|
|
|
|
|
by anonymouswacker
911 days ago
|
|
Government lies, aka statistics, conveniently ignore the cost of high quality items when doing averages. If you are buying eggs as a health conscious person, you know not to buy $1/dozen eggs any more because industry producers have made them low cost by reducing quality, feeding chickens soy and the cheapest excuse for food. The pastured ones are 5-10x the cost and the quality is night and day. US government conveniently views these things as staples, but they are not. |
|
I think this sums it up well. People mostly don't know or care about how hedonic regression is used in CPI (myself included, on knowing). I don't think the process is easy to understand nor transparent (although I may be wrong here).
But BLS denies this assessment (and it's not 100% related to the article posted, but closely related to your comment I think):
https://www.bls.gov/cpi/factsheets/common-misconceptions-abo...
> When the cost of food rises, does the CPI assume that consumers switch to less desired foods, such as substituting hamburger for steak?
> No. ...
> Is the use of "hedonic quality adjustment" in the CPI simply a way of lowering the inflation rate?
> No. ...
Obviously, they provide their own explanations, but I'm not going to paste the whole thing. This is definitely something I'd like to understand better though. Especially every time I complain about how Chewy Chips Ahoy or some other product I enjoyed in my childhood is absolute garbage now, and I don't buy the explanation that I simply had bad taste as a kid.
They also host this Quality Adjustment page to say which types of products do or don't have such adjustments: https://www.bls.gov/cpi/quality-adjustment/home.htm. So maybe this is transparency. I think it would take me 2+ hours on a weekend to really research this to understand it myself.