PDA

View Full Version : Do you think the cost of everyday items will hurt Obama in Nov?



genglandoh
04-15-2012, 12:55 PM
The official inflation rate is low because it is a mixture of many items including big ticket items like houses.
But most people do not buy big ticket items each month, they buy things like food, clothes, gas, electricity and these items are going up fast.

IMHO Women and the retired are the two voting groups that are affected the most.

Do you think with the increase of everyday items this will affect the support Obama has with these groups?

Mrleft8
04-15-2012, 01:36 PM
No.

Cuyahoga Chuck
04-15-2012, 01:42 PM
Your desire to see President Obama fall is written all over this thread as per usual.
Sorry, dude, but wishing won't get you a pony this year.
Obama rules and Willard fails. You may as well get use to it.

ljb5
04-15-2012, 01:46 PM
Here's a list of US Presidents who were in office during periods of inflation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

There's no particular reason to think the Obama will suffer for it more than any previous president.... and no reason to think inflation would be different now if we had John McCain or Mitt Romney in office.

ljb5
04-15-2012, 01:52 PM
To be honest, I think that anyone who blames the President for the price of everyday items is basically a wimp who is looking to the government to solve their problems for them.

The president doesn't set the price of goods in the free market. He doesn't tell you what to buy. It's not his job to manage your bank account.

Maybe he has some small influence over it... but the main factor in deciding how much money you have and how much you spend is you.

Stop whining and take responsibility for yourself.

SMARTINSEN
04-15-2012, 02:01 PM
The recent debate about birth control, and the Paul Ryan budget which seeks to end Medicare, will do far, far more to hurt Romney than rising prices do to Obama, in the two particular groups that you mention, women, and seniors.

Soundbounder
04-15-2012, 02:18 PM
Houses are not included in the CPI, housing is. If they were, inflation rates would have been much higher in the past 3 decades.

Instead:

The CPI calculates the monthly equivalent of owning a home (http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifact6.htm), which it derives from rents. This is very misleading, since rental prices are likely to drop when there is high vacancy, usually when

interest rates (http://useconomy.about.com/od/interestrateindicators/p/interest_rate.htm)
are low and housing prices are rising. Conversely, when home prices are dropping due to high interest rates, rents tend to increase. Therefore, the CPI gives a false low reading when home prices are high (and rents are low).

This is why it did not warn of
asset inflation (http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/asset_bubble.htm)
during the housing bubble of 2005.

(http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/asset_bubble.htm) http://useconomy.about.com/od/economicindicators/p/CPI.htm



Until 1983, the Consumer Price Index (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/consumer_price_index/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) included housing costs. But then the index was changed. No longer would home prices directly affect the index. Instead, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/b/bureau_of_labor_statistics/index.html?inline=nyt-org) makes a calculation of “owners’ equivalent rent,” which is based on the trend of costs to rent a home, not to buy one. The current approach, the B.L.S. says (http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpiqa.htm#Question_2), “measures the value of shelter to owner-occupants as the amount they forgo by not renting out their homes.”

The C.P.I. is not supposed to include investments, and owning a house has aspects of both investment and consumption.

Whatever the reasonableness of that approach, the practical effect of the change was to keep the housing bubble from affecting reported inflation rates in the years leading up to the peak in home prices. It is at least possible that the Federal Reserve would have acted differently had the change never been made.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/02/business/02charts.html

wardd
04-15-2012, 02:21 PM
the cost of birth control pills may hurt romney

Mrleft8
04-15-2012, 03:18 PM
I think Obama in his budget, is cutting medicare.they all are on the left and the right. To say one's not doing so ( or planning to,) is false..

In his budget? Or in the budget that the House of Representatives is sending to him?

genglandoh
04-15-2012, 03:31 PM
Houses are not included in the CPI, housing is. If they were, inflation rates would have been much higher in the past 3 decades.

