Seeking Alpha
About this author:

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Soaring gasoline prices helped drive up overall U.S. consumer prices during May by the fastest rate in six months, but core prices remained tame, a government report today showed. But 12-month core prices advanced 2.3% as expected (see chart above).

 

Note that core CPI inflation (less food and energy, data here) has been below 3% now for 149 consecutive months, since January of 1996 (shaded area above). Also notice that there is a huge difference between the inflationary 1970s and today - in the inflationary 1970s (fueled by excessive money creation) ALL prices were rising simultaneously at double-digits rates, EVEN the non-energy and non-food items of the CPI. Today, except for energy and food prices, core inflation is contained, low and stable, as is growth in the monetary base, suggesting that the concern about inflation is well... inflated.

Also, compared to a recent peak close to 3% during 2006, the core inflation rate is lower today, and has been generally declining since late 2007.

Rising energy prices alone cannot cause inflationary increases in all goods and services, as the situation today suggests, with core inflation remaining low and stable despite rising energy prices. Keep in mind also that during the double-digit inflation in the U.S. during the 1970s, fueled by expansionary monetary policy, the German central bank demonstrated much greater monetary restraint, and inflation in Germany never exceeded 8% in any year during the 1970s and averaged only 5% during that decade (despite experiencing the same increase in world oil prices as the U.S.).

Print this article with comments

This article has 33 comments:

  •  
    One difference between now & the 1970's, the govt. has changed the calculation of inflation so that it is now significantly understated. So a comparison is like apples & oranges.
    2008 Jun 13 05:51 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Ah, but we have yet to experience President Obama.
    2008 Jun 13 06:01 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Get real Mark Perry. The focus on core CPI is flawed, plus inflation calculations have been changed since 1983 to understate real inflation. Read Kevin Williams' book, Bad Money. Even the bond king, PIMCO's Bill Gross, is questioning the inflation numbers. See his June 2008 investment outlook at www.pimco.com/LeftNav/...
    2008 Jun 13 06:40 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Yes, a simple comparison between the way CPI was calculated in the 1970s-80s and now is quite instructive. An ongoing survey I have been making over the past few years, based on products I buy all the time, indicates a real inflation rate of at least 10% and perhaps as much as 12%. Anyone who declares that the core inflation rate since 2007 has been declining isn't working with a full set of tools.
    2008 Jun 13 06:41 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Mark may be on to something. In the 70s, everything inflated (with the exception of equities) including wages. Today there is deflation in real estate and electronics and disinflation in equities.
    2008 Jun 13 06:45 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Jake--you can't have wage inflation if the CPI is jiggered not to recognize price inflation.

    1. The dollar has fallen against all major currencies.
    2. The price of oil and its products has at least doubled in the past year.
    3. The price of food has nearly doubled in the past two years.

    All three phenomena are another way of saying "the US dollar is suffering from inflation".
    2008 Jun 13 06:56 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    As for wages, I'm not aware of any upwards wage pressure. In fact, if anything, wages seem to be disinflating a bit. The evidence on my part is anecdotal based on friends and acquaintances, but that's how it seems...
    2008 Jun 13 08:43 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    PS- As an aside, with unions less prevalent than they were in the 70s, these big collective wage agreements that used to happen which would result in wages ramping up 10% a year or the like are certainly nowhere in sight.
    2008 Jun 13 08:45 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Yes, today is a bit different from the '70, but far less so than you claim. Here's a chart that shows the "official" CPI with the CPI if we were still using the same methodology in use during the stagflation era:

    dshort.com/inflation/i...

    We don't yet have wage inflation, which creates an inflationary spiral. But the level of consumer suffering is indeed approaching the '70s.
    2008 Jun 13 10:18 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    is the lack of wage inflation (which i agree with) to be viewed as a positive in the face of dramatically higher costs of food, clothing and shelter? i don't think so.

    yes, i said shelter...

    one of the great ironies of declining housing prices is that only new buyers benefit but there are far fewer of them today than in the recent past when teaser interest rates and no money down mortgages drew millions into the market. many are now permanent exiles from the market, either having or will having lost their homes to foreclosure or becoming walkaways because the economics now work against them. notwithstanding recent declines, houses are still too expensive for many entering the workforce....partly because of anemic wage growth and loss of many higher-paying jobs to outsourcing but also due to more stringent lending standards which have eliminated many would be homeowners from the market. the bottom line is that declining home prices have helped the few but hurt the many. look for more downside. housing prices are still too high.

