Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-07-2014, 02:58 PM   #151
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,797
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
The biggest decrease in price overall appeared in western countries just because we can leverage low cost developping country works thank to cheap transports. This is quite new and unlikely to continue for ever as they eventually catch up. Already China and Asia is more and more expensive to produce in.
We can discuss the Law of Comparative Advantage. Countries that have a large quantity to cheap labor have an advantage in producing products that only require low skill sets. China is expected to transition 30 million jobs to machines and robots in the next few years. As the price of human labor rises alternative means of manufacturing will be found. 3D printing... Robots.... machines.


QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
But most products get a little more expensive each year.
Show me an industry that is not subsidized or heavily regulated where prices are rising.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
As if it should be part of healthy economy, this is hard to say... Many central bank have an objective arround 2% inflation rate and that not at all implying decreasing prices. More the contrary. Their justification is that deflating price lead to everybody keeping money in the bank instead of spending it as it get more value just by waiting. it doesn't favor creating new enterprise or buyings things. Again just keeping the money make you richer. Enterprise sell less and less and after some time need to fire their employees. At least that's what they say.
Give a scenario where rising prices are good for poor people or people on a fixed income? Are rising food prices good or bad for poor people? Are rising energy prices good or bad for poor people? Are rising housing prices good or bad for poor people?

When new money is injected into the economy by the central bank it doesn't get mailed out to the poor or the middle class. It goes to the big banks and corporations who get access to the money before prices rise. Yes... This money "trickles down", but by the time it trickles down to the middle class prices have already risen to offset the added money into their paycheck. For people at the very bottom prices rise long before any money trickles down to them. Inflationary policies are "trickle down" policies. They are policies that benefit the upper 10% at the expense of the rest.

---------- Post added 12-07-14 at 04:03 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
The historical record shows that. It is a fact.
Then show me an example of this "fact". IF it is a historical record you should have no problem providing a credible source to link to.

There is a lot of historical data the says the opposite. We have periods of price deflation and rising income.
In the US from 1880 to 1896, the wholesale price level fell by about 30 percent, or by 1.75 percent per year, while real income rose by about 85 percent, or around 5 percent per year.

12-07-2014, 03:10 PM   #152
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,982
I'm not going to argue economics on a site devoted to photography. Focusing on Pentax related issues is why I am here.
12-07-2014, 04:12 PM   #153
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Show me an industry that is not subsidized or heavily regulated where prices are rising.


Give a scenario where rising prices are good for poor people or people on a fixed income? Are rising food prices good or bad for poor people? Are rising energy prices good or bad for poor people? Are rising housing prices good or bad for poor people?

When new money is injected into the economy by the central bank it doesn't get mailed out to the poor or the middle class. It goes to the big banks and corporations who get access to the money before prices rise. Yes... This money "trickles down", but by the time it trickles down to the middle class prices have already risen to offset the added money into their paycheck. For people at the very bottom prices rise long before any money trickles down to them. Inflationary policies are "trickle down" policies. They are policies that benefit the upper 10% at the expense of the rest.

---------- Post added 12-07-14 at 04:03 PM ----------

Then show me an example of this "fact". IF it is a historical record you should have no problem providing a credible source to link to.

There is a lot of historical data the says the opposite. We have periods of price deflation and rising income.
In the US from 1880 to 1896, the wholesale price level fell by about 30 percent, or by 1.75 percent per year, while real income rose by about 85 percent, or around 5 percent per year.
I suppose your country has an official office for computing statistics. Help yourself and check the indices of price rate. If it is not too badly done, you can check this year, and many years in the past. In my country, they even provide you with long terms statistics.

I live in France... but let look for example US. They provide inflation rate month by month from 1914 to 2014:

Where do we have noticable deflation ?

- moderate deflation rates in 1921, 1922... after few year with huge inflation of prices.
- moderate deflation rate in 1927, 1928. 1929 is like a draw. Huge deflation rate following the crisis in 1930, 1931, 1932, 1933
- moderate deflation rate in 1938.
- moderate deflation rate in 1949 and no a full year with deflation since 1949.

There where economic crisis in 1921-1922 and I think I don't need to recall to your attention the 1929 economic crisis.

