Poll: Which party will get your vote in the General Election?

[britboy4321]

Do you believe that the official measures of inflation bear any relation to reality?

Anyone who pays bills or buys food knows real inflation is well over 3%.

Yes, I do believe the official measures of inflation bear some relation to reality (the pink pages certainly do and they know more than the both of us). I think most people do. Certainly, apart from yorself, everyone I've ever met thinks the official inflation figure bears some relation to reality.

I pay bills and buy food and I do not know that inflation is well over 3% - therefore your second sentence is simply wrong.

If you totally dismiss any kind of formal figures and basing your opinions on 'Finger-in-the-air' guesses .. you're quite liable to make mistakes and vote on perceptions rather than facts.

 

[britboy4321]

Of course it is different to CPI, as it takes different factors into account (RPIX, for example, is higher than both). I am not quite sure what your point(s) are.

I think I can help:

Dirty dog said

'inflation is lot higher than the officials say'

Someone said 'Yea, CPI is a much better thing to use - that'd give a better picture'

Someone else said 'But CPI is lower than the official figure'

The point being that Dirty Dog's statement was wrong even when you use alternative ways of calculating inflation. It appears his premise is in fact only right when you use his own 'gut-feel, just what he kind thinks in his head' economic system.

 

[dirtydog]

Yes, I do believe the official measures of inflation bear some relation to reality (the pink pages certainly do and they know more than the both of us). I think most people do. Certainly, apart from yorself, everyone I've ever met thinks the official inflation figure bears some relation to reality.

I pay bills and buy food and I do not know that inflation is well over 3% - therefore your second sentence is simply wrong.

If you totally dismiss any kind of formal figures and basing your opinions on 'Finger-in-the-air' guesses .. you're quite liable to make mistakes and vote on perceptions rather than facts.

You'll have to forgive me for not automatically trusting the 'experts' in the financial press, or for siding with 'most people' automatically, because most people are sheep and would jump off a cliff if everyone else was doing it.

(Indeed our civilisation is arguably doing that right now, collectively.)

 

[britboy4321]

You'll have to forgive me for not automatically trusting the 'experts' in the financial press, or for siding with 'most people' automatically, because most people are sheep and would jump off a cliff if everyone else was doing it.

(Indeed our civilisation is arguably doing that right now, collectively.)

Fair enough. I don't believe everything ..

Someone at work also doesn't often side with 'official information'. It's really annoying, if he reads a news article saying 'Local women fell through Ice and drowned' he always says something like 'Yea that's the official story. But she was a local councillor. What actually must have happened is she voted against labour so they had her done in - and the police are on Labour's side as are the papers'.

The trouble is -- it's impossible to argue against this ridiculousness, because his premise requires absolutely no proof whatsoever (maybe some anecdotal thing like 'because something similar happened 31 years ago in timbuktoo'). So he's actually really annoying to talk to and discuss things with you can never get anywhere! The more proof of the facts, the more he says 'Well even they must be in on it'!! :\

TBH it seems a little like that with the 'inflation is way higher than any official figures show' statement, or 'Labour always mess things up than the tories fix them all' comments that pop up ..

 

[Hatter The Mad]

You're insulting dirtydog by comparing your retarded colleague's lack of reasoning with dirtydog's due scepticism.

 

[britboy4321]

You're insulting dirtydog by comparing your retarded colleague's lack of reasoning with dirtydog's due scepticism.

I say scepticism of every single inflation figure mankind can dream up is unreasonable. Simple as that.

 

[dirtydog]

The idea of cooked stats is hardly a wacky conspiracy theory.

In the US the way the figures are calculated has changed a number of times. If they were still calculated the way they used to be, US inflation and unemployment would be a lot higher than it officially is, and GDP would be lower. Is it really a surprise that governments would seek to portray a better picture than the true one?

http://www.shadowstats.com/

 

[dirtydog]

I'll just add, our own government lied to the Commons and to the public about going to war in the middle east. We know they did this, yet you think they would stop short of lying about inflation? Why? They'd lie about anything to suit their agenda.

 

[britboy4321]

I'll just add, our own government lied to the Commons and to the public about going to war in the middle east. We know they did this, yet you think they would stop short of lying about inflation? Why? They'd lie about anything to suit their agenda.

I can't remember the government lying to the commons I think that is illegal. More likely they simply didn't mention information than they told incorrect information (lied) I think, but that is for a different thread (WMDs wasn't ever a lie of course, they repeated the information the security services told them - the worst they did is 'cherry pick' the really good bits (45 minute disopersal capability)!).

I don't think they'd have the capability to lie about inflation because the reasoning behind the figure is clear and obvious to all. They'd easily get caught out. How it is worked out is matter of public record. An undergraduate could double-check the figures quite quickly. The opposition would be all over them like a bad smell. They just couldn't get away with it.

The tories didn't even lie when it got to 15%. It'd be like them lying about the colour of the door of number 10. Someone would just point at it and say .. 'you're lying -- it's black'

!

 

[dirtydog]

I can't remember the government lying to the commons I think that is illegal. More likely they simply didn't mention information than they told incorrect information (lied) I think, but that is for a different thread (WMDs wasn't ever a lie of course, they repeated the information the security services told them - the worst they did is 'cherry pick' the really good bits (45 minute disopersal capability)!).

You don't think they lied? Okay then.

I don't think they'd have the capability to lie about inflation because the reasoning behind the figure is clear and obvious to all. They'd easily get caught out. How it is worked out is matter of public record. An undergraduate could double-check the figures quite quickly. The opposition would be all over them like a bad smell. They just couldn't get away with it.

