Looking in your crystal ball for the inflation rate

What inflation rate do you use?

  • 3.0% non-medical or lower

    Votes: 5 17.2%
  • 3.5% non-medical

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • 4.0% non-medical

    Votes: 6 20.7%
  • 4.5% non-medical

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 5.0% non-medical

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 5.5% non-medical

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 6.0% non-medical or higher

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 6.0% medical or lower

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 7.0% medical

    Votes: 3 10.3%
  • 7.5% medical

    Votes: 4 13.8%
  • 8.0% medical

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 8.5% medical

    Votes: 7 24.1%
  • 9.0% medical

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • 9.5% medical

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • 10% medical or higher

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    29

MJ

Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Joined
Mar 29, 2004
Messages
2,345
I was wondering for those of us who keep track of future budgets, what inflation rate do you currently see in your infallible crystal ball to help determine your budget for the next 25-30 years.

I dividend the poll into number of inflation rate increments for
(1) non-medical expenses
(2) medical expenses.
 
I just got my new health insurance rate for 2006. It went up 4.8%. That's the lowest increase I can remember.

It's been going up about 8% on average. Maybe the % increase will start going down since the dollar amount is much higher now. If I use my base rate from 6 years ago, this increase was in the 8% range (about the same dollar increase as 6 years ago).
 
I use 3.0 % in my spread sheet, sometimes jack it up to 3.5%.

I don't know what to think about medical %.
I was getting hit with ~ 12 - 24 % a year private medical premium increases. Then just when I was bailing out of it, they sent me "only" a 6.5% increase, but it had been only 9 months since the last increase!  I had exactly zero $ of claims over the whole experience. But you get put into a class, usually on a per-state basis. If the class gets sicker, everybody pays. Except for those rookies who are just joining, who get a "no rate increase for 12 months" clause. Then after 12 months... whammo!
 
Medical inflation is out of control. Its very labor intensive. Labor is heavily taxed, which drives up labor costs. Add in monopoly pricing power, which eliminates the price discipline that competition provides. You have to go to Thailand to get reasonable prices.
 
Since I am now paying 100% of the insurance, I was thrilled to find that my company insurance (now cobra) as of May/05, did not increase except the co-pay. I can live with that. But, at $524/month for individual coverage (medical/dental), it is still a bit hefty.
 
MJ, you know why they call them cobras? Because of that nasty bite.

Have you already looked into individual health insurance? You're young and healthy, right? A high-deductible policy might make sense for you (maybe even an HSA). You're probably looking at less than $150/mo.
 
wab said:
Have you already looked into individual health insurance? You're young and healthy, right? A high-deductible policy might make sense for you (maybe even an HSA). You're probably looking at less than $150/mo.

I guess at 57+, I'm still young :confused: and I am in excellent health (cough cough :LOL:) and I don't smoke.
I looked into high deductible but in NY, the insurance companies don't offer it I think because state restrictions. Since I am planning to sell my house next year, I'm looking for a new place to live. Although I haven't been to NM and specifically Albuquerque, I will taking a closer look at that city. Their BCBS PPO for individual coverage is pretty low @ $107 for $5k ded 20/80. Their $2k ded and $20 copay for $206, isn't too bad either.
 
MJ said:
I guess at 57+, I'm still young  :confused: and I am in excellent health (cough cough  :LOL:) and I don't smoke.
I looked into high deductible but in NY, the insurance companies don't offer it I think because state restrictions. Since I am planning to sell my house next year, I'm looking for a new place to live. Although I haven't been to NM and specifically Albuquerque, I will taking a closer look at that city. Their BCBS PPO for individual coverage is pretty low @ $107 for $5k ded 20/80. Their $2k ded and $20 copay for $206, isn't too bad either.

That "high deductible" coverage was my intention pre-ER. Now, I just
settle for about anything available we can afford. An ER
surprise.

NM is a neat state. I could envision myself riding the motorcycle
around all that scenery. Now I don't ride any more. Yet another
surprise. I've had a bunch of them and more to come I expect.

JG
 
MJ said:
I guess at 57+, I'm still young  :confused: and I am in excellent health (cough cough  :LOL:) and I don't smoke.
I looked into high deductible but in NY, the insurance companies don't offer it I think because state restrictions. Since I am planning to sell my house next year, I'm looking for a new place to live. Although I haven't been to NM and specifically Albuquerque, I will taking a closer look at that city. Their BCBS PPO for individual coverage is pretty low @ $107 for $5k ded 20/80. Their $2k ded and $20 copay for $206, isn't too bad either.

NM is beautiful and a pretty low cost place. Check out other places besides Albuquerque in the state.

NM is where I will move if the damp weather in the mid atlantic gets to be too much for my arthritis as I get older.
 
brewer12345 said:
NM is beautiful and a pretty low cost place. Check out other places besides Albuquerque in the state.
NM is where I will move if the damp weather in the mid atlantic gets to be too much for my arthritis as I get older.

