Seniors Are Suffering Under Obama

[Kathianne]

Not that it won't get even worse with the raiding of Medicare:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2012-08-29/seniors-obama-republicans-media/57410976/1


...The ingredients of the crisis are already here. Interest rates on bonds, CDs and money market accounts — staples of the retirement crowd's portfolio — are at historic lows. (I'm always shocked to see what banks are touting. Really? 0.35% — that is, 35/100 of a percent — on a money market? 0.90% on a CD? Yep.) Stocks are nothing to write home about, still well below their highs of five years ago. As for those real estate investments? Forget about it.


The squeeze is real. Some years ago, when earning say 5% on your money was realistic, a $360,000 portfolio of CDs would produce $18,000 a year in interest — that's $1500 a month. Couple that with an unexceptional Social Security (http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/13/%7E/average-monthly-social-security-benefit-for-a-retired-worker) payment of about the same amount, and that's $36,000 a year, $3,000 a month. Nothing fancy, but enough to get by.


Now change that 5% to 0.9% and you're earning $3,240 per year, or about $270 a month. Add that to $1,500 a month in Social Security (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Legislation+and+Acts/U.S.+Government/Social+Security) and you've got $1,770 a month to live on; just $21,240 a year. That's a brutal 41% cut in income. And it is why many senior citizens (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703410604576216830941163492.html) around the country are being forced to draw down savings to make ends meet...

...

There's little hope the policy will change because the Federal Reserve says to expect this to last.


That's not all. For senior citizens, it's a double squeeze. While incomes for retirees are going down, costs are going up. Gasoline is now roughly double what it was when President Obama (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/People/Politicians,+Government+Officials,+Strategists/Executive/Barack+Obama) took office and, in many places, it's back up in the neighborhood of $4 a gallon.


According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Government+Bodies/Bureau+of+Labor+Statistics), ground beef recently hit a national average of more than $3 a pound, the first time in history it's reached that level. (When Obama was inaugurated, it was $2.35). Anyone who has spent time in a grocery store knows that this sort of thing is happening on every aisle — coupled with "shrinkage," as manufacturers reduce the amount of product in a box while keeping the price the same, a way of hiding price increases from (they hope) inattentive consumers. And it's going to get worse, according to the Department of Agriculture (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Government+Bodies/United+States+Department+of+Agriculture), when this summer's drought hits food prices in a few months.


In fact, with this double squeeze, we have the makings of a major national crisis. There's only one thing missing: the kind of news media attention you'd usually get with this many senior citizens suffering in an election year...

[fj1200]

To be fair, POTUS has little effect on interest rates and inflation.

[Kathianne]

To be fair, POTUS has little effect on interest rates and inflation.

Only to a point.

When businesses are not being created, when existing businesses are not expanding and hiring, unemployment rises. When unemployment reaches a certain level, foreclosures and delinquencies rise. Tax collections fall. Government continues to spend more than received. Interests rates fall in response. After years of near zero interest rates, there's no end in sight.

Couple the above with drought, continuing problems in the Middle East, we have today's rapidly rising inflation.

[fj1200]

^The standard theory is that interest rates don't fall in response to increased spending. Besides, low interest rates precede BO. We always have Mid East issues and the drought? No.

Yes, they are suffering under Obama but there's no need to stretch it into all of it being his fault.

[fj1200]

Only to a point.

The better argument IMO is that BO's policies are detrimental to economic growth, growth that would increase the demand for money, the increase in the demand for money that would be accompanied by higher interest rates, higher interest rates that would benefit seniors with money to invest.

In addition to higher demand for money by business would be dollars that would move out of commodities and into the money markets essentially lowering the demand/price of commodities which would tame the inflationary pressures of oil, etc.

[Kathianne]

^The standard theory is that interest rates don't fall in response to increased spending. Besides, low interest rates precede BO. We always have Mid East issues and the drought? No.

Yes, they are suffering under Obama but there's no need to stretch it into all of it being his fault.

Loss of confidence, uncertainty of an executive who holds business owners and leaders in contempt are at the root of 'blame Obama.' He's had nearly 4 years to correct and has failed to do so. The costs of Obama Care are now being felt, while the benefits are marginal at best. Then there is the cronyism and corruption, coupled with the MSM failure to investigate, leading to further concerns for the future. Why invest? Without investment there is no growth. Without growth there is no recovery and millions of us know that. His term, his blame.

[fj1200]

Without growth there is no recovery and millions of us know that. His term, his blame.

Then it appears you accept my theory but the folly in "his term, his blame," is that it ignores the true effects IMO but you can't just blame him for droughts and Fed actions.

[Kathianne]

Then it appears you accept my theory but the folly in "his term, his blame," is that it ignores the true effects IMO but you can't just blame him for droughts and Fed actions.

Ah, but I've never blamed just one person. It's the administration, choices made by executives before him, and near monopoly on legislature by spenders-most of whom are irresponsible, not all are Democrats.