Then to be sure, let's check the definition of inflation (here from wikipedia)

"In economics, inflation is a sustained increase in the general price level of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.[1]"

For me looking for both the inflation rate history on one side and the definition of inflation on the other side I conclude that there was a continuous sustained increase in the general price level of goods in the US since 1949... And overall even from 1914 if we take the average... Even through some year had deflation.

So...I don't get you point? You want to deny the observed inflation rate? You want to deny many central bank have and objective to maintain a low but positive inflation rate ?

I mean there was some idea that prices decreased over time for most things... Still there proof it was not the case recently in the US... Was not the case in France neither.

Even through I'am engineer and with quite good salary I saw the price of meat incresing and buy less of it than before. I remember that 17 years one precise house was brought for 200 000€... Now it is estimated 600 000€. Still it is 17 years older. When I was youg a small new car was worth something like 1200€... Now it is 8000€. You'd say the new car is better blablabla... Mostly it is still a car, a little safer... but 6 time more expensive. Does it consume far less gazoline? No. Do we drive significantly faster? Well there lowered speed limit now. No real difference in service, 6 time the price. And where I live the toll to use the highway take 10 cent every years, price of restaurant tend to get easily 1 euro per year for a lunch...

Another story... My grand father paid many year for retirement before the second world war. Something like 10 year of paying a lot from hissalary... It was before social security in France. When he finally retired after 40 years, thoses 10 years, not go from social security... There where not worth anything valuable anymore. he could have buy a flat through a mortage he is placed the money that way... But he saved for retirement and got nothing for 10 years worth of savings.

To me doesn't look like on what I obverse prices decreases. The officials conclude the same...

Don't want to argue more on this. If you want to conclude on general decrease of prices and deny the official statistics or the observations you can make (outside or cameras) that your right. If you want to say you don't like this, that's also your rights... Go to an economical forum to argue that deflation is better than inflation... You may have had times. Anyway, no point wasting more anyone time on Pentax forum on this.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 12-07-2014 at 04:26 PM.
12-07-2014, 05:31 PM   #154
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,426
People are expensive. In a classic resources-capital-labor-scrip economy (a market-based capitalist system) deflation is caused when alternative means of production replace people with machines, thus either lowering price or adding utility at a constant price. The analog-to-digital photography conversion is an instructive example.*

Of course, what to do for all the people who have been replaced? Why, allow and support through laws and regulations organized labor. The more difficult it becomes to reduce labor expense as a component of final cost the more likely a nation is to experience a period of price inflation. In 1979 27.9% of the Civilian Labor Force was employed under a collective bargaining agreement. That number has steadily declined to roughly 13% today. The entire 35 year period has been marked by disinflation in prices - and since 1990 stagnation in inflation-adjusted household income. Between 4Q2008 and 3Q2009 USA actually experienced price deflation!

Looking ahead in the USA, as the Labor Force Participation Rate declines (presently 92,400,000 eligible-age persons are not in the Labor Force) the more likely existing labor will have more control over the price of work due to a demand-supply imbalance. There simply won't be enough workers to meet demand.

Labor-driven, cost-push re-flation in the USA is coming.


* I got photography in there


Last edited by monochrome; 12-07-2014 at 05:36 PM.
12-07-2014, 07:55 PM   #155
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,797
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
I suppose your country has an official office for computing statistics. Help yourself and check the indices of price rate. If it is not too badly done, you can check this year, and many years in the past. In my country, they even provide you with long terms statistics.

I live in France... but let look for example US. They provide inflation rate month by month from 1914 to 2014:

Where do we have noticable deflation ?

- moderate deflation rates in 1921, 1922... after few year with huge inflation of prices.
- moderate deflation rate in 1927, 1928. 1929 is like a draw. Huge deflation rate following the crisis in 1930, 1931, 1932, 1933
- moderate deflation rate in 1938.
- moderate deflation rate in 1949 and no a full year with deflation since 1949.

There where economic crisis in 1921-1922 and I think I don't need to recall to your attention the 1929 economic crisis.

