Deflation Rising

[Scorpio]

@cactusflower
Erm, the only possible source of the data would be the CSO. Presumably you can check yourself, at cso.ie.
As for price falls, perhaps you missed this point:

These falls in prices are getting more common over time. There were only 4 instances of falling prices across the 12 groups in the 1980s, compared to 15 in the 1990s and 25 between 2000 and 2008.

As for this:

The other problem is that we are in the worst unemployment crisis in Ireland since the Famine, and prices have fallen only slightly from peak.
Put it this way: unemployment is now 130% of the previous worst-ever figure back in the early 90s.
And prices are down what? 6 or 7% from their highest-ever figure in 2007?
Do you see the disconnect?
Prices are up maybe 400% from the last time there were this many unemployed in Ireland.

I hardly know where to start with this... Are you seriously arguing that prices have to fall to 1/400th what they are now?
From an economy's perspective, unemployment matters not in numbers, but in percentage terms. The unemployment rate is just over half what it was during the early 1990s.

I'd be interested in you exploring your unemployment/price level theory - it's certainly a novel departure from the standard unemployment/inflation discussion. One suggestion - you might want to factor in levels of wages and unemployment benefits before leaping to too many more conclusions.

[feargach]

I hardly know where to start with this... Are you seriously arguing that prices have to fall to 1/400th what they are now?...
The unemployment rate is just over half what it was during the early 1990s.

Er, no. Prices are up 400% means that something that cost 25c in 1993 costs a euro now.

We have 400,000 unemployed. That is very serious indeed. I don't have figures to hand for the actual size of the workforce at the moment, but I think it's probably the same rate as before, if not a lot higher.

I know the population is higher than it was in the early 90s, but is it 35% higher? I think not. I think your sums could do with a quick spot-check, just to be sure.

[athlonedub]

Er, no. Prices are up 400% means that something that cost 25c in 1993 costs a euro now.

Err if it had gone up 400pc and it had cost 25c , would it not cost 1.25 now?? (every 25c cent increase would be a 100pc increase on the original price).

If it costs 1 euro now, it is 4 times what it originally cost, but that is a 300pc increase. (ie 75c increase over the original 25c cost)

[feargach]

Err if it had gone up 400pc and it had cost 25c , would it not cost 1.25 now?? (every 25c cent increase would be a 100pc increase on the original price).

If it costs 1 euro now, it is 4 times what it originally cost, but that is a 300pc increase. (ie 75c increase over the original 25c cost)

Haha, well done, you may have caught me on that one. 50c is 200% of 25c, 75c is 300%, €1 is 400%. And that's where I tripped up: I should have said prices have gone up to 400% of what they were previously. Forgive my error.

I hope you'll agree I came closer than the other poster, who seemed to think I thought that one euro today is one-quarter of a cent in 1990.

[athlonedub]

Haha, well done, you may have caught me on that one. 50c is 200% of 25c, 75c is 300%, €1 is 400%. And that's where I tripped up: I should have said prices have gone up to 400% of what they were previously. Forgive my error.

I hope you'll agree I came closer than the other poster, who seemed to think I thought that one euro today is one-quarter of a cent in 1990.

In fairness, yes !!

[athlonedub]

Its the accountant in me !!

[feargach]

I hope yer using protection.

... I'll get me coat...

[Whatuwant2007]

expect the rate of deflation to stablise and then fall (back towards 0 then inflation) as interest rates rise around the world

[athlonedub]

ahhhhhhh the old ones are the best (gags that is!)

[Scorpio]

Er, no. Prices are up 400% means that something that cost 25c in 1993 costs a euro now.

We have 400,000 unemployed. That is very serious indeed. I don't have figures to hand for the actual size of the workforce at the moment, but I think it's probably the same rate as before, if not a lot higher.

I know the population is higher than it was in the early 90s, but is it 35% higher? I think not. I think your sums could do with a quick spot-check, just to be sure.

Apologies, missed the % sign - had thought you were comparing unemployment and prices in the 1840s with now!

Either way, I would really strongly recommend that you get your stats checked, on both counts. You can get them all here, if you don't trust my maths! CSO Database Dissemination Service - Subject Tree
1) Prices in 2007 were 47% above 1995 levels, while wages were 80% above 1995 levels. (Wage figures don't go back before 1995, but prices in 2008 were only 76% above 1989 levels, so even if wages hadn't changed between 1988 and 1995, workers would still be better off.)

2) There are not 400,000 people unemployed, there are 400,000 people signing on, very very different. About 70k-80k people who sign on are not unemployed, as a close examination of the Live Register and QNHS stas will show. So assuming 330k actual unemployed, that means an unemployment rate of about 14%, a good bit below the 1980s figures of up to 19%.

Please please please go off and get the stats to inform your points, rather than just making your points and assuming that the stats would back you up.