[drunkle]

well, assuming inflation is a measure of the currency relative to other currencies, that would suggest that tradeable goods would reflect inflation.

wage inflation is then a reflection of increasing prices in traded goods; autos, for instance.

since the majority of americans work in services, they wouldn’t gain wage inflation since their services are locally traded.

and since homes are not traded across borders, they too are limited to local inflation plus whatever amount of foreign investment or immigration accounts for. i would think that that amount of influx would be significantly less than the the absolute amount of currency inflation (deflation).

[drunkle]

well, assuming inflation is a measure of the currency relative to other currencies, that would suggest that tradeable goods would reflect inflation.

wage inflation is then a reflection of increasing prices in traded goods; autos, for instance.

since the majority of americans work in services, they wouldn’t gain wage inflation since their services are locally traded.

and since homes are not traded across borders, they too are limited to local inflation plus whatever amount of foreign investment or immigration accounts for. i would think that that amount of influx would be significantly less than the the absolute amount of currency inflation (deflation).

[drunkle]

well, assuming inflation is a measure of the currency relative to other currencies, that would suggest that tradeable goods would reflect inflation.

wage inflation is then a reflection of increasing prices in traded goods; autos, for instance.

since the majority of americans work in services, they wouldn’t gain wage inflation since their services are locally traded.

and since homes are not traded across borders, they too are limited to local inflation plus whatever amount of foreign investment or immigration accounts for. i would think that that amount of influx would be significantly less than the the absolute amount of currency inflation (deflation).

[drunkle]

well, assuming inflation is a measure of the currency relative to other currencies, that would suggest that tradeable goods would reflect inflation.

wage inflation is then a reflection of increasing prices in traded goods; autos, for instance.

since the majority of americans work in services, they wouldn’t gain wage inflation since their services are locally traded.

and since homes are not traded across borders, they too are limited to local inflation plus whatever amount of foreign investment or immigration accounts for. i would think that that amount of influx would be significantly less than the the absolute amount of currency inflation (deflation).

[drunkle]

well, assuming inflation is a measure of the currency relative to other currencies, that would suggest that tradeable goods would reflect inflation.

wage inflation is then a reflection of increasing prices in traded goods; autos, for instance.

since the majority of americans work in services, they wouldn’t gain wage inflation since their services are locally traded.

and since homes are not traded across borders, they too are limited to local inflation plus whatever amount of foreign investment or immigration accounts for. i would think that that amount of influx would be significantly less than the the absolute amount of currency inflation (deflation).

[drunkle]

going back through the archives and watching those old shows gives a really incredible feeling… vindication? pride?

watch the fox clips from january or even last year where schiff is completely laughed at and marginalized and trivialized. then jump to q2, same thing. q3 july, same thing. then, in q3 september, things change. some of the douchebags from early 07 are no longer on the show. shame? some of the guys on the later shows still marginalize schiff despite acknowledging his prediction. it’s funny watching fox news in general and the pollyanna’s twist and turn and frivolize on where they buy groceries…

schiff is the only credible voice on fox news. and it seems that it’s only the past year that fox has invited him on.

[drunkle]

going back through the archives and watching those old shows gives a really incredible feeling… vindication? pride?

watch the fox clips from january or even last year where schiff is completely laughed at and marginalized and trivialized. then jump to q2, same thing. q3 july, same thing. then, in q3 september, things change. some of the douchebags from early 07 are no longer on the show. shame? some of the guys on the later shows still marginalize schiff despite acknowledging his prediction. it’s funny watching fox news in general and the pollyanna’s twist and turn and frivolize on where they buy groceries…

schiff is the only credible voice on fox news. and it seems that it’s only the past year that fox has invited him on.

[drunkle]

going back through the archives and watching those old shows gives a really incredible feeling… vindication? pride?

watch the fox clips from january or even last year where schiff is completely laughed at and marginalized and trivialized. then jump to q2, same thing. q3 july, same thing. then, in q3 september, things change. some of the douchebags from early 07 are no longer on the show. shame? some of the guys on the later shows still marginalize schiff despite acknowledging his prediction. it’s funny watching fox news in general and the pollyanna’s twist and turn and frivolize on where they buy groceries…

schiff is the only credible voice on fox news. and it seems that it’s only the past year that fox has invited him on.

[drunkle]

going back through the archives and watching those old shows gives a really incredible feeling… vindication? pride?

watch the fox clips from january or even last year where schiff is completely laughed at and marginalized and trivialized. then jump to q2, same thing. q3 july, same thing. then, in q3 september, things change. some of the douchebags from early 07 are no longer on the show. shame? some of the guys on the later shows still marginalize schiff despite acknowledging his prediction. it’s funny watching fox news in general and the pollyanna’s twist and turn and frivolize on where they buy groceries…

schiff is the only credible voice on fox news. and it seems that it’s only the past year that fox has invited him on.

[drunkle]

going back through the archives and watching those old shows gives a really incredible feeling… vindication? pride?

watch the fox clips from january or even last year where schiff is completely laughed at and marginalized and trivialized. then jump to q2, same thing. q3 july, same thing. then, in q3 september, things change. some of the douchebags from early 07 are no longer on the show. shame? some of the guys on the later shows still marginalize schiff despite acknowledging his prediction. it’s funny watching fox news in general and the pollyanna’s twist and turn and frivolize on where they buy groceries…

schiff is the only credible voice on fox news. and it seems that it’s only the past year that fox has invited him on.

