Inflation

[julian63]

Yes it keeps on going up but just not as much as it did before. It'll take at least ten years or more to get it down to an acceptable level but not before retailers are forced to stop passing the buck on to consumers.

Why, exactly, should the retailers stop passing the buck on to consumers? If the cost to the retailer goes up 10% is he supposed to eat the loss of his profit? Passing along increased costs is not price gouging. It's common sense. The alternative is to go out of business.
p.s. I'm still waiting to hear what lie the government has told.

 

[steveinbsas]

I'm still waiting to hear what lie the government has told.

Ever hear of INDEC?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...entina-data-chief-pushes-reform-idUSKCN0ZD1NJ

 

[Rich One]

Why, exactly, should the retailers stop passing the buck on to consumers? If the cost to the retailer goes up 10% is he supposed to eat the loss of his profit? Passing along increased costs is not price gouging. It's common sense. The alternative is to go out of business.
p.s. I'm still waiting to hear what lie the government has told.

Julian you now for sure the Argentinian Retailer Economics 101 . The Small Butcher wants 100,000 pesos monthly take home to take the family to Mar del Plata in Summer. If sales of lomo go down he increases the price per kilo for same total income..!!!
Market competition ? , Supply and Demand...? Never heard of it
,

 

[steveinbsas]

Why, exactly, should the retailers stop passing the buck on to consumers? If the cost to the retailer goes up 10% is he supposed to eat the loss of his profit? Passing along increased costs is not price gouging. It's common sense. The alternative is to go out of business.

When enough consumers refuse (or are simply unable) to pay the higher prices as a result of "increased costs"(a euphemism for inflation), going out of business isn't necessarily a alternative. It's .often inevitable.

For example, There are now more empty storefronts in Bahia Blanca and Punta Alta now than at any time in thee past seven and a half years. As a matter of fact there were hardly any in Junes of 2010.. Now there are dozens.

PS: The fact that my electric bill more than tripped in 2017 while my monthly income did not increase means that I am now buying less meat and nafta now than ever (two costs I have been able to reduce as they also increased).

The local butcher may not go out off business as a result, but, like me, he may not be going on vacation, either.

 

[julian63]

"Ever hear of INDEC?'
Yes, Steve. So? Prior to Macri's election INDEC stats were notoriously rigged to under-report the level of inflation. Under the new administration it appears a new more realistic approach to measuring inflation has been instituted. As far as I can tell, there is no evidence that INDEC under the new leadership intentionally understated or mis-predicted the level of inflation. As every lawyer knows, there is a big difference between an intentional misrepresentation (aka a "lie") and a negligent (or simply incorrect) misrepresentation (an error).
On the basis of what I have been able to ascertain, while Macri's team may have been wrong about how much future inflation would be, I don't believe there is evidence of an intent to mislead. Accordingly, it is not correct to say INDEC or the Macri admin lied simply because there predictions about future levels of inflation turned out to be wrong.
p.s. A sensible butcher realizes that if he charges too much, a competitor will take away his remaining customers (or a new butcher will appear on the scene). Accordingly, the butcher may have to ratchet down his vacation plans if inflation has caused there to be fewer customers to buy his product. It is not a realistic solution for the butcher to increase his profit margins to maintain his own income levels. Like Steve said, he will soon find himself OOB.

 

[steveinbsas]

Yes. So? Prior to Macri's election INDEC stats were notoriously rigged to under-report the level of inflation. Under the new administration it appears a new more realistic approach to measuring inflation has been instituted. As far as I can tell, there is no evidence that INDEC under the new leadership intentionally understated or mis-predicted the level of inflation. As every lawyer knows, there is a big difference between an intentional misrepresentation (aka a "lie") and a negligent (or simply incorrect) misrepresentation (an error).

On the basis of what I have been able to ascertain, while Macri's team may have been wrong about how much future inflation would be, I don't believe there is evidence of an intent to mislead. Accordingly, it is not correct to say INDEC or the Macri admin lied simply because there predictions about future levels of inflation turned out to be wrong.

How many times have we heard a politician (or their supporters) make "predictions" that turned out to be far from accurate...especially economic predictions...especially the cost if government programs and the rate of inflation?

Oh, I'm sure there's a chance that Macri's "team" never intended to mislead anyone when they "mis-predicted" the future inflation rate.

