Instantaneous Core Inflation: Various Measures

Core up, but supercore down:

Figure 1: Instantaneous inflation for core CPI (blue), chained core CPI (tan), supercore CPI (pink), services supercore (light green), PPI core (red), and PCE core (green), per Eeckhout (2023), T=12, a=4. Source: BLS, BEA, Pawel Skrzypczynski,  and author’s calculations.

15 thoughts on “Instantaneous Core Inflation: Various Measures

  1. baffling

    admit it moses, your fascination with tulsi gabbard was waaaaaay off base!
    gaetz as attorney general seems about right. if you get a convicted felon in the white house, it makes since to place a criminal in the position of chief law enforcement officer.
    and the irony was not lost that the chief of the new department of government efficiency required not one, but two, people to fill the post.
    trump will fill the swamp quickly.

    1. Macroduck

      Looking like Trump is not just nominating sycophants, but moral and intellectual midgets. It’s a casting call for ‘The Apprentice’. No one of any stature has been named, just more of “all the best people”. I’m not a fan of psychiatry from the sidelines, but what does it say about the Felon in Chief that he won’t tolerate competence around him?

      1. baffling

        I think this is a test to see exactly how far he can bully congress. he could care less if gaetz is approved. but approval verifies he can do whatever he wants over the next 4 years with congress as a rubber stamp. and denial just allows him to grow his list of enemies. he will still get a yes man for the position in the long run, which is all he really wants. gaetz is a pawn here. his reward is the ability to close any investigations against himself, and trump.

  2. Macroduck

    Off topic – the military under Trump:

    James mentioned, in a comment to the prior post, Trump saying he means to purge the the military of generals (and presumably admirals) not to his liking. He has expressed a desire to do the same with civil servants, but I suspect the civil servants are better protected.

    Look at Trump’s reported nominee to become Defense Secretary. He has no experience as a military leader or planner, but oodles of experience talking to Trump supporters. Why do we need a domestic policy salesman above all else at the top of DOD? I think maybe to sell Trump’s domestic plans – in particular the end of posse comitatus. Trump wants to use the military to enforce his will. That’s illegal under the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. The Act was suspended under – you guessed it – George Bush the lesser for two years.

    Bush wants to purge the generals because generals have headed off Trump’s authoritarian notions. He wants to put troops in the streets. He has issued over 100 threats to prosecute or otherwise punish his political opponents. But he’s not an authoritarian, not reeeaally, say thinkers-on-a-leash from the right – that’s just the way he talks.

      1. Willie

        What could possibly go wrong with that? I wonder if tea drinking, windows, and stairs will somehow become dangerous in this country as well.

  3. Macroduck

    Off topic – climate change and organized violence:

    https://www.ft.com/content/27718d62-6481-4bdb-ace9-df9b05e23448

    The FT is not working up to its usual standards here, which is unfortunate given the importance of the subject. Climate stress induces violence, including organized violence: war, insurrection, piracy, criminal violence of all kinds. It’s a two-way street, with organized violence adding to climate change.

    With COP29 underway, the FT probably stumbled in this issue and didn’t have time to do any real work. The line about “if global leaders knew, they’d do something about it” is just sad. They know and they aren’t doing much about it.

    The piece is slapped together, but worth noting just for the topic; climate change induces violence. The more change, the more violence.

  4. joseph

    “Matt Gaetz resigned from the House Wednesday, Speaker Mike Johnson announced.”

    Well, that was quick. The current congressional session isn’t over until January and he hasn’t even been officially nominated yet. But the House Ethics Committee was closing in on him regarding underage sex trafficking. His resignation officially closes the investigation abruptly because the committee no longer has jurisdiction. He’s obviously running scared.

    Quite fitting to have a sex offender as the chief legal officer for a sex offender. Simpaticos you might say.

    1. baffling

      his resignation is a mistake. this will give some in the senate leverage to not approve his nomination. trump will act offended, but won’t be. now gaetz is out of the picture.
      trump is nominating people that he will make a fuss over publicly, but will not lose any sleep if somebody else does not approve them.

    2. joseph

      Gaetz’s resignation wasn’t a mistake. It was strategic. The House Ethics Committee was scheduled to release the report on their Gaetz investigation on Friday. It’s no coincidence that he resigned yesterday. Now the chairman has said that they won’t release the report because Gaetz is no longer under their jurisdiction. The committee could still release it, but now they have a technical excuse not to and can avoid risking Trump’s wrath. They are spineless.

  5. David S

    I’m going to be the rebel here and actually comment on what Menzie posted—I hope I that’s okay.

    If a boring Republican had just been elected it would be reasonable to say that inflation measures would continue to move sideways or even start trending down–like the chart suggests. But, we don’t have boring, we all get to ride the crazy train for 2025 so some interesting things can happen. Here’s some possible scenarios that I’ve been thinking of:

    1. Few radical policy changes are actually implemented, i.e. tariffs aren’t as broad-based as promised and the major legislation is just more tax cuts and no meaningful fiscal constraint. Result is decent GDP growth, PCE steady at 2.2 or 2.4, BUT no big drops in most borrowing rates because 10 year notes will be responding to the larger Federal deficit.

    2. Radical policy changes like big tariffs, tax cut, trade war and some foreign policy shenanigan that disrupts energy markets. Result is slower or negative GDP growth, sector shocks in manufacturing (mostly negative, because imported feedstocks and supply chains are messed up), high borrowing rates, high PCE and more expensive food and energy.

    I’m praying for Scenario 1, but recent cabinet appointments hint at Scenario 2. Even something in between won’t be fun.

    1. Macroduck

      “I’m going to be the rebel here and actually comment on what Menzie posted…”

      You’re on pretty thin ice here.

Comments are closed.