Instead:

The CPI calculates the monthly equivalent of owning a home (http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifact6.htm), which it derives from rents. This is very misleading, since rental prices are likely to drop when there is high vacancy, usually when

interest rates (http://useconomy.about.com/od/interestrateindicators/p/interest_rate.htm)
are low and housing prices are rising. Conversely, when home prices are dropping due to high interest rates, rents tend to increase. Therefore, the CPI gives a false low reading when home prices are high (and rents are low).

This is why it did not warn of
asset inflation (http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/asset_bubble.htm)
during the housing bubble of 2005.

(http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/asset_bubble.htm) http://useconomy.about.com/od/economicindicators/p/CPI.htm



Until 1983, the Consumer Price Index (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/consumer_price_index/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) included housing costs. But then the index was changed. No longer would home prices directly affect the index. Instead, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/b/bureau_of_labor_statistics/index.html?inline=nyt-org) makes a calculation of “owners’ equivalent rent,” which is based on the trend of costs to rent a home, not to buy one. The current approach, the B.L.S. says (http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpiqa.htm#Question_2), “measures the value of shelter to owner-occupants as the amount they forgo by not renting out their homes.”

The C.P.I. is not supposed to include investments, and owning a house has aspects of both investment and consumption.

Whatever the reasonableness of that approach, the practical effect of the change was to keep the housing bubble from affecting reported inflation rates in the years leading up to the peak in home prices. It is at least possible that the Federal Reserve would have acted differently had the change never been made.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/02/business/02charts.html


Thanks for the correction.

genglandoh
04-15-2012, 03:36 PM
Here's a list of US Presidents who were in office during periods of inflation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

There's no particular reason to think the Obama will suffer for it more than any previous president.... and no reason to think inflation would be different now if we had John McCain or Mitt Romney in office.

The particular reason is because these everyday items are increasing in price faster then in other years.

I think Carter would disagree with you.

Mrleft8
04-15-2012, 03:43 PM
The particular reason is because these everyday items are increasing in price faster then in other years.

I think Carter would disagree with you.

She disagrees with me on almost everything just on principle anyway.... :D

LeeG
04-15-2012, 03:54 PM
but will the power outages in Ohio hurt him?

ljb5
04-15-2012, 04:51 PM
The particular reason is because these everyday items are increasing in price faster then in other years.

I'd like to verify your information on that one.

Soundbounder
04-15-2012, 05:14 PM
I'd like to verify your information on that one.Consumer Price Index






Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
HALF1
HALF2


2002
1.1
1.1
1.5
1.6
1.2
1.1
1.5
1.8
1.5
2.0
2.2
2.4
1.6
1.3
1.9


2003
2.6
3.0
3.0
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.0
1.8
1.9
2.3
2.5
2.0


2004
1.9
1.7
1.7
2.3
3.1
3.3
3.0
2.7
2.5
3.2
3.5
3.3
2.7
2.3
3.0


2005
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.5
2.8
2.5
3.2
3.6
4.7
4.3
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.0
3.8


2006
4.0
3.6
3.4
3.5
4.2
4.3
4.1
3.8
2.1
1.3
2.0
2.5
3.2
3.8
2.6


2007
2.1
2.4
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.7
2.4
2.0
2.8
3.5
4.3
4.1
2.8
2.5
3.1


2008
4.3
4.0
4.0
3.9
4.2
5.0
5.6
5.4
4.9
3.7
1.1
0.1
3.8
4.2
3.4


2009
0.0
0.2
-0.4
-0.7
-1.3
-1.4
-2.1
-1.5
-1.3
-0.2
1.8
2.7
-0.4
-0.6
-0.1


2010
2.6
2.1
2.3
2.2
2.0
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.5
1.6
2.1
1.2


2011
1.6
2.1
2.7
3.2
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.9
3.5
3.4
3.0
3.2
2.8
3.5


2012
2.9
2.9
2.7





http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=CU_cpibrief



The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measure of the average change in price over time in a fixed market basket of goods and services bought by consumers for day-to-day living. The All Items CPI for the U.S. is the broadest, most comprehensive index, and is often quoted as the source for the "rate of inflation". The CPI for All Items less Food and Energy (also sometimes referred to as the "core" or " underlying" CPI) excludes volatile food and energy prices. Some analysts use this index to track long-term trends in prices. This chart shows 12-month percent changes in both the CPI for All Items and the CPI for All Items Less Food and Energy for each month from 1991 to the most recently published month. These changes are calculated from indexes before seasonal adjustment. Unadjusted indexes are more commonly used for annual percent change calculations.

