Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Inflation adjustment calculator
- This topic has 55 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 5 months ago by
NotCranky.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 29, 2007 at 11:18 PM #126560December 30, 2007 at 8:45 AM #126368
Bugs
ParticipantRich’s graphs are based on local wage, population and pricing trendlines. I feel very comfortable using those trendlines when making these comparisons.
1997 definitely wasn’t the bottom, but it was sill a little below the long term (local) pricing trendline. I think prices intersected the long term trend in 1998; logically that would be the point at which to base comparisons on where prices “should be”.
That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.
December 30, 2007 at 8:45 AM #126525ParticipantRich’s graphs are based on local wage, population and pricing trendlines. I feel very comfortable using those trendlines when making these comparisons.
1997 definitely wasn’t the bottom, but it was sill a little below the long term (local) pricing trendline. I think prices intersected the long term trend in 1998; logically that would be the point at which to base comparisons on where prices “should be”.
That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.
December 30, 2007 at 8:45 AM #126537ParticipantRich’s graphs are based on local wage, population and pricing trendlines. I feel very comfortable using those trendlines when making these comparisons.
1997 definitely wasn’t the bottom, but it was sill a little below the long term (local) pricing trendline. I think prices intersected the long term trend in 1998; logically that would be the point at which to base comparisons on where prices “should be”.
That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.
December 30, 2007 at 8:45 AM #126605ParticipantRich’s graphs are based on local wage, population and pricing trendlines. I feel very comfortable using those trendlines when making these comparisons.
1997 definitely wasn’t the bottom, but it was sill a little below the long term (local) pricing trendline. I think prices intersected the long term trend in 1998; logically that would be the point at which to base comparisons on where prices “should be”.
That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.
December 30, 2007 at 8:45 AM #126630ParticipantRich’s graphs are based on local wage, population and pricing trendlines. I feel very comfortable using those trendlines when making these comparisons.
1997 definitely wasn’t the bottom, but it was sill a little below the long term (local) pricing trendline. I think prices intersected the long term trend in 1998; logically that would be the point at which to base comparisons on where prices “should be”.
That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.
December 30, 2007 at 9:31 AM #126388NotCranky
Participant“That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.”
I am not saying we have a plateau or soft landing or any of that hogwash and I never did. To say that the eventual floor could make 97′ look dirt cheap is a reasonable element for discussion.San Diego is a good potential candidate for such an effect to some degree. It is going to take more than a vague comparision to a few mostly unrelated,failed ideas to make it an obsolete theory.
Breakfast calls, I will work on this later.
December 30, 2007 at 9:31 AM #126545Participant“That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.”
I am not saying we have a plateau or soft landing or any of that hogwash and I never did. To say that the eventual floor could make 97′ look dirt cheap is a reasonable element for discussion.San Diego is a good potential candidate for such an effect to some degree. It is going to take more than a vague comparision to a few mostly unrelated,failed ideas to make it an obsolete theory.
Breakfast calls, I will work on this later.
December 30, 2007 at 9:31 AM #126557Participant“That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.”
I am not saying we have a plateau or soft landing or any of that hogwash and I never did. To say that the eventual floor could make 97′ look dirt cheap is a reasonable element for discussion.San Diego is a good potential candidate for such an effect to some degree. It is going to take more than a vague comparision to a few mostly unrelated,failed ideas to make it an obsolete theory.
Breakfast calls, I will work on this later.
December 30, 2007 at 9:31 AM #126624Participant“That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.”
I am not saying we have a plateau or soft landing or any of that hogwash and I never did. To say that the eventual floor could make 97′ look dirt cheap is a reasonable element for discussion.San Diego is a good potential candidate for such an effect to some degree. It is going to take more than a vague comparision to a few mostly unrelated,failed ideas to make it an obsolete theory.
Breakfast calls, I will work on this later.
December 30, 2007 at 9:31 AM #126650Participant“That is, unless one believes in some variation of the now-debunked New Paradigm or Soft Landing scenarios that predict a reset of the long term pricing trends at the much higher levels.”
I am not saying we have a plateau or soft landing or any of that hogwash and I never did. To say that the eventual floor could make 97′ look dirt cheap is a reasonable element for discussion.San Diego is a good potential candidate for such an effect to some degree. It is going to take more than a vague comparision to a few mostly unrelated,failed ideas to make it an obsolete theory.
Breakfast calls, I will work on this later.
December 30, 2007 at 9:39 AM #126392
barnaby33ParticipantYou all a bunch of punk-ass-bitches. This thread be ’bout an inflation adjustment calculator. Can’t none y’all read?
Josh
December 30, 2007 at 9:39 AM #126549barnaby33ParticipantYou all a bunch of punk-ass-bitches. This thread be ’bout an inflation adjustment calculator. Can’t none y’all read?
Josh
December 30, 2007 at 9:39 AM #126562barnaby33ParticipantYou all a bunch of punk-ass-bitches. This thread be ’bout an inflation adjustment calculator. Can’t none y’all read?
Josh
December 30, 2007 at 9:39 AM #126629barnaby33ParticipantYou all a bunch of punk-ass-bitches. This thread be ’bout an inflation adjustment calculator. Can’t none y’all read?
Josh
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.