5,984
edits
CPI: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:ERW-X-post-1557147094632189952-FZwZB0OVQAEEqLY.jpg|thumb]] | [[File:ERW-X-post-1557147094632189952-FZwZB0OVQAEEqLY.jpg|thumb]] | ||
Eric Weinstein applies [[Gauge Theory]] to critique '''Consumer Price Index (CPI)''' as a fundamentally flawed, manipulable inflation measure, politically hackable for wealth redistribution amid institutional suppression and methodological flaws, emphasizing technical criticisms, historical references, and alternatives. | |||
== Early References and the Emergence of Critique == | |||
Weinstein's public mentions of the CPI date back to at least 2010, where he lists it among topics burdened by "fictional narratives," alongside issues like telomeres, scientist shortages, and immigration policy. In a May 1, 2010, post, he highlights CPI as an area where dominant stories obscure underlying truths, setting the stage for his later, more detailed indictments. By 2013, Weinstein explicitly ties CPI to "gauge theoretic" concepts, critiquing a ''USA Today'' article that portrayed adjustments to the index as "evil tricks" repurposed for good. He describes CPI as a gauge-theoretic construct, implying it should be treated with the rigor of physical measurement tools, yet it is vulnerable to manipulation akin to financial engineering on Wall Street. | |||
== The Boskin Commission and Allegations of Manipulation == | |||
A central pillar of Weinstein's critique is the Boskin Commission, a 1990s advisory panel appointed by the U.S. Senate to review CPI methodology. In multiple X posts, particularly from 2020 and 2021, Weinstein accuses the commission—chaired by economist Michael Boskin and involving Harvard professors—of deliberately "hacking" the CPI to understate inflation, thereby facilitating a trillion-dollar wealth transfer over a decade. In a [https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1220179670802395137 January 23, 2020, thread], he labels the commission's efforts as "[[Anti-Interesting|anti-interesting]]," a term he defines as topics that are fascinating but stifled by powerful institutions to protect the "[[Gated Institutional Narrative (GIN)]]". | |||
Weinstein elaborates in an [https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1382366169257021441 April 14, 2021, thread], citing a blog post by Barry Ritholtz and a screenshot from Harvard economist Greg Mankiw acknowledging the commission's role in reducing entitlements. He claims the commission aimed to break the CPI by a precise amount to avoid legislative changes that would cut Social Security payments and raise taxes. This manipulation, he argues, was enabled by suppressing his and Pia Malaney's joint work on gauge theory in economics, which could have provided a more robust framework for cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) accounting for changing preferences. | |||
In a [https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1492519523873918976 February 12, 2021], post, Weinstein connects this to broader policy deceptions, such as silencing discussions on non-existent scientist shortages to depress wages via programs like the H-1B visa. He portrays the Boskin Commission's actions as a conspiracy to alter economic gauges without public scrutiny, likening it to tampering with thermometers to deny climate change—a metaphor he repeats in a June 15, 2021, thread. | |||
== Technical Criticisms: Gauge Theory and the Index Number Problem == | |||
Weinstein's arguments are deeply technical, rooted in his application of gauge theory to economics. He contends that economists fail to grasp the mathematical foundations of their own indices. In a May 12, 2021, thread, he claims price and quantity indices like CPI are misunderstood, referencing historical figures such as Ragnar Frisch and Irving Fisher. He criticizes "chaining" methods for ordinal preferences, arguing they introduce arbitrary discretion that allows for faking higher growth and lower inflation. | |||
Weinstein advocates for viewing CPI through a differential geometric lens, as outlined in his work on "The Index Number Problem: A Differential Geometric Approach." In an October 14, 2021, post, he recommends key terms like "Konus index," "superlative index," "Divisia Index," "cycling problem," "mechanical index number," "COLA," and "chain index" for those seeking deeper understanding. These concepts reveal, he argues, that CPI construction is riddled with errors and discretion, extending to measurements of money supply via Divisia Monetary Aggregates. | |||
The moral of his critiques, as stated in the May 12, 2021, thread, is that those controlling CPI and GDP indices can manipulate outcomes by halting methodological debates. This suppression, he alleges in August 25, 2019, and December 18, 2019, posts, stems from Harvard economists' efforts to protect wealth transfers, labeling economics as an "imperialist" discipline that borrows from physics without credit. | |||
== Broader Implications for Inflation and Economic Policy == | |||
Weinstein frames CPI flaws as enabling central bankers to disguise fiat money printing and economists to withhold field advancements. In the June 15, 2021, thread, he warns that politically motivated adjustments hide inflation's true impact, advocating for decentralized alternatives like cryptocurrencies (#btc) to bypass institutional gauges. He supports initiatives like Balaji Srinivasan's inflation dashboard, as noted in an August 5, 2021, post, to democratize inflation measurement away from entities like the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). | |||
This ties into Weinstein's concept of "Managed Reality," where institutions like the National Science Foundation (NSF) perpetuate myths, such as labor shortages, to serve elite interests. In a June 18, 2020, post, he praises his wife, economist Pia Malaney, for opposing CPI manipulation and trade deceptions, highlighting a personal dimension to his advocacy. | |||
== Conclusion == | |||
Eric Weinstein's position on CPI and inflation is a multifaceted critique that combines technical rigor with allegations of institutional malfeasance. He views the CPI not as an objective measure but as a manipulable gauge, exemplified by the Boskin Commission's interventions and the suppression of gauge-theoretic innovations. By understating inflation, Weinstein argues, policymakers enable wealth transfers from the vulnerable to the powerful, while economists' mathematical blind spots perpetuate discretionary errors. His calls for transparency, methodological debate, and decentralized alternatives reflect a broader push against gated narratives in economics. While provocative, these views invite further scholarly examination of index construction and its socioeconomic ramifications, potentially bridging physics and economics in novel ways. | |||
== On X == | == On X == | ||