As for the effects of mother nature and Middle East, the effects of both are maximized in their impact due to the economic disaster of this administration.

[fj1200]

Ah, but I've never blamed just one person.


His term, his blame.

:eek:

[Kathianne]

:eek:

I understand what you're trying to get to, but after more than 3 years, he does own it. If you took over a position from one that failed, I doubt you'd have as long to keep going, worse than your predecessor.

[fj1200]

^I agree that he and his policies have failed but I don't want pointless blame heaped on Romney starting next January just because he gets to fly around in Air Force 1.

[aboutime]

Then it appears you accept my theory but the folly in "his term, his blame," is that it ignores the true effects IMO but you can't just blame him for droughts and Fed actions.


From before the day Obama was sworn in. He blamed Bush, or anyone else he could target. Now. The tables are turned, and according to Liberal thinking, fair-play, and tolerance. It is now Obama's turn to be blamed for the flooding in La, Mississippi, and Alabama. And, in keeping with the BLAME GAME during the Bush years. YES. Obama IS responsible for the droughts, storms, tornado's, bombings, shootings, and even GABBY GIFFORDS near death experience.
All's FAIR in Democrat Blame Games.
Remember how Bush was blamed for everything. How's it feel for Obama when the SHOE is on HIS FOOT?

[Kathianne]

^I agree that he and his policies have failed but I don't want pointless blame heaped on Romney starting next January just because he gets to fly around in Air Force 1.

Hey, if he can blame Bush for 3 years, by the 4th he owns it. Time for him to go.

Wanna lay dollars to donuts that if the economy rockets off after Mitt wins, Obama will be saying, "I built that recovery?"

[fj1200]

From before the day Obama was sworn in. He blamed Bush...

And that has WHAT to do with the subject at hand?


Hey, if he can blame Bush for 3 years, by the 4th he owns it. Time for him to go.

Wanna lay dollars to donuts that if the economy rockets off after Mitt wins, Obama will be saying, "I built that recovery?"

Something I haven't disagreed with.

[red states rule]

Thanks to Al Gore's Amazing internet we can watch candidate Obama talk about the Bush deficit and compare that deficit to Obama's record deficits



http://youtu.be/zUPZJDBJI84


ANY QUESTIONS?

[fj1200]

ANY QUESTIONS?

Yes. Relevance?

[red states rule]

Yes. Relevance?

If you cannot see the hypocrisy of Obama talking about Bush's tiny deficits compared to his own record deficits - well you really are beyond help or you are attemping a lame defense of Obama

[fj1200]

If...

So... no relevance to the thread then.

[red states rule]

So... no relevance to the thread then.

It is relevant as the more money Obama spends the less money there is in the public sector. The less money in the public sector means less economic growth. Less economic growth means seniors have to endure the Obama economy like the rest of us. However since seniors are on a fixed income the suffer more. Which is the topic of the thread

Again, Economics 101 seems not to be one your strong points

[fj1200]

It is relevant as the more money Obama spends the less money there is in the public sector. The less money in the public sector means less economic growth. Less economic growth means seniors have to endure the Obama economy like the rest of us. However since seniors are on a fixed income the suffer more. Which is the topic of the thread

Again, Economics 101 seems not to be one your strong points

:laugh: Considering you just parroted my earlier post, would you like to restate that?


The better argument IMO is that BO's policies are detrimental to economic growth, growth that would increase the demand for money, the increase in the demand for money that would be accompanied by higher interest rates, higher interest rates that would benefit seniors with money to invest.

In addition to higher demand for money by business would be dollars that would move out of commodities and into the money markets essentially lowering the demand/price of commodities which would tame the inflationary pressures of oil, etc.

Of course, deficit spending is not really a major issue relating to economic growth IMO.

[red states rule]

:laugh: Considering you just parroted my earlier post, would you like to restate that?



Of course, deficit spending is not really a major issue relating to economic growth IMO.

I hardly "parroted" your psot FJ. as we do not have high interest rates.

I can restate that you do have a very inflated opinion of your knowledge of economics and for some reason like to talk down to mmany people here

[fj1200]

I hardly "parroted" your psot FJ. as we do not have high interest rates.

I can restate that you do have a very inflated opinion of your knowledge of economics and for some reason like to talk down to mmany people here

You're right, I overstated your analysis; my apologies. I didn't say we had high interest rates, economic growth is what drives interest rates... or should be.