I am looking for the amenities of a small to medium size city with cool to hot climate with normal humidity, low cost, and somewhat bicycle friendly (I am used to NYC traffic). I want to continue to use my bicycle for the next 10 years+ as my main mode of transportation (shop, visit friends, day trips) and either keep my car or use rentals/taxis for long distance trips and emergencies.
Initially, it is going to be my homebase while I travel 6 to 8 months a year.

BTW, as always, any recommendations that seem to fit my criterias, would be appreciated.
 
PPI surges

Government's wholesale price gauge rises 1.9% on month-to-month basis, easily topping estimates.
October 18, 2005: 11:32 AM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - A leap in energy costs drove the prices paid by businesses to the fastest month-to-month gain in more than 15 years in September, according to a report issued Tuesday, as the government's measure of inflation on the wholesale level came in above Wall Street's expectations.

The Producer Price Index showed that the price of finished goods rose 1.9 percent in September after a 0.6 percent rise in August. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast a rise of 1.4 percent. It's the biggest one-month percentage jump in the PPI since January 1990. As recently as March 2004, the 12-month change in the PPI had been only 1.5 percent.
 
This is fun, eh? The market shrugged off the highest increase in the CPI in 25 years, but the PPI makes the market take a hit. I guess that makes sense, though. The PPI jump is more likely to directly impact core CPI.
 
Well, now they know it's just a matter of time before companies have to raise prices, reducing demand, destroying next quarters revenue numbers, profits etc. Market anticipating dissapointing earnings...I'm diggiing my bomb shelter now.

Medical inflation: last year my premiums went up ten percent, haven't gotten the fun filled update for '06.
 
Heh, I see that only one person voted for "non-medical" (CPI-U?) inflation averaging 5.5% or higher. I just calculated the CPI-U increase YTD: 5.66%.
 
MJ said:
I am looking for the amenities of a small to medium size city with cool to hot climate with normal humidity, low cost, and somewhat bicycle friendly (I am used to NYC traffic). I want to continue to use my bicycle for the next 10 years+ as my main mode of transportation (shop, visit friends, day trips) and either keep my car or use rentals/taxis for long distance trips and emergencies.
Initially, it is going to be my homebase while I travel 6 to 8 months a year.

BTW, as always, any recommendations that seem to fit my criterias, would be appreciated.

What is "normal" humidity? NM seems very dry to me, but I suppose it depends on what you are used to.

In NM, I would also look at Taos. This is going to sound funny, but I would also check out Alamosa, CO, especially if you are looking for a low cost home base. Its a smallish town in the south central plains of CO. We visited it earlier this year and after driving through a lot of obviously poor farmland, I was amazed at how cosmopolitan it was. Very inexpensive, close to the NM border, and a few hours drive to CO springs and Denver (for airports).
 
brewer12345 said:
What is "normal" humidity? NM seems very dry to me, but I suppose it depends on what you are used to.
I guess I meant between 25% to 50%. BTW, Albuquerque has 87% hum right now.

I'll look at the other towns although they sound like they might be a bit too small for me.
 
MJ said:
I guess I meant between 25% to 50%. BTW, Albuquerque has 87% hum right now.

I'll look at the other towns although they sound like they might be a bit too small for me.


I'd suggest Boulder, CO, but I suspect that it would be expensive.
 
I guess I meant between 25% to 50%. BTW, Albuquerque has 87% hum right now.

I could be wrong but doesn't dew point (moisture in the air?) really tell you how humid the air feels.  I just know the humidity # did not always tell the story & whenever the dew point goes beyond 65 it starts feeling real sticky.  Just my experience in sticky climates.

edit
"When air temperature and dew point temperatures are very close, the air has a high relative humidity. The opposite is true when there is a large difference between air and dew point temperatures, which indicates air with lower relaitve humidity. Locations with high relative humidities indicate that the air is nearly saturated with moisture; clouds and precipitation are therefore quite possible. Weather conditions at locations with high dew point temperatures (65 or greater) are likely to be uncomfortably humid."

http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/maps/sfcobs/dwp.rxml
 
The CPI is not the *real*inflation rate.

From The Ecomomist:
http://www.economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=5025953

Short conclusion:
"Over the past three decades as a whole, Mr Reis's DPI has followed a similar downward trend to the CPI. But in recent years the gap between the two has widened. In the four years to 2004, the average annual rate of inflation according to the DPI was 7.4%, compared with an average increase of only 2.3% in the CPI. This was largely due to the rising price of homes. The true rate of increase in workers' cost of living is calculated to be just as high. Still feeling as well off as you did?"

Of course several posters here have been posting that the CPI is bogus for some time now but its nice to have studies that support this.
 
yakers said:
The CPI is not the *real*inflation rate.

Will the *real* inflation rate please stand up?

So, who among us buys a new house each year (without selling the old one)? Does it make sense to include the rising cost of houses in an inflation index?

There are many measures of inflation. Another one economists use is called the GDP Price Deflator, which is considered the most "unbiased" measure. And it has generally been a point or so below the CPI.

The CPI is what it is. Nobody is trying to trick you.
 
I would prefer an independent group to determine the CPI. One without any conflicts of interest.
 
Back
Top Bottom