From: ScottW48@hotmail.com   
      
   On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:34:38 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:   
   > On 8/15/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:    
   > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 5:26:01 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:    
   >    
   >     
   >    
   > >>>>>> It's now under 3%, which is pretty normal.    
   > >>>>    
   > >>>>> Only 50% above target.....but that's normal for dem run    
   > >>>>> gov't.    
   > >>>> How to lie with statistics. Sure, 3 is 50% more than two, but    
   > >>>> it's also just one more.    
   > >>>    
   > >>>    
   > >>> Let's calculate how broke Stephen would be if there was only 1    
   > >>> more percent of inflation every year of his life.    
   > >>>    
   > >>> Every dollar he earns today would only be worth 36c compared to    
   > >>> what it would be without that additional 1% of inflation    
   > >>> (assuming he's 50 years young....which I doubt)    
   > >> Wages and fees go up too.    
   > >    
   > > Not enough.   
   > What's "enough"? It's not zero as in the calculation you just argued.    
      
   It's your premise....you asked for an extra 1% of inflation above current   
   target.   
   You offer no proof that that this "Stephen's Inflation" will be offset by any    
   additional rise in wages.   
   I'm just pointing out your complete ignorance of the long term impact of even   
   1%   
   inflation.   
   >    
   > Looking over my bank accounts, instead of the usual interest payments    
   > too small to notice, my Roth is yielding discernible amounts.   
      
   Stock markets been on a roll.   But if you were in treasuries you certainly   
   took    
   a big hit the last couple years as your bonds market values plunged.   
      
   Meanwhile....your luxury of a Roth savings account isn't enjoyed by the   
   millions    
   living paycheck to paycheck who don't have the luxury of ignoring the harsh   
   bite of inflation   
   on their budgets.     
   You just want people to suffer while your party rules to no benefit at all for   
   even you.   
      
   > > You're too stupid to realize why gov't might want to set a higher    
   > > target inflation and are inflating propaganda balloons for morons    
   > > like you. It's not because it's in your best interest or to protect    
   > > or improve your standard of living. It's to deflate gov't debt and    
   > > keep the money spickets flowing that dems need to retain power.   
   > You've shown your hand: your criticisms are strictly partisan    
   > anti-Democratic attacks.    
   >    
   > BTW, "money spickets" = investment = sustained growth    
   >    
   > If Republicans provided a similar improvement in the standard of living,    
      
   Look at real wages under Trump before covid.   
      
   If you ran a Bill Clinton policy of "the era of big gov't is over" I'd give it   
   full consideration.   
   But I'm not holding my breath.   
      
   ScottW   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)