reduction in the unemployment rate. I know exactly what it shows. I’m trying to explain to you that the stimulus slowed the job losses. > [@](#): > > Also, much of the reason for the reduction in job loss were public sector jobs (the creation of which is hardly anything to crow about). Public sector jobs stimulate the economy. This is a fact. You need to understand basic fucking economics before you whine. > [@](#): > > Here’s a link that explains what the graph shows: [Private Site](http://blueollie.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/the-obama-stimulus-job-loss-graph-the-mathematics/) Thanks. Like I say, I understand the graph. Do you actually think that tax cuts would be the smart thing to do? Do you know why that isn’t considered a good idea? Also, the administration never promised 8% unemployment. That was a projection based on the most up-to-date numbers they had at the time. There were plenty of caveats with that projection as well, they knew they didn’t have enough info for a solid projection at the time. In retrospect the stimulus should have been bigger. But uninformed douchebags on the right made that a political impossibility. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/31 "2010-07-18T03:21:01Z")
Right. When a Republican makes a prediction, it’s a promise and a guarantee, and you take them to task if it doesn’t turn out to be the case in all particulars. But Obama’s team was just making projections that turned out to be faulty, and that’s OK. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/32 "2010-07-18T03:31:45Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > This is just bullshit. > I’m a portfolio manager, and I have access to an extremely broad spectrum of research and analysis. > > Krugman wasn’t saying anything that about half of Wall Street was saying. There was nothing particularly controversial or sensational about it. > > It’s well understood that two possible nasty consequences of our Governments’ efforts to provide stimulus are a long term high inflation environment, or a long term deflationary environment. > > So far we have **neither**. Hopefully we will not have **either**. At the moment we are slightly deflationary. A few months ago we were slightly inflationary. The European situation increased the relative value of the dollar as the de facto secure currency and US Treasuries as the riskless asset. > You are correct though that Krugman’s POV was wholly consistent with that of the major economic forecasters. But they aren’t being pitted, are they? > > That was likely to be a very temporary thing. The jury is still out on the long term trend. Deflation is certainly the larger danger. > > Those are the facts. That being the case I hate ignorant revisionist idiots who play games with the truth for political purposes. > > You don’t know what you are talking about, so you should shut up. So, help me He Who Knows What He’s Talking About. By what mechanism would a stimulus package cause deflation? I for one cannot think of one. (Did you mean inadequate stimulus might cause deflation? In that case, my pitting is retracted.) “A few months ago we were slightly inflationary.” Oh. Let’s look at the percentage change of the core CPI (less the volatile food and energy categories, so as to understand underlying price pressures), year over year: ```auto 2009-01-01 1.7 2009-02-01 1.8 2009-03-01 1.8 2009-04-01 1.9 2009-05-01 1.8 2009-06-01 1.7 2009-07-01 1.6 2009-08-01 1.4 2009-09-01 1.5 2009-10-01 1.7 2009-11-01 1.7 2009-12-01 1.8 2010-01-01 1.5 2010-02-01 1.3 2010-03-01 1.2 2010-04-01 1.0 2010-05-01 1.0 2010-06-01 1.0 ``` That looks to me like declining inflation. Heck, we could even be experiencing deflation now, given that we’re seeing 1 year percentage changes above. Personally, I think the fears of hyperinflation that were circulating a year ago were delusional (or, rather, they were based upon a framework that has been resoundly refuted.) I find it highly plausible thought that core inflation could go to 3-4% – heck I think core inflation should go that high, so that we can avoid liquidity traps in the future. But 3-4% inflation is nothing to get hysterical about, unless you are predisposed to that emotion anyway. You are correct that Krugman’s POV was consistent with that of the major forecasters. But they aren’t being pitted in the OP, are they? ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/33 "2010-07-18T03:40:06Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Right. When a Republican makes a prediction, it’s a promise and a guarantee, and you take them to task if it doesn’t turn out to be the case in all particulars. But Obama’s team was just making projections that turned out to be faulty, and that’s OK. Again, there were a fair number of Ron Paul freaks talking of imminent _hyperinflation_, as in the price of bread rising twice a day. I would say that hypothesis has been _falsified_. We’re here to fight ignorance Mr. Rover, and that involves embracing the scientific method. I know it’s hard when the facts refute your cherished theories, but there comes a time when you have to buck up and compare your wishes with the facts. The scientific approach also involves distinguishing between baselines, forecasts and error bounds. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/34 "2010-07-18T03:43:37Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Do you actually think that tax cuts would be the smart thing to do? Do you know why that isn’t considered a good idea? A temporary tax cut actually has some justification (though a smaller fraction of it would be spent than a permanent tax cut.) For those interested, here are the multipliers for a range of stimulus policies: [http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2008/10/pocketfull\_of\_m.html](http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2008/10/pocketfull_of_m.html) With respect, those who are unfamiliar with the term “Multiplier” might benefit from an introductory class in macroeconomics. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/35 "2010-07-18T03:52:30Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > You are correct that Krugman’s POV was consistent with that of the major forecasters. But they aren’t being pitted in the OP, are they? Er, no. “Mainstream financial analysts” were pitted as well. :smack: I guess I glommed onto the tea party bit. Just to correct the record: [Professional forecasters agree that stimulus package was effective](http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/02/assessing-the-stimulus.html). And ETA: “With respect to anybody (I’m not picking on Lobo), those who are unfamiliar with the term “Multiplier” might benefit from an introductory class in macroeconomics.” ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/36 "2010-07-18T03:59:03Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Er, no. “Mainstream financial analysts” were pitted as well. :smack: I guess I glommed onto the tea party bit. > > Just to correct the record: [Professional forecasters agree that stimulus package was effective](http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/02/assessing-the-stimulus.html). > > And ETA: “With respect to anybody (I’m not picking on Lobo), those who are unfamiliar with the term “Multiplier” might benefit from an introductory class in macroeconomics.” No slight taken. But if you do a search for \*multiplier \*with my name you’ll find that I’ve tried to explain it to Shodan about a dozen times. I certainly would benefit from a macroeconomics class though. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Batfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Batfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batfish)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/37 "2010-07-18T15:48:01Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Also, much of the reason for the reduction in job loss were public sector jobs (the creation of which is hardly anything to crow about). > [Private Site](http://blueollie.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/the-obama-stimulus-job-loss-graph-the-mathematics/) Yeah! Because everyone knows that retail stores, banks, mortgage companies, car dealers and landlords won’t take your money if you have a government job. What about government contractors? Are those public sector jobs? Are those jobs okay with you? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/38 "2010-07-18T18:42:46Z")
> [@Batfish](#): > > Yeah! Because everyone knows that retail stores, banks, mortgage companies, car dealers and landlords won’t take your money if you have a government job. > > What about government contractors? Are those public sector jobs? Are those jobs okay with you? You should go into idiot-on-strawman S&M porn–you sure can get yourself worked up beating the hell out of a strawman. ---
**Author:** ![Batfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Batfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batfish)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/39 "2010-07-18T19:10:24Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > You should go into idiot-on-strawman S&M porn–you sure can get yourself worked up beating the hell out of a strawman. Okay, so what’s it called when you reflexively dismiss someone’s employment just because it’s “public sector”. Explain to me why anyone’s work from city trash collector to Treasury Department clerk is any less important a contribution to the economy than your “private” sector job. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2010, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932/40 "2010-07-18T19:54:43Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > So, help me He Who Knows What He’s Talking About. By what mechanism would a stimulus package cause deflation? I for one cannot think of one. (Did you mean inadequate stimulus might cause deflation? In that case, my pitting is retracted.) Not enough, not the right kind. “Inadequate.” Yes. Was that not clear? > [@](#): > > “A few months ago we were slightly inflationary.” > > Oh. Let’s look at the percentage change of the core CPI (less the volatile food and energy categories, so as to understand underlying price pressures), year over year: > > ```auto > > 2009-01-01 1.7 > 2009-02-01 1.8 > 2009-03-01 1.8 > 2009-04-01 1.9 > 2009-05-01 1.8 > 2009-06-01 1.7 > 2009-07-01 1.6 > 2009-08-01 1.4 > 2009-09-01 1.5 > 2009-10-01 1.7 > 2009-11-01 1.7 > 2009-12-01 1.8 > 2010-01-01 1.5 > 2010-02-01 1.3 > 2010-03-01 1.2 > 2010-04-01 1.0 > 2010-05-01 1.0 > 2010-06-01 1.0 > > ``` > > That looks to me like declining inflation. Heck, we could even be experiencing deflation now, given that we’re seeing 1 year percentage changes above. That’s exactly what I was saying. We were mildly inflationary, now we are likely mildly deflationary. > [@](#): > > Personally, I think the fears of hyperinflation that were circulating a year ago were delusional (or, rather, they were based upon a framework that has been resoundly refuted.) I find it highly plausible thought that core inflation could go to 3-4% – heck I think core inflation should go that high, so that we can avoid liquidity traps in the future. But 3-4% inflation is nothing to get hysterical about, unless you are predisposed to that emotion anyway. I would think of that as “normal” if there is such a thing. I can’t recall any credible analysts seriously predicting “hyperinflation.” Are you sure that’s the word you mean? What people are concerned about is high inflation. Numbers in the teens. > [@](#): > > You are correct that Krugman’s POV was consistent with that of the major forecasters. But they aren’t being pitted in the OP, are they? Well… Yes they are. “Conservatives,” “Mainstream Financial Analysts,” who by footnote serve the “Aristocracy.” The OP paints a picture of the lone, brave, liberal economist as being the only one who is smart enough to see what’s in store, and the only one brave and honest enough to speak it. It’s just fucking stupid. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wheres-the-inflation-fucktards/546932.md?page=3)