    given the choice between rising nonwage inflation only or rising wage and nonwage inflation i'll take the latter. it might not be what the fed would like to see, but since when did the fed ever give a damn about the man on the street?

    a personal note:

    i sold my overpriced house in july 2007. i subsenquently rented an apartment on a 7 month lease but i moved when they tried to increase my rent by about 7 percent when the lease expired. the lease on my new apartment expires in august and i was just informed that my new rent will cost me 15% more. i have lived there a year. i'll move, of course, as much to deny them the privelege of screwing me as any rent i might save. don't count on experiences like mine to be reflected in the consumer price index. the feds like their numbers massaged.
    2008 Jun 13 10:38 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    icandoitdon, I'm not surprised rents are rising; you're competing for apartments with a bunch of foreclosed ex-owned homers! Still, one wonders why you didn't negotiate a 5-year lease with 4% annual increases - a level I'd consider very reasonable given how closely it approximates the 5-year Treasury note yield.

    Nevertheless, your point is well-taken; "owner's equivalent rent" occupies an absurdly large portion of the CPI relative to either real rents or the actual price of a house. No one seriously doubts that it understates price increases except perhaps our author; the only real controversy is one of degree. If real prices are rising by 5% a year, we're probably ok (the long bond is rapidly approaching that level). If they're rising by 12% a year, we're in big trouble because the bond and oil vigilantes simply don't have enough market power to force the issue that far.
    2008 Jun 13 11:22 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    If you are purchaser of electronics, or a washer & dryer, well then I probably agree...there's no inflation

    I.E. the Core CPI.

    However...if you're like me: If you regularly buy fuel, use transportation, need hospital services, eat food at home, pay tuition, require medical care, eat out, drink booze, and pay rent...

    DONT TELL ME THAT THERE IS NO INFLATION!
    2008 Jun 14 12:53 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Dr Joke Perry, this is not April fools day as it is now June and the US department of lies has you hook line and sinker with their gov generated figures.

    It might be time to go back to school or at least down to the end of the street.

    Get real, you are being suckered.
    2008 Jun 14 05:55 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    To the comment -Ah, but we have yet to experience President Obama

    Give me a break, G Bush and a unfiied republician congress during his first term expanded spending more than any administration in history, perhaps more than all combined. Give your comment on that, remember the quote from Bush "I want the prescription bill on my desk now". One thing mr pres- you didn't fund the bill- you passed the cost to our kids. You talk about Obama. I would rather have 'tax and spend' than "tax cut and spend". The latter passes the cost of social programs to our kids. It is the republican way
    2008 Jun 14 08:43 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    First 6 years, fjd, not just the first term. That Medicare D the Rs broke arms to push through is costing our grandchildren a fortune, giving the health insurers a windfall, not benefiting most seniors very much, and confusing everybody. It's got to be made part of regular Medicare in February.

    This has been a credit card administration.
    2008 Jun 14 09:36 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Dr. Perry presents a thoughtful and reasoned concept, based upon the same flawed reasoning as the present process for determining the CPI. Born in the depression and living through a number of economic cycles it is clear those my age can see and understand inflation and the fact the CPI is greater then that which the leadership of our country wish us to believe. The economy has been poorly managed by those who are driven by greed. The common man knows it is time to put in place new and realistic leadership with an honest economic plan.
    2008 Jun 14 10:15 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Perry--Ive known that there is little or no inflation but you explain it well. Many believe what they want.

    Gold crashing as well as real estate. We are deflating as Japan did during the 1990s and we did in the 1930s. When debt is removed (what is happening now) its called deflation.

    Most of these people dont beleive the government and are looking for a man on horseback (a Hitler).

    Jakester is right. The rest of these people must be given an F. I'm sure none of them are in your classes.
    2008 Jun 14 10:48 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    By the "rule of 72" at any inflation rate above 7.2% prices double in 10 years. At 5% prices double in 14 years. At 2% it takes 35 years for prices to double.

    On the other hand, high inflation made it easier to pay off fixed rate mortgages. A 6% fixed mortgage looks cheap when salaries are rising to keep up with inflation.

    An ordinary insured S&L account payed 5%, certificates of deposit (CDs) payed more and money market mutual funds payed much more.





