DON'T BUY IT!

By now you've undoubtedly heard about the Labor Department's announcement: One of our metrics for measuring and tracking inflation--the Consumer Price Index (CPI)-- has risen by 6.2% over the last year. The CPI, by the way, is simply a weighted average of the prices of the representative goods and services purchased by a typical household in a given year. An increase in the CPI of 6.2% means that the very same "basket" of good and services that cost you $100 in one year would cost you $106.20 twelve months later. The exact same stuff would've increased by $6.20. The price of some of the stuff in your market basket probably would have fallen over the year; some of it might have stayed the same and: some of the stuff would have risen. On average, though, the CPI has risen by about 6.2% and, as you may have also heard, it's been three decades since we've seen an increase in the price level that large.

Given that this is the most rapid rise year-to-year rise in the CPI for the past three decades or so, it's not surprising that's there been a bunch of speculation about the root causes of this rise. Add to the mix that the 6.2% climb in the average price level occurred during a pandemic that has snatched the lives of more than 750,000 domestically, and more than 5 mill worldwide, and it then becomes even less surprising that much of our current discourse is fixated on "explaining" the relationship between the pandemic and prices.

Also unsurprising is the fact that economic ghouls are shrieking about how the current bout of inflation is supposedly the end result of the stimulus spending that took place during the pandemic induced recession. They are determined to lay much of that 6.2% average price increase directly at the feet of the stimulus payments--to dump it on the doorsteps of all those who argued that such increased spending was necessary to help prevent more and more economically fragile households from being swallowed up by the pandemic induced recession. They want you to think that the jump prices for eggs, beef, pork, gas--you name it-- is somehow related to, say, the $1400 payments that households received during the pandemic. Or the extra "cheddar" that some folks found sprinkled over their regular unemployment checks. Or....

What they really want is to rally their troops to fight against further spending that'll be needed to pave the road toward a caring, just, and inclusive economy. What they really want is rile up their warriors to support a politics and economics of austerity. What they really want is to foment an atmosphere so full of despair and fear that they'll be better equipped to successfully implement policies that are pegged to serving plutocrats than ordinary people.

DON'T BUY IT!

Here's what I hope you do: Don't buy it.

Don't buy the fable that tries to get you to see the legacy of the stimulus payments as being nothing more than a burst of inflation.

Don't buy a tale whose real punch line is that running some coins to the poor and the economically marginalized inevitably ends up doing more harm than good.

Don't buy any story about inflation that yaks on endlessly about stimulus payments and says not one word--nothing!-- about how the monopolistic position of certain firms are enabling them to push up prices beyond what is warranted by increased costs.

Don't buy narratives that scream about the alleged dangers of assisting poor and working households but that are not only mum as hell on the price pain that can accompany weak anti-trust laws but also silent on corporations that are more focused on stock buy backs and financial engineering than on than on producing the very semi-conductors that are bottled up in the supply chain and responsible for the crazily high prices of cars.

Don't buy none of this. Don't get bamboozled by siren songs that seduce you into punching down rather than swinging up.

And here's one last reason not to buy what's being pushed by the proponents of economic austerity: The data clearly shows that the stimulus payments significantly decreased the number of persons living in poverty. Just a couple of months ago, the Census Bureau came out with a report that showed that just the first two rounds pulled close to 12 million persons out of poverty. That same study, by the way, estimated that the beefed up unemployment benefits that took place during the pandemic kept well over 5 million persons from falling below the official poverty line.

Those who are currently and consistently harping on the supposed inflationary impact of the stimulus payments are saying, in effect, that--in the name of price stability-- "we" should have let more people slip below the official poverty line. That "we" should have just let more people fall completely overboard and let the choppy water have at them.

So, yeah, I'm going to say it: Going forward, more money needs to be spent on the nation's human, social, and physical infrastructure. Not less.

I'm looking side-eye at folk who don't break a sweat when it comes to tax breaks for the rich but act like they're about to fall out and can come up with all kinds of excuses for tolerating the economic misery of the nation's poor and working class.

I'm not buying it.

Catch you on the flip side,

Doc Greene