[aboutime]

It is relevant as the more money Obama spends the less money there is in the public sector. The less money in the public sector means less economic growth. Less economic growth means seniors have to endure the Obama economy like the rest of us. However since seniors are on a fixed income the suffer more. Which is the topic of the thread

Again, Economics 101 seems not to be one your strong points


red states rule. Of course it is more relevant. As one of those Seniors, at 65. We see the effects of Obama, and his terrible economic, failed principles working on all of us now. Being on a definitive, never changing fixed income. Now being chewed up with more of those Obamacare kinds of demands....most other people never hear about like..Increased costs of Medicare each month. Taken from our Retirement funds from Social Security.
Yes. I do receive my military pension...based on my retirement year of 1995, and not on today's yearly, military retirement rates. Plus the unknown, unseen, denied expenses of secondary Medical coverage...OUT OF POCKET, which the Govt. welched on before I retired. Keeping my side of the bargain CONTRACT with the U.S. Govt. And they broke their promises I aimed for over 30 years.
It will get worse as time is permitted to slip by...as Obama, and the Dems insist that 716 BILLION Obama took from Medicare to pay for Obamacare...approaches.

[red states rule]

red states rule. Of course it is more relevant. As one of those Seniors, at 65. We see the effects of Obama, and his terrible economic, failed principles working on all of us now. Being on a definitive, never changing fixed income. Now being chewed up with more of those Obamacare kinds of demands....most other people never hear about like..Increased costs of Medicare each month. Taken from our Retirement funds from Social Security.
Yes. I do receive my military pension...based on my retirement year of 1995, and not on today's yearly, military retirement rates. Plus the unknown, unseen, denied expenses of secondary Medical coverage...OUT OF POCKET, which the Govt. welched on before I retired. Keeping my side of the bargain CONTRACT with the U.S. Govt. And they broke their promises I aimed for over 30 years.
It will get worse as time is permitted to slip by...as Obama, and the Dems insist that 716 BILLION Obama took from Medicare to pay for Obamacare...approaches.

Thank you. Some people never learned (or slept through) Economics 101 and yet try to show their "knowledge" of the subject


http://www.larrysfunnybone.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-10-05-humor-cartoon-2.jpg

[aboutime]

Thank you. Some people never learned (or slept through) Economics 101 and yet try to show their "knowledge" of the subject


http://www.larrysfunnybone.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-10-05-humor-cartoon-2.jpg

Thanks again. But I did learn, long ago. The truth cannot, and will not be changed to appease anyone.
If our Washington DC govt. was forced to run this nation like My wife and I run our budget...being unable to spend something we do not have for stuff we don't need, to impress people we don't know...or like. None of us would be in debt.
We learned many years ago when we had more than 12 credit cards. It would eventually catch up with us.
And that is exactly what the ECONOMY is doing to all of us today.
Difference is. My wife and I no longer have BORROWED debt like the 16 TRILLION we heard about today in the Obama NON-BUDGET.
Anyone who is foolish enough to think, or believe they can keep on spending money they borrowed, or money they don't have. WILL END UP BROKE. And even if we have 1 BILLION OBAMA'S in the White House. Those Obama Bucks are WORTHLESS.

[fj1200]

Thank you. Some people never learned (or slept through) Economics 101 and yet try to show their "knowledge" of the subject


http://www.larrysfunnybone.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-10-05-humor-cartoon-2.jpg

Thank you for backing up your losing argument with a cartoon. Good on 'ya.

[fj1200]

red states rule. Of course it is more relevant.

Times are tough, BO is an idiot, no argument here. Now related it to the OP.

[red states rule]

Thank you for backing up your losing argument with a cartoon. Good on 'ya.

Oh dear. After showing you over and over the relevance you leave me no choice but to quote the Bible FJ

Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge.

[fj1200]

Oh dear. After showing you over and over the relevance you leave me no choice but to quote the Bible FJ

You haven't showed jack here other than being a mindless drone. But I see you have fallen in with the ways of some around here; when backed into a corner, fall back on insults and calling everyone who disagrees a lib.

[aboutime]

Thank you for backing up your losing argument with a cartoon. Good on 'ya.


So fj1200. you are now agreeing that you failed Economics? Choose a number. Trying to distract, as you just did. Merely proves the cartoon applies perfectly to Obama...and even You.

By the way. If you are insulted, or offended by us calling you a lib. It once again proves how...THE TRUTH ALWAYS HURTS.

[fj1200]

So fj1200.

Your reading comprehension, as per usual, sucks. And you may call me a lib all you like, it only speaks to your ignorance. Or you can point out all the liberal positions I have taken on this board. Your choice.

[Kathianne]

The continuing dismal economy has kept interest rates close to zero. Seniors rely on interest from investments.

Cost of living has skyrocketed, though because food and gasoline are omitted from the numbers, not much attention is paid. Seniors too need food and gasoline.

Fixed income and the present scenario, seniors are being hit with no end in site. So are the rest of us, though many can work another job or 4.

[red states rule]

You haven't showed jack here other than being a mindless drone. But I see you have fallen in with the ways of some around here; when backed into a corner, fall back on insults and calling everyone who disagrees a lib.

Please show me where I called you a lib. As far as the rest of your post...........


http://catmacros.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/alphabet_soup_cat2.jpg%3Fw%3D720

[fj1200]

The continuing dismal economy has kept interest rates close to zero. Seniors rely on interest from investments.