Soundbounder
04-15-2012, 05:47 PM
US Consumer Food Price Index 2000-2012

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fredgraph.png?g=6tA

wardd
04-15-2012, 07:27 PM
Letting the free market operate as it will??? You mean like Obamacare for example????? Are you delusional?

the insurance companies are all for obama care

wardd
04-15-2012, 07:42 PM
Of course they are. He wants to force people to buy their products. You Donkeys call this "letting the free market operate as it will?

free market is a misnomer and always has been

all markets are regulated by someone whether by the government or monopolies


which do you think would more likely be on your side?

John Smith
04-15-2012, 08:33 PM
I think Obama in his budget, is cutting medicare.they all are on the left and the right. To say one's not doing so ( or planning to,) is false..

Exactly when and how does he hope to cut Medicare?

So far, under Obamacare, premiums have gone down and benefits have gone up.

I've seen some abuse found. I've seen the 15% overpayment to the Advantage plans cease.

Where is this great Obama cut to Medicare?

John Smith
04-15-2012, 08:38 PM
Google the links Doug about medicare. For some reason, this machine is not cooperating and allowing me to copy any. There are enough links. Who is cutting, most seem to say obama while blaming the reps of course.Regardless.Oh wait, perhaps the supreme court if the case goes against him.:)

The thing that is most apt to hurt Obama will the the Super Pac ads against him and the misinformation they will spread.

It's interesting to listen to Romney's decription of what Obama has failed to do and what he, Romney, would do when a little research is showing Obama is actually doing those very things.

Romney promises to get rid of Planned Parenthood. Scott Walker repealed a woman's right to sue for equal pay. Obama wants to give women contraceptives with no out of pocket, Romney doesn't.

I think the question is: how much will Romney help Obama?

Mrleft8
04-16-2012, 09:24 AM
Where is this great Obama cut to Medicare?

In the meat dept...... Right next to the bacon.....

Mrleft8
04-16-2012, 10:20 AM
What?

ljb5
04-16-2012, 11:17 AM
The prices may have gone up on many items if one reads the amounts in a jar or box. Those may be the same size with far lesser amounts in them and no one really may notice the difference.

The consumer price index (CPI) takes this into account.

It is probably fairly foolish of you to assume that information known to you is unknown to others.

Mrleft8
04-16-2012, 11:29 AM
The consumer price index (CPI) takes this into account.

It is probably fairly foolish of you to assume that information known to you is unknown to others.

Consider the source.... ;)

John Smith
04-16-2012, 12:25 PM
The prices may have gone up on many items if one reads the amounts in a jar or box. Those may be the same size with far lesser amounts in them and no one really may notice the difference. A can of soup may not contain 14 oz now whereas, the same can used to hold 18oz before, but the prices are the same.If anything will hurt him, it will be gas prices which he really has no control over. That item is much more of an 'in your face" issue and people see, up front, the the fluctuations in prices.


Back during Reagan's years I made up a joke: Inflation is under control. We have no idea why prices keep going up.

genglandoh
04-16-2012, 12:33 PM
In ANY Presidential election, the opinion of voters depends on the narrative. Yes, the costs of some consumer goods, both perishables, as well as durables, has risen... others have actually fallen. The real question is whether an opponent can make hay out of this narrative, when the President can counter it with some other information. For example, could Romney's argument about incipient inflation be more powerful than Obama's argument about dramatic cuts to education and infrastructure, or Medicare and Medicaid, that Romney will advocate?