Like a snowball''s chance in hell.

Though it didn't happen in Argentina, this reminds me of a politician who once predicted (if not actually promised) that if the government took control health care, health insurance premiums would be lowered by an average of 25%.

In many cases health insurance premiums doubled and tripped.

But I'm sure he didn't intentionally understate or mis-predict the eventual cost increases.

Many politicians don't seem to care if their predictions come true.

They don't need to when they don't have to operate with a positive balance sheet (i.e. make a profit) and they have so many economic illiterates making excuses for them simply because they appear to have good intentions.

 

[julian63]

Steve, why are you so sure that Macri's INDEC team intentionally mis-predicted the level of inflation after he took office? Do you have any evidence of that? As I see it, that would be counter intuitive, would it not? I mean - why would a sitting Pres intentionally low ball a future figure when the subsequent publication of the actual figures would only embarrass him, and worse, cause him to lose credibility with the populace?

Politicians who want to get re-elected don't care if their predictions don't come true? I find the logic behind that thinking incomprehensible.

 

[Rich One]

"Ever hear of INDEC?'
Yes, Steve. So? Prior to Macri's election INDEC stats were notoriously rigged to under-report the level of inflation. Under the new administration it appears a new more realistic approach to measuring inflation has been instituted. As far as I can tell, there is no evidence that INDEC under the new leadership intentionally understated or mis-predicted the level of inflation. As every lawyer knows, there is a big difference between an intentional misrepresentation (aka a "lie") and a negligent (or simply incorrect) misrepresentation (an error).
On the basis of what I have been able to ascertain, while Macri's team may have been wrong about how much future inflation would be, I don't believe there is evidence of an intent to mislead. Accordingly, it is not correct to say INDEC or the Macri admin lied simply because there predictions about future levels of inflation turned out to be wrong.
p.s. A sensible butcher realizes that if he charges too much, a competitor will take away his remaining customers (or a new butcher will appear on the scene). Accordingly, the butcher may have to ratchet down his vacation plans if inflation has caused there to be fewer customers to buy his product. It is not a realistic solution for the

P.S. A sensible ? butcher realizes that if he charges too much?, a competitor will take away his remaining customers (or a new butcher will appear on the scene). Accordingly, the butcher may have to ratchet down his vacation plans if inflation has caused there to be fewer customers to buy his product. It is not a realistic solution for the butcher to J

@Julian... Your logic is correct for, other marketplaces we know, based on the most basic economic principles ..

But Not in Argentina . You read previous postings above on complaints about the increased price of Malbec, and eggs, etc.
What they they do they do ? Refused to pay and bought elsewhere, NO,,! They just paid the higher prices.. The Butcher knows that and doesn't care . The competitor Butchers will increase their prices accordingly, A new Butcher? will start business with the higher prevailing prices... We face an Oligopoly. We depend on 3 butchers in the barrio..?
We can converse this until blue in the face but the facts are above.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Why, exactly, should the retailers stop passing the buck on to consumers? If the cost to the retailer goes up 10% is he supposed to eat the loss of his profit? Passing along increased costs is not price gouging. It's common sense. The alternative is to go out of business.
p.s. I'm still waiting to hear what lie the government has told.

You are a little too impatient [and annoying].

FYI I m in Asia, so, while you wait impatienly, I sleep because there are 12 hours of difference.

Lie: they asserted that the increase in the cost of electricity, fuel, transportation does not influence the inflation, but after 2 years they admit it does.

For me is weird that it is only 25% when there are rise of 400% here, 200% there.

The fuel infinia premium nafta went from 13 to 26 pesos since Macri arrived, this is 50% per year, not 25.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Steve, why are you so sure that Macri's INDEC team intentionally mis-predicted the level of inflation after he took office? Do you have any evidence of that? As I see it, that would be counter intuitive, would it not? I mean - why would a sitting Pres intentionally low ball a future figure when the subsequent publication of the actual figures would only embarrass him, and worse, cause him to lose credibility with the populace?

Politicians who want to get re-elected don't care if their predictions don't come true? I find the logic behind that thinking incomprehensible.

Simple. Wages cannot decrease by law, so, inflation is the loophole to by pass the labor law. If you read the news, the goal of this gobernment is to force low increases of the wages of about 10/15% while inflation is a lot higher. It is very simple.