![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In which I explain, as simply as I can, a system that I might be totally mistaken about.
(But then again, that lumps me in with virtually all economists, who get paid to make guesses.)
Quick point: which do you think is more likely- the government's claim that it currently takes about $123 to buy what was worth $100 in 2000... or the pre-Clinton method of calculating inflation, which would make the amount $147... or the pre-Reagan method, which would make it $186?
Your comments, as ever, encouraged.
(But then again, that lumps me in with virtually all economists, who get paid to make guesses.)
Quick point: which do you think is more likely- the government's claim that it currently takes about $123 to buy what was worth $100 in 2000... or the pre-Clinton method of calculating inflation, which would make the amount $147... or the pre-Reagan method, which would make it $186?
Your comments, as ever, encouraged.
