The central bank is raising rates to fight inflation. No one else seems willing to help

  • Rodeo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep in mind that they manipulate the CPI to make it look not so bad.

    For example, if the price of a luxury item spikes by 50% (like a lot of grocery items did in the last year), they’ll remove it from the basket and put in a cheaper alternative instead. The idea is that what people would do, but the result is a figure that doesn’t represent actual price increases.

    • zephyreks
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The main purpose of CPI is to see if Canadians can still make ends meet. It’s not supposed to express price increases, but cost of living increases.

      People change their habits as prices change. That’s well-known.

      • Rodeo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        So maybe it should be called the Buying Habits Index then.

        • glib
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We could call it the Cost of Not Dying if you prefer

    • EhForumUser
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Makes sense. Inflation is trying to determine the value of currency as you can’t just ask how much a dollar is worth. Of course, a dollar is always worth a dollar! Which means nothing as we know a dollar today isn’t worth the same as a dollar yesterday. Thus, CPI becomes the proxy.

      If a luxury item becomes more valuable, then you’re no longer measuring the change in value of the currency, you’re measuring the change in value of that item. It can never be an exact science, but if one thing jumps by 50% when nothing else has, there is extreme confidence that it is not the change in value of the currency that resulted in the change in price and it stands to reason that you would want to eliminate it from the calculation.

      • Rodeo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not meant to measure inflation. It’s supposed to measure the cost of consumer goods, but instead they say it’s about “overall cost of living” to justify the manipulation.

        • EhForumUser
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s supposed to measure the cost of consumer goods

          Because consumables are what are frequently purchased to be able to observe inflation taking place.

          It wouldn’t make sense to track houses, for example. People only buy those once, maybe twice in their life. You would have no idea how their perception of the value of the dollar is changing watching that.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            But it doesn’t make sense to change the basket from having 7 portions of meat to having 3 portions of meat and 4 portions of tofu (example pulled out of my ass, but the principle is the same as what’s being done). That’s what people do because of inflation to reduce their spendings, it still means that the number reported has nothing to do with real inflation.

            Real inflation/deflation is the variation of price of specific items over time. You could absolutely check inflation of housing by comparing the price of thousands of houses that respect some criterias over time without changing the criterias.