[drunkle]

esmith:

can you add graphs that chart the rate of change of the particular areas?

any specific areas you want?

also, (maybe you did this already? or case-shiller did?) apply filters that weed out 95, 90, and 75 percentile data?

What do you mean?

no preference for area, figure you could easily do it for all your existing classifications…

filter out the 5th/95th percentile data, 10th/90th, 25th/75th… as in, get rid of the data that is outside of the percent range in the distribution…

i don’t recall the exact method of doing so and i dont even recall the proper term. but essentially, lop off the top and bottom set of data that is less than the bottom 5% and greater than the top 95% of the data in the distribution. so for example:

dataset:
15
15
15
45
45
55
65
65
75
95

median = 50, 10% percentile = 17, 90% = 93. eliminate values that fall outside of the percentile range and then recalculate median and plot. for this dataset, median becomes 60…

i’m wondering if doing such would get rid of aberrant values (prices) and affect the median, showing a more accurate picture… or maybe doing such would really only be useful with calculating mean… or maybe it’s just a waste of time as the values dont change much…

[drunkle]

esmith:

can you add graphs that chart the rate of change of the particular areas?

any specific areas you want?

also, (maybe you did this already? or case-shiller did?) apply filters that weed out 95, 90, and 75 percentile data?

What do you mean?

no preference for area, figure you could easily do it for all your existing classifications…

filter out the 5th/95th percentile data, 10th/90th, 25th/75th… as in, get rid of the data that is outside of the percent range in the distribution…

i don’t recall the exact method of doing so and i dont even recall the proper term. but essentially, lop off the top and bottom set of data that is less than the bottom 5% and greater than the top 95% of the data in the distribution. so for example:

dataset:
15
15
15
45
45
55
65
65
75
95

median = 50, 10% percentile = 17, 90% = 93. eliminate values that fall outside of the percentile range and then recalculate median and plot. for this dataset, median becomes 60…

i’m wondering if doing such would get rid of aberrant values (prices) and affect the median, showing a more accurate picture… or maybe doing such would really only be useful with calculating mean… or maybe it’s just a waste of time as the values dont change much…

[drunkle]

esmith:

can you add graphs that chart the rate of change of the particular areas?

any specific areas you want?

also, (maybe you did this already? or case-shiller did?) apply filters that weed out 95, 90, and 75 percentile data?

What do you mean?

no preference for area, figure you could easily do it for all your existing classifications…

filter out the 5th/95th percentile data, 10th/90th, 25th/75th… as in, get rid of the data that is outside of the percent range in the distribution…

i don’t recall the exact method of doing so and i dont even recall the proper term. but essentially, lop off the top and bottom set of data that is less than the bottom 5% and greater than the top 95% of the data in the distribution. so for example:

dataset:
15
15
15
45
45
55
65
65
75
95

median = 50, 10% percentile = 17, 90% = 93. eliminate values that fall outside of the percentile range and then recalculate median and plot. for this dataset, median becomes 60…

i’m wondering if doing such would get rid of aberrant values (prices) and affect the median, showing a more accurate picture… or maybe doing such would really only be useful with calculating mean… or maybe it’s just a waste of time as the values dont change much…

[drunkle]

esmith:

can you add graphs that chart the rate of change of the particular areas?

any specific areas you want?

also, (maybe you did this already? or case-shiller did?) apply filters that weed out 95, 90, and 75 percentile data?

What do you mean?

no preference for area, figure you could easily do it for all your existing classifications…

filter out the 5th/95th percentile data, 10th/90th, 25th/75th… as in, get rid of the data that is outside of the percent range in the distribution…

i don’t recall the exact method of doing so and i dont even recall the proper term. but essentially, lop off the top and bottom set of data that is less than the bottom 5% and greater than the top 95% of the data in the distribution. so for example:

dataset:
15
15
15
45
45
55
65
65
75
95

median = 50, 10% percentile = 17, 90% = 93. eliminate values that fall outside of the percentile range and then recalculate median and plot. for this dataset, median becomes 60…

i’m wondering if doing such would get rid of aberrant values (prices) and affect the median, showing a more accurate picture… or maybe doing such would really only be useful with calculating mean… or maybe it’s just a waste of time as the values dont change much…

[drunkle]

esmith:

can you add graphs that chart the rate of change of the particular areas?

any specific areas you want?

also, (maybe you did this already? or case-shiller did?) apply filters that weed out 95, 90, and 75 percentile data?

What do you mean?

no preference for area, figure you could easily do it for all your existing classifications…

filter out the 5th/95th percentile data, 10th/90th, 25th/75th… as in, get rid of the data that is outside of the percent range in the distribution…

i don’t recall the exact method of doing so and i dont even recall the proper term. but essentially, lop off the top and bottom set of data that is less than the bottom 5% and greater than the top 95% of the data in the distribution. so for example:

dataset:
15
15
15
45
45
55
65
65
75
95

median = 50, 10% percentile = 17, 90% = 93. eliminate values that fall outside of the percentile range and then recalculate median and plot. for this dataset, median becomes 60…

i’m wondering if doing such would get rid of aberrant values (prices) and affect the median, showing a more accurate picture… or maybe doing such would really only be useful with calculating mean… or maybe it’s just a waste of time as the values dont change much…

[Author]

Posts