How does the US government get away with it then?

Do you think the average Joe realises or has ANY REMOTE INTEREST in how the inflation figures are calculated? Of course he doesn't. It's the same in this country, most people don't know, don't care. Give them evidence it's a con, they'll be indifferent or won't believe it anyway. It is EASY for governments to dupe a gullible or disinterested population.

 

[britboy4321]

You don't think they lied? Okay then.


How does the US government get away with it then?

Do you think the average Joe realises or has ANY REMOTE INTEREST in how the inflation figures are calculated? Of course he doesn't. It's the same in this country, most people don't know, don't care. Give them evidence it's a con, they'll be indifferent or won't believe it anyway. It is EASY for governments to dupe a gullible or disinterested population.

Yes I don't think they lied. I don't know anyone who can give me any examples of what they supposedly lied about -- I created a thread on it .. no-one could tell me! They were selective in what they told us, but that isn't lying!!

The US government does not lie about inflation nor does the UK. To lie means 'Mr Prime Minister, the inflation rate using the system you told us to is 3%' 'Dear House of commons, the inflation rate is 2%'.

Of course they don't lie about it. They use a system that hopefully for them makes it look good compared to other formula to derive it -- but it isn't a secret the system they use, it's public knowledge. There is no lying involved at any point. That's all I'm saying. They only say 'Using THIS system, it's 3%'. Using a different system one could say it it '4%' but we're using THIS system'. That isn't lying.

 

[RDM]

TBH it seems a little like that with the 'inflation is way higher than any official figures show' statement,

For some people it is though. If you are on a low income then inflation is going to be higher than the CPI because you will not be spending your limited cash on cars, new furniture, household goods and all the other myriad of things that make up the CPI basket. You will primarily be spending it on food and fuel.

 

[Dolph]

Yes I don't think they lied. I don't know anyone who can give me any examples of what they supposedly lied about -- I created a thread on it .. no-one could tell me! They were selective in what they told us, but that isn't lying!!

The US government does not lie about inflation nor does the UK. To lie means 'Mr Prime Minister, the inflation rate using the system you told us to is 3%' 'Dear House of commons, the inflation rate is 2%'.

Of course they don't lie about it. They use a system that hopefully for them makes it look good compared to other formula to derive it -- but it isn't a secret the system they use, it's public knowledge. There is no lying involved at any point. That's all I'm saying. They only say 'Using THIS system, it's 3%'. Using a different system one could say it it '4%' but we're using THIS system'. That isn't lying.

Well, if they have never lied, we might as well stop the informative and eye-opening Iraq inquiry before it lets too many 'ommissions of truth' slip out...

 

[Efour]

Well, if they have never lied, we might as well stop the informative and eye-opening Iraq inquiry before it lets too many 'ommissions of truth' slip out...

lol spat my coffee out then

 

[britboy4321]

For some people it is though. If you are on a low income then inflation is going to be higher than the CPI because you will not be spending your limited cash on cars, new furniture, household goods and all the other myriad of things that make up the CPI basket. You will primarily be spending it on food and fuel.

True -- although you could argue richer people spend more money buying more stuff therefore the bottom line is rising prices affect them more ..

 

[Hatter The Mad]

True -- although you could argue richer people spend more money buying more stuff therefore the bottom line is rising prices affect them more ..

Why would you argue that (on what basis)?

 

[britboy4321]

Well, if they have never lied, we might as well stop the informative and eye-opening Iraq inquiry before it lets too many 'ommissions of truth' slip out...

Indeed we've had 5 enquiries now -- which cost YOU AND ME millions of pounds each.

The same faces pop up, say exactly the same thing, answer the same slightly reworded questions with the same answers, yet again -- and at the end some old bloke produces a 1200 page report which has no new information. Yet Again.

We should have had 1. Job done. But of course the tories forced 5 because it makes 'Joe Uneducated' think the government has got something to hide and isn't it terrible they really have to dig to the bottom of it all'.. without thinking ACTUALLY 'These conservatives are costing us a BOMB for their own political gain by forcing more and more rehashing of enquiries'.



Whats the betting when this one finishes, David Cameron will demand review number 6 to 'finally unveil the truth'? At the good ol' tax payer's expense of course yippee! And sadly people will actually vote for him because Iraq must have been .. er .. even worse to demand 6 reviews when will the government stop lying eh??!

This world is a slimy place ..

 

[Hatter The Mad]

which cost YOU AND ME millions of pounds each

No. The cost would barely broken a quid each, not millions. Even the bank bailouts didn't cost us millions each. Jesus, where do you get your figures from?

We should have had 1. Job done.

You're very naive, then. No wonder you're a Labour supporter - you accept everything they say, taking it as red.

 

[britboy4321]

Why would you argue that (on what basis)?

Simple maths ..

The loaf of bread mr ***** buys weekly has gone up 5%. It now costs £1.05

The big yummy cake I buy instead of bread each week has gone up 5%. It now costs £5.25

Therefore the 5% inflation has cost me 25p, him 5p. Mr ***** is stung less.

 

[RDM]

True -- although you could argue richer people spend more money buying more stuff therefore the bottom line is rising prices affect them more ..

You could, but you would have to be absolutely bonkers to do so. CPI is probably a reasonable measure for how the well off are impacted by inflation as they are more likely to be buying new cars and the like. The amount they spend on food and fuel would be quite low as a % of their outgoings. Compare that with a low income family and the recent hikes in food and fuel will give them a personal inflation rate of considerably more than CPI.