I have not done that anywhere yet. On the contrary, I keep assuming you have them; perhaps I should stop, as you ignore what I write, and your only arguments are "but CPI=BPP, and even krugman says so", completely disregarding everything I write. Is my explanation that CPI can only equal BPP if they were constructed to be so wrong in any way?
> but you are the one who used the anecdote of your personal purchases as evidence.
No, I brought this up as anecdote. I did bring independent evidence (from a seekingalpha author) that agrees with shadowstats analysis - which you conveniently ignore.
> For every case like this, there are 100 where the professional consensus was right, and the lone dissenter was simply a quack.
This is a meaningless statement of appeal to authority. I'm not debating thousands of cases. I'm debating one case, with some support, which you conveniently ignore.
> You guys haven't proven beyond a doub
Who are "you guys?"
> You are also accusing BPP of fudging their numbers, and admittedly they aren't open about their data sources, but here's the rub.
Sorry sir, you apparently lack both statistical skills and reading skills. I am not accusing BPP of anything of the sort. I would urge you to reread what I wrote, but I have done that already, and that is useless.
For the benefit of others who actually read (if anyone still is) - the BPP index cannot have been constructed other than to have a value similar to the CPI. They do not have to be fudging or part of a conspiracy to be wrong (a fact jshen conveniently ignores)
> You could easily create your own BPP type index, make it open with the code in the public domain, and show some real numbers to prove that the BPP is fudged. Right?
"Easily?" Are you aware that BPP is the only (semi-)independent source of this data, and when they were about to close down there was a lot of outrage at the lack of any alternative.
In fact, there are millions of dollars to be made in knowing the difference between the officially published CPI and the "analyst estimate consensus". If you think it's easy, do that and you can retire on the first time your CPI collection disagrees with estimate consensus. Similarly for NFP numbers, PPI and others.
"Easily?" - one of us is living in lala-land, and it isn't me.
> side note: shadowstats is not transparent either. They haven't produced the data sources plus the code that generates their numbers.
Neither does the BLS, by the way, only very vague descriptions, and parts of the data are based on interviews asking people to speculate "if you were to do this, how much do you think you could earn / how much would it cost".
There is NO WAY for anyone to independently verify significant components of the BLS' CPI number.