For me looking for both the inflation rate history on one side and the definition of inflation on the other side I conclude that there was a continuous sustained increase in the general price level of goods in the US since 1949... And overall even from 1914 if we take the average... Even through some year had deflation.
The Federal Reserve was chartered in 1913. The crash of 29 followed an inflationary bubble known as the "Roaring 20's". This is a post WWI bubble.
We have several war bubbles that distort data. You need to look at the history. 1947-1948 saw double digit inflation rates. The deflation you quoted in 1949 is a direct result of the central bank trying to combat the runaway inflation of post WWII.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
So...I don't get you point? You want to deny the observed inflation rate? You want to deny many central bank have and objective to maintain a low but positive inflation rate ?
All all of the years you quote occur after we established a central bank.
Deflation that occurs as a result of a economic bubble is not good. Deflation that occurs as a result of natural economic growth is a good thing.

I mean there was some idea that prices decreased over time for most things... Still there proof it was not the case recently in the US... Was not the case in France neither.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Even through I'am engineer and with quite good salary I saw the price of meat incresing and buy less of it than before. I remember that 17 years one precise house was brought for 200 000€... Now it is estimated 600 000€. Still it is 17 years older. When I was youg a small new car was worth something like 1200€... Now it is 8000€. You'd say the new car is better blablabla... Mostly it is still a car, a little safer... but 6 time more expensive. Does it consume far less gazoline? No. Do we drive significantly faster? Well there lowered speed limit now. No real difference in service, 6 time the price. And where I live the toll to use the highway take 10 cent every years, price of restaurant tend to get easily 1 euro per year for a lunch...
In the USA food is not calculated into the inflation rate. Food is heavily subsidized here, so we pay much more for it than we would normally. There is an old saying in economics. IF you want to make something really expensive, subsidize it. This is why I said above to give me an example of a good that is not subsidized where prices are rising over time. The federal government does not include food, housing, or energy in the CPI (our inflation index) because all of those segments are heavily subsidized and the subsidies distort the numbers.

I still have not seen anyone explain how poor people are helped by rising prices. Everyone wants to use vague references and general statements. Let's start with the simple stuff. If you are poor and have limited income elasticity how are you helped by rising prices? How do rising food prices help poor people? If you believe inflation is good, then it should be simple to explain how rising prices help people.
12-08-2014, 12:11 AM   #156
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
In the USA food is not calculated into the inflation rate. Food is heavily subsidized here, so we pay much more for it than we would normally. There is an old saying in economics. IF you want to make something really expensive, subsidize it. This is why I said above to give me an example of a good that is not subsidized where prices are rising over time. The federal government does not include food, housing, or energy in the CPI (our inflation index) because all of those segments are heavily subsidized and the subsidies distort the numbers.

I still have not seen anyone explain how poor people are helped by rising prices. Everyone wants to use vague references and general statements. Let's start with the simple stuff. If you are poor and have limited income elasticity how are you helped by rising prices? How do rising food prices help poor people? If you believe inflation is good, then it should be simple to explain how rising prices help people.
You miss the point, you melt what you think is good or not with what happen. That you don't like it doesn't prevent to happen. There still positive inflation rate. And that removing's from your own explanations subsidized thing that anyway see their price increasing over time as you explain. (like Food, housing or energy). The obvious conclusion is that price of things increase even more if we count everything.

Don't like? Think it is bad... That's another topic !

QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
The Federal Reserve was chartered in 1913. The crash of 29 followed an inflationary bubble known as the "Roaring 20's". This is a post WWI bubble.
We have several war bubbles that distort data. You need to look at the history. 1947-1948 saw double digit inflation rates. The deflation you quoted in 1949 is a direct result of the central bank trying to combat the runaway inflation of post WWII.
No point to deny big key event like war do happen from time to time... I mean just listen to the news, there several wars going on just right now.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 12-08-2014 at 12:32 AM.
12-08-2014, 05:49 AM   #157
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,797
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
There still positive inflation rate.
Did I say there wasn't?

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
The obvious conclusion is that price of things increase even more if we count everything.
1. IF the central bank is pursuing an inflationary policy, then obviously prices rise with inflation. This is the result of monetary policy and not natural economic expansion or contraction.