The Fed has kept interest rates close to zero. According to some the Fed has been kept too low:

Right now, the Federal Reserve's official interest-rate target on federal funds is 0% to 0.25%. Is that where the target should be according to the Taylor Rule?
No, the interest-rate target would be at 1%, or a little higher. That is based on starting with a multiple of the inflation rate, and then adjusting up or down for the growth rate of the economy compared with its potential growth rate. Right now, the growth-rate part of the formula would call for a downward adjustment, so you end up around 1%.
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424053111903835404577347834076048076.html#a rticleTabs_article%3D2

Some also argue that it has been kept too low for most of the '00s which would mean that seniors were suffering then as well.


Cost of living has skyrocketed, though because food and gasoline are omitted from the numbers, not much attention is paid. Seniors too need food and gasoline.

Food and energy are not counted in the core rate because of their volatile nature. The core rate has recently peaked at about 2.25 (http://ycharts.com/indicators/us_core_inflation_rate); we've seen much worse. Non-core inflation has also peaked recently but still under 4 (http://ycharts.com/indicators/us_inflation_rate).


Fixed income and the present scenario, seniors are being hit with no end in site. So are the rest of us, though many can work another job or 4.

Yes they are, but the end should be in about four months.

[fj1200]

Please show me where I called you a lib. As far as the rest of your post...........

While I have no doubt that your back end makes better arguments than your front end I never said that times weren't tough and BO isn't a pathetic POTUS, just that there are things in this world that he doesn't control.


... you are attemping a lame defense of Obama

The rest of my post was spot on too wasn't it? ;)

[Kathianne]

The Fed has kept interest rates close to zero. According to some the Fed has been kept too low:

http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424053111903835404577347834076048076.html#a rticleTabs_article%3D2

Some also argue that it has been kept too low for most of the '00s which would mean that seniors were suffering then as well.



Food and energy are not counted in the core rate because of their volatile nature. The core rate has recently peaked at about 2.25 (http://ycharts.com/indicators/us_core_inflation_rate); we've seen much worse. Non-core inflation has also peaked recently but still under 4 (http://ycharts.com/indicators/us_inflation_rate).



Yes they are, but the end should be in about four months.

Sorry, but I see nothing saying food prices will be falling. Gasoline? Right now, that's up to ME.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The continuing dismal economy has kept interest rates close to zero. Seniors rely on interest from investments.

Cost of living has skyrocketed, though because food and gasoline are omitted from the numbers, not much attention is paid. Seniors too need food and gasoline.

Fixed income and the present scenario, seniors are being hit with no end in site. So are the rest of us, though many can work another job or 4.

Ask yourself why food and gasoline are omitted from the numbers..Because they both are desperately needed , have skyrocketed and most people can relate to them as prime indicaters of how the economy is doing.-Tyr

[aboutime]

Your reading comprehension, as per usual, sucks. And you may call me a lib all you like, it only speaks to your ignorance. Or you can point out all the liberal positions I have taken on this board. Your choice.


Whatever you say is fine with me. Thanks for allowing me to properly identify you as a lib. As for the Ignorance. I have you to thank for that since I always attempt to emulate those who feel a need to use name calling, and those who make childish accusations. Sorta like Tit for Tat.

Never fails. But always makes me smile. Seeing how frustrated it makes people like you who deny, deny, deny.

Besides. This is a forum where I come to express my opinions. If you disagree with those opinions. That's too bad.

[red states rule]

Whatever you say is fine with me. Thanks for allowing me to properly identify you as a lib. As for the Ignorance. I have you to thank for that since I always attempt to emulate those who feel a need to use name calling, and those who make childish accusations. Sorta like Tit for Tat.

Never fails. But always makes me smile. Seeing how frustrated it makes people like you who deny, deny, deny.

Besides. This is a forum where I come to express my opinions. If you disagree with those opinions. That's too bad.

With all due respect, FJ is not a liberal. Yes, he is arrogant and condescending like most libs. Yes he talks down to people like most libs. and yes, he easily gets PO'd when people disagree with him like most libs

There was a time when fj was a decent poster and I do not know what happened to him

Maybe the Obama economy hit him pretty hard. Maybe things are not going well at work.
Or maybe fj thimks acting like liberal compensates for being unable to win an argument

But I can assure you, unless he suffered a serious head injury recently, he is not a liberal

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

With all due respect, FJ is not a liberal. Yes, he is arrogant and condescending like most libs. Yes he talks down to people like most libs. and yes, he easily gets PO'd when people disagree with him like most libs

There was a time when fj was a decent poster and I do not know what happened to him

Maybe the Obama economy hit him pretty hard. Maybe things are not going well at work.
Or maybe fj thimks acting like liberal compensates for being unable to win an argument

But I can assure you, unless he suffered a serious head injury recently, he is not a liberal

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and quacks loudly like a duck it is a damn duck.
I've long thought what aboutime is saying. A liberal in hiding would be a dead ringer! Just sayin'.. -Tyr

[red states rule]

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and quacks loudly like a duck it is a damn duck.
I've long thought what aboutime is saying. A liberal in hiding would be a dead ringer! Just sayin'.. -Tyr

Again, he has been here for awhile, and unless he has taken a job at MSNBC - he is not a liberal.

