You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

[lektrode]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

...Your statement is accurate if you include the 2008 - 2009 deflation period, but is not accurate otherwise.

and never mind where it would be if the wheels hadnt flown off the wagon in 09
with the trajectory prices were on in 07-08?
from what eye see in the boat biz, a 25% uptick, at least, has occurred since 05-06
(on everything but my revenue), with some items up 50-100%

[lektrode]

Re: You're not going to believe this

..... don't give a shit. If you haven't figured it out by now, I'm
about getting at the truth at any cost. Thanks for "reaching out." I'm
still not for sale.
....

and _thats_ why i pay it, EJ.
the clarity that your output provides those of us with little education/experience in this realm is PRICELESS!
please dont go getting caught up in a tit4tat/flame war with that idiot, life is to damn short.

[Spartacus]

Re: Latest update to the EJ/Mish email exchange

Consciously
you may have been thinking that you are doing me some kind of favor. You
misspelled my name, unconsciously

Any stand up comedian can tell you about the hecklers that come up after the show and claim to have helped the performance.

phphphphphphphphphphttttttttttttttttttttttttttt !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've come across so many Mish followers all over the interwebz who recite Mish articles verbatim and immediately declare themselves "the winner". I saw it many times last year - this year I've reduced my internet time so I don't know what it's like now.

Just a personal note on an interesting interwebz pathology; one case where "law of attraction" actually works. Maybe Mish should go on chOPRAH?

[lektrode]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

....CPI is not an accurate measure of inflation, therefore someone claiming that because CPI is low there isn't inflation is both wrong and naive.

+1
the focus on CPI has gotta be the biggest act of fraud _ever_ by those who frame the 'in' vs 'de' flation debate (krugman and the rest of the keynesian delusionals, aka more-gov types)

but what do i know, i'm just a common tradesman, a moron in the view of the dismal science practitioners - BUT I DO KNOW WHEN THE PRICES OF STUFF THAT I BUY IS GOING NOWHERE BUT ***UP*** and a lot closer to 10% than 1

and its an insult to even my meager intelligence when we see these op/eds by/within the lamestream media from people like slugman, who the more-gov (spending) types seem to revolve around, in terms of policy discussions - esp after they blow trillions on accomplishing NOTHING, cept a can-kick for another year and continue to advocate for more, WITH NO COHERENT PLAN on what to spend it on, never mind where will it come from -

and even tho i think some taxes need to be raised, the SPENDING SIDE HAS TO GIVE FIRST

and the first place to cut spending IS TO CLAWBACK THE PAYOUTS TO AIG, GS et al and the free money 'on loan' to the banking industry, WHILE THEY SCREW US ON THE SPREAD tween what they pay on deposits and rates charged on consumer loans!

[LargoWinch]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

That's fine. But whatever the story is now was not the story back in 2007. A prediction is not worth much when it changes as things play out. I also seem to remember posts like "ka - here we go" back in 2007/2008. But whatever.

Not that I am not all for updating as new information comes in. But to call ka poom theory as it existed in 2007 100% accurate is not truthful.

As you say Munger - "whatever" if possibly ka-Poom timing was wrong, it doesn't make it untrue. End of Story.

Also, I am sorry to say, but in this thread, considering your weak and out of context arguments, you do come across like a Mish shill.

[jeffb]

Re: You're not going to believe this

Wow. Thank you FRED. For the first time since I joined in iTulip, I am truly speechless.

WOW! ...is right!! That whole conversation just sat me back in my chair! thank you Fred and EJ.
It's okay that many, many foks are ill-informed...that's where the increase in our wealth will come from.

[Spartacus]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

This is NOT Mish's worst.

The worst was when he declared[0] deflation BECAUSE PORN STARS WERE BEING PAID LESS.

He mentioned Savana Stern, IIRC.


[0] by fiat !!! !!!!!!!!!!! granted it was not by royal fiat (except in Mish's mind)

[Mega]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

Gee Eric
I mean even i make an effort to spell your name right!

What he doesn't seem to get is this is a "Game" run by the CB's to screw the people............normaly slowly over time, not at high Warp speed like now. As a layman i noticed how before "They" want to PRINT they will cause a deflation spike.....then clain that the chances of high or hyper inflation has now passed & its now SAFE for them to print. Knowing that QE3 was about to arrive i sussed that "They" throw a bear in the stock prices they control (PPT) & rase margins on EVERYTHING............

Thus a burst of DEFLATION...............Mish is not a soft, but he seems to not understand this basic truth.

Mike

[c1ue]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

The CPI has been around 1% for several years now.

Where do you get this idea from?

http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid1106.pdf

Unadjusted, all items, 12 months to June 2011: 3.6%

http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid1006.pdf

Unadjusted, all items, 12 months to June 2010: 1.1%

http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid0906.pdf

Unadjusted, all items, 12 months to June 2009: -1.4%

http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid0806.pdf

Unadjusted, all items, 12 months to June 2008: 5.0%

Net inflation per annum, 2008 - 2011: 2.04%

Net inflation per annum, 2009 - 2011: 1.08%

Net inflation per annum, 2010 - 2011: 2.34%

Your statement is accurate if you include the 2008 - 2009 deflation period, but is not accurate otherwise.

[Munger]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

Munger, who said that "ka" has occurred?

I would also point out to you that ka-Poom being a process, select members are kept up to date regarding where we are in the cycle. As such, since it appears that you do not have access to most of the information and updates regarding the theory (in the select section), I fail to understand how you can declare such theory a failure.

That's fine. But whatever the story is now was not the story back in 2007. A prediction is not worth much when it changes as things play out. I also seem to remember posts like "ka - here we go" back in 2007/2008. But whatever.