2. To use sensors as an example. There was a shortage of really high quality silicon needed for imagining sensors. Low quality silicon results in lower yields. There were also manufacturing issues that required multiple masks to produce FF sensors. A few years ago a couple of new facilities for producing pure silicon came on line. This lead to a big drop in the price of raw materials needed to produce sensors and higher yields. This also lead to a big shake up in the American solar panel industry which some people might remember. At the same time Canon and Sony improved manufacturing techniques for FF sensors allowing the production of a FF sensor with a single mask. The result of these two natural economic evolutionary events is price deflation in the digital camera market. Today you can buy a FF digital camera for $1,200.00 and it doesn't have a damn thing to do with Moore's Law. 10 years ago I paid $3,000 for a 12MP Canon 5D. Falling prices are natural in a healthy economy. Technology is a good example because of the compressed time frame.


You still have not explained how inflationary policies help poor and middle class people. How do higher prices help people with little or no money? How do higher prices help people with limited income elasticity? The answer is that you can't, because inflationary policies make poor people poorer. That is why you are avoiding the question.
12-08-2014, 06:19 AM   #158
Pentaxian
dcshooter's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Washington DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,603
As much as I respect everyone's opinions on this, there's a reason economics is called the "Dismal Science." Methinks it's time for me to bow out of this thread!

12-08-2014, 01:18 PM   #159
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
Winder we have the same view. Don't got it yet?

Yes price increase overall. this is tracked by inflation rate. Food is more and more expensive. Housing or ernergy too. Poor or middle class struggle with that issue. Price do decrease for FF camera and plasma TV... Unfortunately you cannot eat FF camera or plasma TV. Thoses things account for a tiny bit of overall expenses and even then are just luxury toys for most, in no way are they necessary.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 12-08-2014 at 01:47 PM.
12-08-2014, 01:49 PM   #160
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,426
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
In the USA food is not calculated into the inflation rate. Food is heavily subsidized here, so we pay much more for it than we would normally. There is an old saying in economics. IF you want to make something really expensive, subsidize it.
When calculating the Consumer Price Index the Bureau of Labor Statistics assigns a weight of 14.9% to Food & Beverages. Since Food and Energy are highly volatile, BLS publishes another measure without them - CPI-ex Food and Energy.

Here's a link to the 2011 - 2012 BLS Weights (10/2013)I'm out with this one - getting overly political. Thread Ignored.

Last edited by monochrome; 12-09-2014 at 09:10 AM.
12-08-2014, 04:19 PM   #161
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,982
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Price do decrease for FF camera and plasma TV.
I know I promised to refrain discussing this any more, but this seriously needs a refrain from what I already said; then I will keep my promise and say no more.

Most of the cost in these particular examples is electronics of some kind, which is why I made my comment about Moore's Law. Prices of TVs and cameras will continue to go down; prices of automobiles and houses will continue to go up ... and most of us spend a lot more on the latter (the stuff going up in price) than on the former (the stuff which benefits from Moore's Law)
12-08-2014, 08:05 PM   #162
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,797
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Most of the cost in these particular examples is electronics of some kind, which is why I made my comment about Moore's Law. Prices of TVs and cameras will continue to go down; prices of automobiles and houses will continue to go up ... and most of us spend a lot more on the latter (the stuff going up in price) than on the former (the stuff which benefits from Moore's Law)
Do you understand that Moore's Law simply describes the rate of advancement of an industry? It's not a real law, and it doesn't change the laws of supply and demand.
As people become more productive they can produce more with less resources. Digital cameras have allowed people to be more efficient and produce more images at a lower cost. The result is people are paying less for images.

There is a rate of evolution in every industry. Moore's Law specifically applies to one industry, but doesn't change or define the economics of the industry. Yes, the tech industry is a rapidly evolving industry, but the speed of evolution doesn't change economics. If the industry evolves slowly, then prices fall slowly. If an industry evolves rapidly, then prices fall rapidly. This assumes constant demand.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Food is more and more expensive. Housing or ernergy too.
And all of these are subsidized and prices are distorted by government. Oil is currently falling... WHY? Because Saudi Arabia is driving down prices and selling a lot of oil at a low price? WHY? Because the Saudi's only need $10.00 a barrel to be profitable. The Gwar oil field produces more oil than the next 5 super fields combined. Russia needs $110.00 a barrel to be profitable and Iran needs $130.00 a barrel. The Saudi's don't use trade embargoes to put political pressure on other countries, they manipulate oil prices. Energy prices are highly manipulated by governments.