I do not why he has turned into such a snob. At one time he was a very good poster - but for some reason he has changed

[fj1200]

Sorry, but I see nothing saying food prices will be falling. Gasoline? Right now, that's up to ME.

The graphs I linked show a downward trend.


Ask yourself why food and gasoline are omitted from the numbers..Because they both are desperately needed , have skyrocketed and most people can relate to them as prime indicaters of how the economy is doing.-Tyr

Understand the difference between inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation) and core inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_inflation).

[red states rule]

The graphs I linked show a downward trend.



Understand the difference between inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation) and core inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_inflation).

Your graphs are very wrong. Gas here is 3.90/gal

Anyone who agrees with the government excluding food and energy from the inflation rate are nuts. Prices are soaring and yet some decide to ignore that harsh reality

High gas prices is a massive tax on working folks and causes the cost of damn near everything to go up

[fj1200]

Whatever you say is fine with me. Thanks for allowing me to properly identify you as a lib. As for the Ignorance. I have you to thank for that since I always attempt to emulate those who feel a need to use name calling, and those who make childish accusations. Sorta like Tit for Tat.

Never fails. But always makes me smile. Seeing how frustrated it makes people like you who deny, deny, deny.

Besides. This is a forum where I come to express my opinions. If you disagree with those opinions. That's too bad.

I try not to, and did not, call you a name, I simply identified your state of being uninformed which can be OK except when it's willful. So unless you can back your opinion of me being a lib you are happy being "willful."


With all due respect, FJ is not a liberal. Yes, he is arrogant and condescending like most libs. Yes he talks down to people like most libs. and yes, he easily gets PO'd when people disagree with him like most libs

There was a time when fj was a decent poster and I do not know what happened to him

Maybe the Obama economy hit him pretty hard. Maybe things are not going well at work.
Or maybe fj thimks acting like liberal compensates for being unable to win an argument

But I can assure you, unless he suffered a serious head injury recently, he is not a liberal

Thank you, I apologize for extending your statement beyond what you wrote. However, I'm not arrogant and condescending. I still post in the same manner but IMO the type of "debate" that has been going on is quite different than it has been in the past. I relish someone disagreeing with me but I prefer when it's backed by something other than "you're a lib."

Also, thank you for your psychoanalytic attempts at making sense of my posting. Your associates in Psychoanalysis was money well spent.

[fj1200]

Your graphs are very wrong. Gas here is 3.90/gal

Anyone who agrees with the government excluding food and energy from the inflation rate are nuts. Prices are soaring and yet some decide to ignore that harsh reality

High gas prices is a massive tax on working folks and causes the cost of damn near everything to go up

They aren't my graphs. They still track inflation including food and energy. And yes, you're correct, inflation is a tax and it hits the working class more severely.

[red states rule]

I try not to, and did not, call you a name, I simply identified your state of being uninformed which can be OK except when it's willful. So unless you can back your opinion of me being a lib you are happy being "willful."



Thank you, I apologize for extending your statement beyond what you wrote. However, I'm not arrogant and condescending. I still post in the same manner but IMO the type of "debate" that has been going on is quite different than it has been in the past. I relish someone disagreeing with me but I prefer when it's backed by something other than "you're a lib."

Also, thank you for your psychoanalytic attempts at making sense of my posting. Your associates in Psychoanalysis was money well spent.


Thanks for showing once again you are still arrogant and condescending like a liberal. I guess you think you honor us by coming down from the top of your Ivory Tower and trying to edcuate the unwashed masses you must deal with here

It is not hard to see you are the one who has changed. Of course the one with the problem is the last one to know they have a problem

[Kathianne]

The graphs I linked show a downward trend.



Understand the difference between inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation) and core inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_inflation).

I don't have a ton of time today, leaving for work in a couple hours and have stuff to do. Like most folks in the middle to lower end of socioeconomic strata I understand that food prices have jumped and all I've read about the impact of the drought indicates that is going to get worse.

Gasoline today is $4.29 a gallon around a 10 mile radius here.

A quick search brought this up:

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/us-inflation-surges-1-7-as-consumer-prices-rise-0-6-in-august-2012/10001056/


US Inflation Surges 1.7% as Consumer Prices Rise 0.6% in August 2012

September 14, 2012 · Filed Under Inflation (http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/category/inflation/)


...


The following grid offers US Labor Department inflation data ranging from February to August and over the past 12 months.