    2008 Jun 14 11:02 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    fjd10595, "more than all combined" - that would be FDR. I didn't particularly agree with Bush's prescription bill. Still, everyone and his uncle seemed to be calling for it at the time (AARP had bags made up that said "Rx in Medicare NOW"), and I have no doubt that there would be some kind of prescription benefit in Medicare by now anyway. And at least Republicans react negatively when their leadership spends too much. Democrats make big spenders their heros, and I would reference FDR on that.
    2008 Jun 14 11:33 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Last week's economic reports were so poor(despite the temporary boost in retail sales due to the tax rebate) that the only good thing I posted was a chart showing how the difference in the 6-month vs 18- month annualized rate in the CPI should start approaching negative territory. This should give the Fed some breathing room.

    2008 Jun 14 11:41 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    No other country in the world is reporting inflation as low as the US.

    Who is cooking the numbers, us or them?
    2008 Jun 14 11:50 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    There are two meanings to the word "inflation". One meaning is the growth of the money supply, the other meaning is the growth of consumer prices (CPI). Consumer prices have indeed risen very slowly during the past 25 years. This is perfectly illustrated in the cost of a first class stamp which in the fall of 1984 was 24 cents while today it is 42 cents. This price change translates to an average yearly price change of 2.4%. Unfortunately, that low figure is misleading.

    The majority of all consumer goods sold today in the US is manufactured abroad, not in the US. The low cost of consumer prices reflects therefore the high productivity of foreign economies, not the productivity of the US economy. Secondly, these foreign made consumer goods have not yet been properly paid for (persistent trade deficits). We pay for these consumer goods not with our own goods and services but with financial assets (like US Treasuries). However, financial assets represent claims on future production of US goods. That is, consumer goods in the US are being paid for with promises of future US production of goods. The deception is in the fact that this future US production will never materialize, at least not at today's low prices (indicated by the looming bankruptcy of Ford and GM). In order to arrive at a correct figure of the consumer price index, one has therefore to take into account the growth of the total amount of US financial assets held by foreign creditors. This sum (many trillions of Dollars) represents the unpaid cost of imported consumer goods.

    Looking at the second meaning of the word inflation, namely the growth of the money supply, then we experienced during the past 25 years an almost hyperinflationary growth of the money supply. That growth is visible in stock market charts, in the cost or real estate in New York City and in the level of yearly bonuses paid to people working on Wall Street.

    To sum up, the past 25 years were indeed a paradise for consumers and people working on Wall Street. The price for these excesses has not been paid yet. But we can not avoid it in form of either a global depression or hyperinflation depending on how the central banks decide to rebalance the system.

    There are no free lunches. This wisdom hold true not only in daily life, but also in macro economics as well as in financial engineering.
    2008 Jun 14 12:06 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Perhaps you should look at this from a utilitarian viewpoint so you can get a handle on reality.

    You are taking food and energy out of core inflation to give the impression that things aren't is bad as they seem. This is a futile exercise. You need to complete the opposite analysis and state the inflation rate of food and energy, the two most important commodity classes. Frankly, your comparison to the 1970's is useless since we weren't competing for these commodities with BRIC at that time.

    People need a place to live and to eat; they need to buy gas, and they need to buy food, soap, healthcare, and medicine. They also need to purchase electricity, heat, and water. Almost all other purchases are optional. They can put off purchases of new clothes, furniture, electronics, new cars, and anything else they "don't really NEED".

    The reason inflation is so low in the non-commodity sectors at this time is due to heavy discounting as retailers try to convert their inventory to cash as quickly as possible. There are record number of restaurants, retail stores, and other business closing their doors. Discretionary purchasing power continues to shrink. Tne total net worth of Americans and American corporations is taking a big hit.
    This is payback for government and corporate mismanagement and American's appetite for quick profits, conspicuous consumption, greed, and lack of patience.

    There is no need for you to make assumptions and analyses that have nothing to do with reality. The real problems are right in front of your eyes.



    2008 Jun 14 12:35 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Thanks to 70's Stagflation Survivor for the link. Shadow Statistics does a great job on M3 and inflation calculations.

