There is no "citation needed" meme. There is two metrics (or many, one from the .gov and the others from private analysts) and everybody repeats that one is wrong without explaining why. I have no interest in defending the .ar goverment, but this article is not really good. They should say something like "this another metric or method should be used, these are the correct parameters, because of a, b, and c. The ones used by the Argentinian gov are wrong because of d, e, and f". Also remember that the index is not an absolute number, it is relative to certain parameters. Saying that "15%" is low or high just like that is absurd, its like saying that a distance of "10" is too large without referring to a scale. OTOH, the argument usually exposed is also wrong, it reads like: "The people buying every day in the local store knows that inflation is higher." Thats a fallacy, the only thing I can know from going to the store is the price from that store. An index cant be used for predictions directly.
I would like to repeat that I have no sympathy with .gov.ar, I think they do many things wrong. Sadly, those things are not the ones pointed by the media. I am interested in changing the status quo but, imho, the only democratic, honest way to do it is using rationality as a tool for making our best possible decisions.
I dont understand why do you react like that. I am not joking. Read carefuly. My salary increased more than 4x, but that doesnt prove you wrong right? Statistics doenst work that way. Sorry if I offended you by having a different opinion, but ad hominem arguments like yours are not going to improve things, we should try to actually think.
Yes, of course, but that doesnt prove anything about INDEC. The index does not measure the changes in that way. Please, dont call me "irrational", it clearly doesnt apply, I think that I have a reasonable argument that of course can be wrong, but by any means is irrational. Please tellme how do you go from this premise: "The prices in the supermarket raised" to "Indec is a lier". My argument is that it cant be "Because yogurth increased 300% and Indec inflation report is 10%". We need something better to prove they are wrong (and let me repeat again that I think they are wrong)
Well, you keep talking about me instead about the topic,and I dont understand why you are disrespectful with my person. I will go back to reading on Logic, mi topic for this week. I got "Metalogic" from Hunter. Really, sorry for the noise.
You are asking to see meticulous proofs in a simple blog post, which is not gonna happen. Also, any article like this will assume that you already know something about what's going on there, or at least in the rest of the world. Eg: If someone says 20-30% inflation rate is high, it's obviously comparing it to the inflation in other countries. So yes, it's damn high.
About the metrics, its pretty simple: they just pick the products/services that didn't increase much their price during that period. Of course nobody can't actually live with those products, nobody buys them or even know them. And when they need something real for the index, like the Big Mac.. Well, you know what happens. Automagically its price is reduced to a half, and the product is removed from the menu.
So, in this metric, 10% of inflation is high, right? and another countries can use a different metric, and in fact, they do. Each economy is different, if you cant produce energy by natural caracteristics of your country, your economy could be tied to international oil prices, for example. So comparing this things one to one is not possible. I want to make it clear again. I am not defending .gov.ar, but the way we are thinking these problemsis wrong.
Proof need to happen, in a post or anywhere else. Without that a rational decision cant be made, and we will never reach true democracy. The simple blog post as you call it is not only useless but harmful, because we use this information for actually making decisions. In modern politic, there is a close relation between knowledge, rationality and freedom.