February – August 2012 Consumer Prices – Gains (percent)


<tbody>

Feb
2012
Mar
2012
Apr
2012
May
2012
June 2012
July 2012
Aug 2012
12
Month


All items
0.4
0.3
.0
-0.3
.0
.0
0.6
1.7


Food
.0
0.2
0.2
.0
0.2
0.1
0.2
2.0


Food at home
.0
0.1
0.2
-0.1
0.1
.0
0.1
1.5


Food away from home
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
2.8


Energy
3.2
0.9
-1.7
-4.3
-1.4
-0.3
5.6
-0.6


Energy commodities
5.7
1.7
-2.6
-6.4
-2.3
0.2
8.6
1.5


Gasoline (all types)
6.0
1.7
-2.6
-6.8
-2.0
0.3
9.0
1.8


Fuel oil
2.8
2.7
-1.1
-2.8
-7.9
-0.5
4.6
-0.8


Energy services
-0.8
-0.4
-0.2
-0.7
.0
-1.1
0.8
-3.7


Electricity
.0
-0.8
0.2
0.3
-0.5
-1.3
0.2
-1.2


Utility (piped) gas service
-3.4
0.9
-1.8
-4.1
1.7
-0.2
2.8
-11.2


All items less food, energy
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
1.9


Comm. less food, energy
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
.0
-0.2
0.7


New vehicles
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
-0.1
0.2
1.0


Used cars and trucks
-0.2
1.3
1.5
1.0
.0
-0.5
-0.9
-0.6


Apparel
-0.9
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.2
-0.5
1.7


Medical care
0.8
0.4
.0
.0
0.1
0.5
0.3
3.6


Services less energy
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
2.4


Shelter
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
2.1


Transportation
-0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
-0.2
-0.2
.0
1.4


Medical care
.0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.3
0.2
4.2

</tbody>


Consumer Price Index figures for September 2012 get released by the US Labor Department on October 16, 2012 at 8:30 AM ET. CPI information is used as the core data for this site’s Inflation Calculator (http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/).

[red states rule]

and given the results of Obama's failed foreign policy we are seeing right now - does anyone think gas prices will NOT go even higher?

Hey, libs have said for years gas prices should be as high here as they are in Europe - so Dems should be jumping for joy over this

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Thanks for showing once again you are still arrogant and condescending like a liberal. I guess you think you honor us by coming down from the top of your Ivory Tower and trying to edcuate the unwashed masses you must deal with here

It is not hard to see you are the one who has changed. Of course the one with the problem is the last one to know they have a problem

My friend, a shill can only be counted on shilling for its cause, never for agreeing with reason, logic and truth.
Also never willing to accept facts when given. Just sayin'.-Tyr

[red states rule]

My friend, a shill can only be counted on shilling for its cause, never for agreeing with reason, logic and truth.
Also never willing to accept facts when given. Just sayin'.-Tyr

I know

It is like having OCA back isn't it? :laugh2:

[fj1200]

Sorry, but I see nothing saying food prices will be falling. Gasoline? Right now, that's up to ME.

Sorry, I noticed something from my earlier post. The rate mentioned is the rate of increase, which is falling. Unfortunately that still means it's going up.

[fj1200]

Thanks for showing once again you are still arrogant and condescending like a liberal. I guess you think you honor us by coming down from the top of your Ivory Tower and trying to edcuate the unwashed masses you must deal with here

Glass houses buddy:

Again, Economics 101 seems not to be one your strong points

But if you think that when I correct what I believe to be a wrong statement as arrogant and condescending, then I guess guilty as charged. Or perhaps you should raise your game.


It is not hard to see you are the one who has changed. Of course the one with the problem is the last one to know they have a problem

Then you truly are blind.


It is like having OCA back isn't it? :laugh2:

No wonder you hate him so much; you are exactly the same.

[red states rule]

You should ask Jim to change your name to FU1200. It would better reflect your attitude and how you view the other members here

[aboutime]

You should ask Jim to change your name to FU1200. It would better reflect your attitude and how you view the other members here


Good suggestion. Funny stuff. Sometimes I wonder whether fj isn't just trying to be as much of a PITA as Gabby, bomb throwing, then running away to hide.

FU1200...And it's not a typical liberal use of a four letter word either.

[red states rule]

Good suggestion. Funny stuff. Sometimes I wonder whether fj isn't just trying to be as much of a PITA as Gabby, bomb throwing, then running away to hide.

FU1200...And it's not a typical liberal use of a four letter word either.

From now one I will only address him as FU. It is short and very accurate way to describe his attitude

[fj1200]

I don't have a ton of time today, leaving for work in a couple hours and have stuff to do. Like most folks in the middle to lower end of socioeconomic strata I understand that food prices have jumped and all I've read about the impact of the drought indicates that is going to get worse.

Gasoline today is $4.29 a gallon around a 10 mile radius here.

A quick search brought this up:

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/us-inflation-surges-1-7-as-consumer-prices-rise-0-6-in-august-2012/10001056/

I suppose we could argue those specifics for quite some time but wasn't the point of the thread about BO being the cause of all our ills? I mean most economists would be very happy with a 1.7 annual rate.