Not that I am not all for updating as new information comes in. But to call ka poom theory as it existed in 2007 100% accurate is not truthful.

[LargoWinch]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

Sounds like rationalization to me. I know the site has been backing off the original theory for a while now, stating that ka poem is a low process. Well, at some point I need to call a spade a spade. The period between ka and poom was never stated as taking 5+ years until well after it was obvious it was going to take at least that long. I call that wrong.

Munger, who said that "ka" has occurred?

I would also point out to you that ka-Poom being a process, select members are kept up to date regarding where we are in the cycle. As such, since it appears that you do not have access to most of the information and updates regarding the theory (in the select section), I fail to understand how you can declare such theory a failure.

You don't like the CPI. Perhaps because it shows that high sustained inflation is not happening. Thee are many other measures that show the same thing. the few measures that would so inflation (such as including energy and food prices) are showing deflation right now. The is a good reason they are not included in core inflation measures.

I did not say that we are in the POOM phase or that high sustained inflation should be happening now. I simply pointed out to you that CPI is not an accurate barometer of inflation.

[Munger]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

Munger, because Ka-Poom has not yet happened doesn't mean it is wrong. Select members are also kept up to date with the process - including a "live chat event" earlier this week during the crux of market volatility.

Also, CPI is not an accurate measure of inflation, therefore someone claiming that because CPI is low there isn't inflation is both wrong and naive.

Sounds like rationalization to me. EJs piece basically said, "what we predicted has proven 100% accurate." well, not so fast. Without any time constraints it can never be proven wrong. I know the site has been backing off the original theory for a while now, stating that ka poem is a process. Well, at some point I need to call a spade a spade. The period between ka and poom was never stated as taking 5+ years until well after it was obvious it was going to take at least that long. I don't call that 100% accurate.

You don't like the CPI, perhaps because it shows that high sustained inflation is not happening. Thee are many other measures that show the same thing. The few measures that would show higher inflation (such as including energy and food prices) are showing deflation right now. They are volitile. There is good reason they are not included in core inflation measures.

[Munger]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

Delete

[LargoWinch]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

Good post, but I sense a shifting of the iTulip position to fit the facts as well.

When I first started coming to this site in 2006, the story was KaPoom. I.e., short period of disinflation followed by POOM, or high sustained inflation. It's been a while since I've heard that theory spouted around these parts, mostly because it's been wrong. I remember seeing some short shifting of positions along the lines of "inflation is a process, not an event," but for the most part, at this point, I consider iTulip's KaPoom theory as posited in 2006 etc just plain wrong. An expanding monetary base has proven to not lead directly to high sustained inflation. Rather, the liquidity trap view of new keynsians has proved remarkably accurate. It's interesting that this group has actually been calling for higher sustained inflation to deal with the debt load, but the political process will not let it happen.

The CPI has been around 1% for several years now. No matter how you spin it, this cannot prove an "inflation" theory as correct. This inflation is among the lowest we'e ever seen. Yes, deflation predictions were flat wrong, but so were high sustained inflation predictions. I also recall seeing comparisons to Argentina, albeit with intelligent caveats involving the status of the dollar as the reserve currency. It seems fairly obvious to me now that the correct comparison was Japan, which I don't recall seeing here back in 2007.

Anyways, my point is that while I still value EJs take on things (and he has a remarkable ability to simplify tough economic concepts and incorporate political aspects into his analysis), I feel this was not being entirely forthcoming in portraying itself as 100% accurate. I wo uld like to see an update regarding why KaPoom as stated in 2007 was not entirely correct, and why. I think a modified version is likely accurate, in which an extended period of very low inflation is followed by an extended period of moderate inflation.

Munger, because Ka-Poom has not yet happened doesn't mean it is wrong. Select members are also kept up to date with the process - including a "live chat event" earlier this week during the crux of market volatility.

Also, CPI is not an accurate measure of inflation, therefore someone claiming that because CPI is low there isn't inflation is both wrong and naive.

[Munger]

Re: You're not going to believe this - Eric Janszen

Good post, but I sense a shifting of the iTulip position to fit the facts as well.

When I first started coming to this site in 2006, the story was KaPoom. I.e., short period of disinflation followed by POOM, or high sustained inflation. It's been a while since I've heard that theory spouted around these parts, mostly because it's been wrong. I remember seeing some short shifting of positions along the lines of "inflation is a process, not an event," but for the most part, at this point, I consider iTulip's KaPoom theory as posited in 2006 etc just plain wrong. An expanding monetary base has proven to not lead directly to high sustained inflation. Rather, the liquidity trap view of new keynsians has proved remarkably accurate. It's interesting that this group has actually been calling for higher sustained inflation to deal with the debt load, but the political process will not let it happen.

The CPI has been around 1% for several years now. No matter how you spin it, this cannot prove an "inflation" theory as correct. This inflation is among the lowest we'e ever seen. Yes, deflation predictions were flat wrong, but so were high sustained inflation predictions. I also recall seeing comparisons to Argentina, albeit with intelligent caveats involving the status of the dollar as the reserve currency. It seems fairly obvious to me now that the correct comparison was Japan, which I don't recall seeing here back in 2007.

Anyways, my point is that while I still value EJs take on things (and he has a remarkable ability to simplify tough economic concepts and incorporate political aspects into his analysis), I feel this was not being entirely forthcoming in portraying itself as 100% accurate. I wo uld like to see an update regarding why KaPoom as stated in 2007 was not entirely correct, and why. I think a modified version is likely accurate, in which an extended period of very low inflation is followed by an extended period of moderate inflation.