    What they need to do next is to calculate 70's and 80's inflation using the current "new and improved" index". We could prove that inflation was really only 2.5% back then and that stagflation never occurred!!
    2008 Jun 14 01:25 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    To me the real question is will paying for the war on the credit card and running of the dollar printing presses take us down the same route of Nixon in 1972/1973. It is truely sad that the political and business leadership of this country are gaming the system instead of making it work better for all Americans.
    2008 Jun 14 02:02 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Mark: Try calculating the CPI based on the pre-Clinton index. Also try your luck at the gas station and supermarket offering to pay based on the "core" rate. The reasons wages are not increasing is fraudulent CPI calculations and global wage arbitrage which are serving their intended purpose of eliminating the American middle class.
    2008 Jun 14 02:57 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Let me guess, you too got your advanced degree from Yale - just like our fearless leader - the decider.

    OK so maybe you're right, the real value of a blue chip higher education has deflated.
    2008 Jun 14 03:16 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    The Fed and Goverment has their spin meister working everywhere
    2008 Jun 14 05:02 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    in the seventies, i was in my twenties and the future looked bleak because of high inflation. i wondered why no one was lifting a finger to help me. pretty soon, i got tired of waiting for help and i started pulling my own weight. as a result, i got stronger each day. today, i am in my fifties and the future looks bleak because of rampant socialism.

    people, we have to ask you to step away from the table. the public treasury is not bottomless. we cannot increase the amount paid out, just because people are poor. a certain amount of poverty acts as an incentive to the general population. we cannot send paychecks out to stimulate the economy, just because we like business to grow a little longer.

    sometimes, business will not grow. ever hear of farmers letting their fields go fallow? you have to let them replenish themselves.

    whenever you vote for more public spending you are robbing peter to pay paul. even if you are not using a gun, it's still a crime.

    the question of whether government has spent money irresponsibly and dragged us into an unnecessary war is not a question i want answered with more irresponsible spending. the argument i hear is that we have billions to spend on military bombs, planes and tanks, but we have people starving right here. actually, we don't have billions to spend on war, some idiot borrowed the money and now we have to pay it back, not spend more.

    we have been very fortunate, living off of cheap labor from foreigners for many years. now, they are raising the cost of living. some of you think that we should spend until we can no longer borrow and then go bankrupt. it worked for you on your credit cards, it worked on your mortgages, so it should work for the whole country, right?

    you may think everyone else is to blame and the world owes you for all the suffering you've done. you weren't born rich, you didn't hit the lottery, no one died and left you money, oprah didn't give you anything, you didn't own a house when they appreciated, you didn't own gold when it appreciated, you didn't own tech stocks when they appreciated either. that's tough! tough luck, maybe god does not want you to have wealth.

    maybe god wants you to live as a poor person, to suffer and to experience the depth of his compassion. maybe god wants you to get a job and give all your money away. god does not want you to take money away from other people to do his work. he can do that himself. just take care of yourself and your family. try to make your little corner of the world a better place in which to live. don't throw trash out your window. don't waste our precious resources, even if you can afford to do so. ask your neighbors if they need anything when you are going to the store. be of good cheer.

    2008 Jun 14 08:42 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    I'd expect a better analysis from someone which a PHD. and I'd expect them to recalibrate the current CPI to 30 years ago.

    And maybe even an explanation of how the world's inflation has been running at 5-7% for past several years and the USD has been devaluing and the US's inflation is still 2-3% under the world's inflation level. Now that's real magic!!!!
    2008 Jun 15 12:26 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Alex, I'm very happy that you didn't "particularly agree" with Bush's prescription program, since that, and all of the other bush spending will break the backs of our kids. Don't know when exactly, whether it will be a slow train wreck or a quicker adjustment, but a ponzi scheme only goes on for so long. As I said, republicans "tax cut and spend", and democrats "tax and spend". Take your pick. I've come to believe that the democrat tax and spend scenerio is better, if I have to pick one, since I will feel the pain now for the largess, as opposed to destroying future generations. Anyone here give their bills to their kids? You know, the republican way.
    2008 Jun 15 08:55 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    President Obama, you mean Jimmy Carter's 2nd term?
    2008 Jun 15 05:59 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Inflation? What inflation? Certain things are cheaper relatively speaking like electronics and clothing. A recent trip to Kohl's had many household items buy one get one free. I recently bought designer jeans for the same price as a roasting chicken. Only a slight exaggeration. Now if I could just eat the jeans... or run my car on the buy one get one free dish towels...
    2008 Jun 16 11:38 PM | Link | Reply