[fj1200]

From now one I will only address him as FU. It is short and very accurate way to describe his attitude

Interesting reaction to losing a debate. Such is your right I guess.

[Kathianne]

I suppose we could argue those specifics for quite some time but wasn't the point of the thread about BO being the cause of all our ills? I mean most economists would be very happy with a 1.7 annual rate.

Please. Tell me where I said BO was the cause of 'all our ills.' That he should be taking responsibility and not trying to push the problems off on Bush, ATM's, youtube videos is not asking too much.

[fj1200]

Good suggestion. Funny stuff. Sometimes I wonder whether fj isn't just trying to be as much of a PITA as Gabby, bomb throwing, then running away to hide.

FU1200...And it's not a typical liberal use of a four letter word either.

I guess I'll chalk that up to your failure to actually identify a liberal position that I hold. Even your buddy admits you're wrong about that. How long has tzs been hiding now?

[red states rule]

Interesting reaction to losing a debate. Such is your right I guess.

When have I lst a debate to YOU son? You walked away from the "Is it a fee or tax" debate; and you have not pointed out any errors of mine on this thread

You realy are becoming another OCA. You have quickly developed the inflated opinion of yourself and you seem to have the condescending attitude down perfect

[aboutime]

Interesting reaction to losing a debate. Such is your right I guess.


fj. Thanks so much for showing us, or reminding the rest of us how to respond in such a typical, expected, defensive, liberal fashion.

Look at how easily you THINK you managed to end this by announcing the LOSS of a Debate...that never took place.

Much like, the same way Liberals who are backed up against a wall after being presented Proven, Honest facts. Use their only Liberal defense for not having an Honest answer...buy instantly accusing the other person of being a RACIST.

A tactic used by liberals most often to END, CEASE, FINISH all opportunities to continue by putting someone on the defensive with the RACIST ACCUSATION, or RACE CARD.

So. You have earned this fj...or FU...whatever you like....3935

[fj1200]

Please. Tell me where I said BO was the cause of 'all our ills.' That he should be taking responsibility and not trying to push the problems off on Bush, ATM's, youtube videos is not asking too much.

I guess I misread the entire first page then. I agree that he shouldn't be blaming Bush, etc. and that seniors have it rough, there are just things in this world that he doesn't have absolute control over; the things mentioned in the OP for example.

[red states rule]

fj. Thanks so much for showing us, or reminding the rest of us how to respond in such a typical, expected, defensive, liberal fashion.

Look at how easily you THINK you managed to end this by announcing the LOSS of a Debate...that never took place.

Much like, the same way Liberals who are backed up against a wall after being presented Proven, Honest facts. Use their only Liberal defense for not having an Honest answer...buy instantly accusing the other person of being a RACIST.

A tactic used by liberals most often to END, CEASE, FINISH all opportunities to continue by putting someone on the defensive with the RACIST ACCUSATION, or RACE CARD.

So. You have earned this fj...or FU...whatever you like....3935


In honor of FU

http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/liberals.jpg

[fj1200]

When have I lst a debate to YOU son? You walked away from the "Is it a fee or tax" debate; and you have not pointed out any errors of mine on this thread

You realy are becoming another OCA. You have quickly developed the inflated opinion of yourself and you seem to have the condescending attitude down perfect

More condescension from you I see. You might also want to double check who you were having a debate with. And I don't expect you to accept that you actually post errors even when glaring.


fj. Thanks...

....3935

You're welcome because anyone who reviews this thread and doesn't see your utter failure to prove your posit... would be blind.

Racecard? Please point out my use of the race card. More failure coming from you.

[fj1200]

In honor of FU

http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/liberals.jpg

Thanks for showing us the extent of your debating skills. Or was this you not calling me a liberal again.

[aboutime]

More condescension from you I see. You might also want to double check who you were having a debate with. And I don't expect you to accept that you actually post errors even when glaring.



You're welcome because anyone who reviews this thread and doesn't see your utter failure to prove your posit... would be blind.

Racecard? Please point out my use of the race card. More failure coming from you.


NO NEED fj. Your liberalism gets in the way, and you would deny everything. Like any good, uninformed liberal would.

As for the utter failure. That's a major problem for COWS who are like liberals. ANAL Retentive.

[Kathianne]

I guess I misread the entire first page then. I agree that he shouldn't be blaming Bush, etc. and that seniors have it rough, there are just things in this world that he doesn't have absolute control over; the things mentioned in the OP for example.

No, you read into the OP what you were looking for. Seniors ARE suffering under Obama and the article explained how they are. You'll also note that it mentioned years before Obama and how 'bad' got 'worse.' That is it. No blaming all on Obama.

[fj1200]

NO NEED fj. Your liberalism gets in the way, and you would deny everything. Like any good, uninformed liberal would.

As for the utter failure. That's a major problem for COWS who are like liberals. ANAL Retentive.