This is really debate fodder... and we'll be seeing a lot of it. There's a disconnect between the talking points and the back-up facts; when Romney attacks the President for the slow economic recovery, Obama will counter with talk of 25 months of continued economic improvement. When Romney attacks the President for health insurance mandates, Obama will counter that it was Romney's plan to begin with.

Quite honestly, I don't think that arguments about inflation are going to mean much, in the coming election.

I have a different point of view.
Candidates try to create a narrative (spin) about what is happening.
But people are not stupid if the subject is something they are involved with they will ignore the spin and vote based on what they are experiencing.
In this cause most people will agree that everyday items are going up and they are reminded of this fact every time they buy a tank of gas or food for the family.
So in this election if the price of everyday items stay high or increase even higher I think it will affect the re-election of Obama.
Obama only won the election in 2008 with 53% of the vote so if 4% of the voters in 2012 switch and vote for Romney Obama will lose the election.

I just do not know how big this affect will be.

Some supporting material for your review.

Inflation: Not as low as you think
Forget the modest 3.1 percent rise in the Consumer Price Index, the government's widely used measure of inflation. Everyday prices are up some 8 percent over the past year, according to the American Institute for Economic Research.
The not-for-profit research group measures inflation without looking at the big, one-time purchases that can skew the numbers. That means they don't look at the price of houses, furniture, appliances, cars, or computers. Instead, AIER focuses on Americans' typical daily purchases, such as food, gasoline, child care, prescription drugs, phone and television service, and other household products.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505144_162-57387655/inflation-not-as-low-as-you-think/

Will Price Inflation Of Meat, Corn, Food, And Farmland Continue?
Today's corn prices are triple the price they were three years ago. High corn demand and high gasoline and diesel prices are having a ripple effect throughout every component of the food and agriculture system. In 2011, we saw many grocery store food item prices rise by double digits and Midwestern farmland prices went up 25%, attributable to high corn and soybean returns for farmers.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/392901-will-price-inflation-of-meat-corn-food-and-farmland-continue

ljb5
04-16-2012, 12:37 PM
Doug, do you mean those 2 packages of girl scout cookies in the same sized box, as the original box, are cheaper than the four packages in the same sized box sold originally four or five years ago? 2 packages vs four, same price, less weight, fewer cookies.but, say what you want.This is what the shopper reads. call it inflation call it gas prices, call it the cost of production, call it anything you want

You don't need to 'call it anything you want.' It is part of inflation.

It gets measured and tracked just like other types of inflation.

It's not hidden or mysterious in any way.

John Smith
04-16-2012, 12:44 PM
And a can of coffee used to be 16oz, but now it's 10-11 ounces. This has been going on for a long time....and yes, the CPI Food Index takes this into account. hard to blame Obama for this.

Seems like tuna has less per can also. Looks the same, but I don't seem to get as many sandwiches out of it as I used to, unless I really load it up with celery and onion.

Andy Rooney did a piece on this, but decided not to complain as "60 minutes" was down to 43.

I get a kick out of the new Hershey bar with the air pockets: less chocolate to make the same size bar.

ljb5
04-16-2012, 12:51 PM
In this cause most people will agree that everyday items are going up and they are reminded of this fact every time they buy a tank of gas or food for the family.

True... but this happens all the time, regardless of who is in office.

If voters made their decisions based strictly on inflation, no incumbent would ever get re-elected because there is always inflation.

I really don't agree with your idea that housing (rent or mortgage) should be excluded from the calculation. A person might buy a house only once in ten years... but they pay for it each and every month.

Right now, mortgage rates are very, very low... and that's not an abstract idea. I see it every month when I pay my mortgage.... and it's not a small effect either.

Think about this for a second: I refinanced my house with a mortgage less than 4%. Back in 2007, mortgage rates were above 6%.

That 2.5% difference in mortgage rate saves me about as much money as all my other monthly expenses combined.

When my mortgage payment comes down $800 or $1000 per month, do you think I care that a loaf of bread has gone up $0.15?

If you're only counting the cost of bread, you're totally missing the picture.

