Dave Richardson's recent missive (and an L.A. TIMES column by Robert
Kuttner, Dec. 6, 1996) suggests the following: If one wants to measure the
cost of living over time, why not divide the nominal consumer spending by
the Genuine Progress Indicator, which is supposed to be a measure of the
real benefit actually produced by our economy for people. (It's the
standard formula for an average price level: money spent/use-value
received.) The GPI adjusts real GDP figures for a lot of things such as
environmental degradation, etc. 

My quick calculation shows that the "cost of living inflation rate" was
11.7% in 1993 and 6.6% in 1994, compared to 2.6% and 2.3% for the GDP
deflator-based inflation rate. However, there is some correlation between
the two inflation rates (the R2 is 0.372 and the t-stat on the regression
coefficient is 4.43). (The C-O-L inflation rate was negative in 1966, by
the way.) I wouldn't use yearly figures for the C-O-L inflation rate, since
it jumps around a lot; moving averages seem appropriate. 

The two inflation rates are very different. The C-O-L one seems better for
discussions of how well people are doing, while the GDP deflation one (and
similar) seems better for financial issues.

I'm not sure that all of the adjustments in the GPI should be done when
calculating the C-O-L. This is a new research topic for me...

BTW, Dave is right that the politicians deserve the blame for appointing a
bunch of economists that they knew were biased in favor of concluding that
the CPI was biased upward. But the economists should be lambasted for
willing to accept such a job. It goes against the official canons of
academic honesty. We're not supposed to start with out conclusions, right? 











in pen-l solidarity,

Jim Devine   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way
and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.



Reply via email to