Considering that so far you haven't even shown anything for me to actually deny... Own your failure buddy.

[fj1200]

No, you read into the OP what you were looking for. Seniors ARE suffering under Obama and the article explained how they are. You'll also note that it mentioned years before Obama and how 'bad' got 'worse.' That is it. No blaming all on Obama.

OK then. But then seniors are always suffering... along with the poor... and women... and minorities... and, and, and...

[Kathianne]

OK then. But then seniors are always suffering... along with the poor... and women... and minorities... and, and, and...

Now you are just being silly, no?

[fj1200]

Now you are just being silly, no?

Not really, I just get annoyed by the widows and orphans debate ploy which was probably his point all along.

I've been watching these developments for a while, and by now you'd expect a lot of sad news coverage about old people who diligently saved for retirement being squeezed by high prices and federal policies, being forced to choose between medicine and food or having to let go of pets and move in with children because things have just gotten too expensive, living on cat food and the like. But actually, we're not hearing much.

I can't help but feel that we'd be hearing a lot more if the White House were occupied by a Republican, rather than a Democrat who has received unprecedented news media support. But luckily, that's not the case. So let's be thankful that a major national crisis has been averted. At least until Jan. 20, 2013, anyway.

[Kathianne]

Not really, I just get annoyed by the widows and orphans debate ploy which was probably his point all along.

Actually the point that those on fixed incomes, most probably in a bit worse shape my parents were in with pension of $2500 per month and SSI around another $2000 sounds 'substantial,' lord knows they thought it would be. They had accumulated though, over a million in savings/investments by the time my dad retired at 63. For the next 8 years, things were fine, then my mother had her first stroke.

But when one figures in extra health insurance that was over $6k per year, plus the regular bills, income off investments was a necessity-especially after my mom needed 24/7 nursing for close to 3 years-all paid my dad. Mom died in 2004, my dad in 2007-interests rates were low, but not at near 0. Indeed these were their choices, they could afford to make. By the time my father died and all expenses were covered, his estate was less than $20k. He'd gone over this with both my brother and I shortly after my mother died. He had figured out how long the remaining money would last, he was correct within $5k.

Now folks with smaller pensions, perhaps without their homes paid or they rent, haven't seen COLA increase in years-that pretty much had already started before my dad died. For the same reasons; savings, CD, and other 'safe' investments are paying very close to 0. Younger people can go into the stock market and higher risk venues, making some increase possible on investments. They have time to recover losses, whether from pensions, 401k, or real estate benefiting perhaps by this new QE3. Old folks don't.

I feel sorry for all of us, living through these times. Can I see a higher cost though for the elderly, the poor, and the children of the poor? Yes.

Something to read I came across, thought you might find it interesting:

http://reason.com/archives/2012/09/13/occupy-the-fed


<hgroup> How Quantitative Easing Helps the Rich and Soaks the Rest of Us And why the Occupy movement should be up in arms. </hgroup> Anthony Randazzo (http://reason.com/people/anthony-randazzo/all) | September 13, 2012

The decision is in: Unlimited quantitative easing. That was the announcement from the Federal Open Market Committee this afternoon, launching a third round of purchases of securities in a bid to boost the economy and reduce unemployment. This time, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and crew are pledging to buy $40 billion per month (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/13/fed-stimulus-federal-reserve-qe_n_1881216.html) until the economy improves. The Fed's policy committee also extended its zero-interest rate policy until “at least mid-2015.” If QE3 lasts that long, the Feds will be printing at least another $800 billion to buy mortgage-backed securities.


It won’t be a surprise to read conservatives lambasting this as unconventional monetary policy meant to help re-elect President Obama. And inflation hawks have already started screeching. But the loudest cry of “for shame” should be coming from the Occupy Wall Street movement.


Quantitative easing—a fancy term for the Federal Reserve buying securities from predefined financial institutions, such as their investments in federal debt or mortgages—is fundamentally a regressive redistribution program that has been boosting wealth for those already engaged in the financial sector or those who already own homes, but passing little along to the rest of the economy. It is a primary driver of income inequality formed by crony capitalism. And it is hurting prospects for economic growth down the road by promoting malinvestments in the economy.


How is the Federal Reserve contributing to regressive redistribution, income inequality, and manipulated markets? Let’s flesh this out a bit...

[aboutime]

Considering that so far you haven't even shown anything for me to actually deny... Own your failure buddy.


Funny stuff fj. You remind me of one of my favorite Donald Rumsfeld sayings, whenever you feel that power you try to exert here by thinking how successful your ONE-UPSMANSHIP is, yet you fail miserably each time.

That saying is, and applies to you, and others like gabby so well.

"You really do not know, what you don't know...you don't know!"

[fj1200]

:confused:

You should just stop there.

[fj1200]

Something to read I came across, thought you might find it interesting:

http://reason.com/archives/2012/09/13/occupy-the-fed

Yup, he's spot on. It's possible for the tea party and occupiers to be in sync on that one.