Concordia 33
04-16-2012, 01:10 PM
The official inflation rate is low because it is a mixture of many items including big ticket items like houses.
But most people do not buy big ticket items each month, they buy things like food, clothes, gas, electricity and these items are going up fast.

IMHO Women and the retired are the two voting groups that are affected the most.

Do you think with the increase of everyday items this will affect the support Obama has with these groups?

yes

genglandoh
04-17-2012, 08:00 PM
True... but this happens all the time, regardless of who is in office.

If voters made their decisions based strictly on inflation, no incumbent would ever get re-elected because there is always inflation.

I really don't agree with your idea that housing (rent or mortgage) should be excluded from the calculation. A person might buy a house only once in ten years... but they pay for it each and every month.

Right now, mortgage rates are very, very low... and that's not an abstract idea. I see it every month when I pay my mortgage.... and it's not a small effect either.

Think about this for a second: I refinanced my house with a mortgage less than 4%. Back in 2007, mortgage rates were above 6%.

That 2.5% difference in mortgage rate saves me about as much money as all my other monthly expenses combined.

When my mortgage payment comes down $800 or $1000 per month, do you think I care that a loaf of bread has gone up $0.15?

If you're only counting the cost of bread, you're totally missing the picture.

I am glad you got a good deal on your mortgage.
Maybe you are in a position to not be effected by higher food or gas prices but most people are.

A retired person living on a fixed income would disagree with you.

ljb5
04-17-2012, 08:39 PM
I am glad you got a good deal on your mortgage.
Maybe you are in a position to not be effected by higher food or gas prices but most people are.

It's not that I'm oblivious to prices of other goods.... it's just that I don't think it is right of you to refuse to recognize certain parts of CPI because you prefer to focus only on the parts that have gone up.

Housing cost is a very real and very significant part of (nearly) everyone's monthly expenses. You can't ignore it just because it doesn't fit your argument.

genglandoh
04-20-2012, 09:31 AM
It's not that I'm oblivious to prices of other goods.... it's just that I don't think it is right of you to refuse to recognize certain parts of CPI because you prefer to focus only on the parts that have gone up.

Housing cost is a very real and very significant part of (nearly) everyone's monthly expenses. You can't ignore it just because it doesn't fit your argument.

True Housing Costs are a real part of everyones monthy expenses.
But for most people housing costs are level at best.

Thanks for posting a very special case but I am looking at the average person and if they will blame Obama for the real increase in everyday items.

ljb5
04-20-2012, 10:52 AM
True Housing Costs are a real part of everyones monthy expenses.
But for most people housing costs are level at best.

Back in post #1, you said inflation was low because of housing, despite the fact that prices on day-to-day goods are rising rapidly.

If you think housing is 'level at best,' go ahead and include it in your CPI. It is, after all, a real monthly expense.

It has become clear that you really don't care what CPI is or how it is measured. You also don't care if inflation is high or low compared to historical norms.

You've positioned yourself to argue either for or against inclusion of housing costs (and any other cost, I'm sure) as long as it supports the conclusion that you've already formed: Blame Obama!

To answer your question: yes, of course, some people will blame Obama for inflation... but these are the same people who would blame him for anything.

Some people just aren't equipped to thrive in the real world. They are constantly looking for other people to blame for their own failures or for the normal burdens of everyday existence.

Republicans cater to these people who believe that the evil government must be to blame for every hangnail and zit they ever had.

So you want to blame Obama? Fine. Go ahead and blame him. But don't try to pretend that your blame is supported by any real numbers. If you need to manipulate the CPI measurements to support your position, you're really just fooling yourself.

John Smith
04-20-2012, 11:57 AM
True Housing Costs are a real part of everyones monthy expenses.
But for most people housing costs are level at best.

Thanks for posting a very special case but I am looking at the average person and if they will blame Obama for the real increase in everyday items.

Some will. To them, there was no inflation before he took office.

I think we often suffer or benefit from tings put in place by previous administrations, but whomever is in office at the moment is apt to get the credit or the blame.