I don't know enough about the economy of France, but in the USA food is highly subsidized and we have import restricts on many goods that drive up prices. We pay twice as much for sugar as Mexico because we protect the American sugar industry. The Farm Bill is $1 trillion. Most of it subsidies and pork for corporate farms. We pay farmers not to produce. I'm sure if we look at France we will see mercantilism is alive and well. Subsidies, trade tariffs, you name it. All of these lead to higher prices and prevent prices from falling. They are not part of a healthy evolving economy.

Goods that are not manipulated by government fall in price as manufacturers become more efficient at production. We put a 20% tariff on solar panels to protect our solar panel industry, but that keeps prices from falling. The same events that have driven down the price of sensors have also driven down the price solar panels, but our government stepped in and prevented those prices from falling. American's pay 20% more for solar panels than people in other countries so that an extremely small but politically connected industry can get rich.

Prices fall in a healthy economy as producers become more efficient. Competition drives efficiency. What is happening in the photography industry? Are prices rising or falling? Photography is nearly a totally free industry. There are no barriers to entry (regulation). There are no cartels or unions setting prices. Free markets drive down prices. Photography is free industry and the downward trending prices reflect this.

If you think real prices rise naturally over time then photographers real wages should be rising over time. They aren't. The industry is not regulated or subsidized and those are the two primary reasons you see rising prices in an economy. If the government required all professional photographers to have a Masters of Fine Arts degrees or medium format cameras, you would see rising prices and fewer professional photographers because the barrier of entry would be raised. You would have regulation. You would also see the cost of tuition rise for the degree and the medium format industry would be much larger.

Let's keep it specific to the industry. Explain why prices (wages) are not naturally rising for professional photographers over time?
12-08-2014, 08:14 PM   #163
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,982
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Do you understand that Moore's Law simply describes the rate of advancement of an industry? It's not a real law, and it doesn't change the laws of supply and demand.
I am a computer professional. I understand Moore's Law. I used it correctly. I applied it to the specific things you talked about, namely modern TV sets and cameras, both of which are parts of the electronics industry, which is the industry that Moore's Law applies to.

You may continue to talk. I'm going back to discussions on photography, which is why I am here.

Have a good day.
12-08-2014, 08:49 PM   #164
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
This thread has become increasingly tedious and off topic.
It needs to be closed.
12-08-2014, 08:50 PM   #165
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,797
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I am a computer professional. I understand Moore's Law. I used it correctly. I applied it to the specific things you talked about, namely modern TV sets and cameras, both of which are parts of the electronics industry, which is the industry that Moore's Law applies to.

You may continue to talk. I'm going back to discussions on photography, which is why I am here.

Have a good day.
I'm sure you are a computer professional. My background in economics. Moore's "law" describes the speed at which an industry advances, and it is not a law. All industry advance. Some slower than others. Some are stagnate for years, decades or centuries. Agriculture has had long periods of no advancement followed by periods of rapid growth, but the economics of the goods produced don't change just because the rate of advancement changes.

As people become better (more productive) at producing a given good, the price of that good falls. It does not matter if we are talking about integrated circuits or socks. The same rules apply.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, ccd, couple, dslr, edition, fa, february, hoya, jim, kodak, leica, lenses, malcolm, march, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, people, plans, pma, price, production, prototype, release, ricoh, rumors, rumors from japan, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Abstract My Website and Photos on Website Scootatheschool1990 Photo Critique 11 05-22-2013 01:13 AM
Some shots from japan (645D) larkis Pentax Medium Format 38 10-19-2012 05:26 PM
Travel Some shots from Japan (Sep, 2010) PacificCanuck Post Your Photos! 4 03-27-2011 01:44 PM
Pentax JAPAN formally apologizes on their website falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 47 01-30-2011 10:46 PM
rumors from Italy eurostar Pentax News and Rumors 25 12-23-2008 03:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top