WEBVTT - What Is Really Going On With Rent and Healthcare Inflation?

0:00:10.039 --> 0:00:13.840
<v Speaker 1>Hello, and welcome to another episode of the Odd Lots Podcast.

0:00:13.880 --> 0:00:18.400
<v Speaker 1>I'm Joe Wisenthal and I'm Tracy Halloway. Tracy last month's

0:00:18.520 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 1>inflation number, and I guess it was just a disappointment, right,

0:00:21.360 --> 0:00:24.360
<v Speaker 1>because two months ago it was this cool number both

0:00:24.400 --> 0:00:27.760
<v Speaker 1>on headline core, like maybe the turn is finally here,

0:00:28.360 --> 0:00:30.720
<v Speaker 1>and then last month it was like, no, straight back

0:00:30.760 --> 0:00:33.000
<v Speaker 1>up again. How many words did you write about why

0:00:33.040 --> 0:00:35.199
<v Speaker 1>people should be focused on month on month versus year

0:00:35.240 --> 0:00:39.080
<v Speaker 1>on here? I still think that from an investor or

0:00:39.120 --> 0:00:41.440
<v Speaker 1>standpoint or just someone trying to understand you account clearly

0:00:41.479 --> 0:00:45.480
<v Speaker 1>like the sequential numbers are more telling. I wasn't, Tracy.

0:00:45.640 --> 0:00:48.840
<v Speaker 1>I resent the insinuation that you think I would write,

0:00:48.840 --> 0:00:52.360
<v Speaker 1>so I would never insinuate anything, Okay, but you're right, Okay,

0:00:52.520 --> 0:00:56.440
<v Speaker 1>So people were expecting inflation to start to slow down

0:00:56.600 --> 0:00:58.280
<v Speaker 1>a little bit, and that's why there was lots of

0:00:58.320 --> 0:01:00.200
<v Speaker 1>talk about why you should look at the sequence whole

0:01:00.280 --> 0:01:03.360
<v Speaker 1>month on month data versus the year on year. But

0:01:03.600 --> 0:01:06.280
<v Speaker 1>what we saw instead was basically, any way you slice

0:01:06.319 --> 0:01:10.480
<v Speaker 1>the data, it looked disappointing. And where you going to

0:01:10.560 --> 0:01:12.800
<v Speaker 1>defend month on month again? No, no, of course, I

0:01:12.920 --> 0:01:16.720
<v Speaker 1>was just gonna say, ironically, the one the only measure

0:01:16.800 --> 0:01:20.680
<v Speaker 1>that looked good was the completely unsliced headline data because

0:01:20.720 --> 0:01:23.640
<v Speaker 1>that was so far dragged out, but the moment you

0:01:23.680 --> 0:01:26.120
<v Speaker 1>did even the slightest bit of product under headline was like,

0:01:26.160 --> 0:01:29.039
<v Speaker 1>oh my god, raging hut. All right. Well, the I

0:01:29.080 --> 0:01:31.760
<v Speaker 1>think the big takeaway from that number, other than it

0:01:31.840 --> 0:01:34.200
<v Speaker 1>being disappointing, was the fact that we really see some

0:01:34.240 --> 0:01:37.240
<v Speaker 1>of these price increases starting to spread from things like

0:01:37.280 --> 0:01:41.240
<v Speaker 1>food and energy and more towards services. And services, as

0:01:41.319 --> 0:01:43.880
<v Speaker 1>everyone is now finding out, is a big, big part

0:01:43.920 --> 0:01:46.120
<v Speaker 1>of the core index. And I guess everyone called this

0:01:46.200 --> 0:01:47.760
<v Speaker 1>to like, I think last year they're like, oh, we're

0:01:47.760 --> 0:01:50.240
<v Speaker 1>gonna have this big shift to services and yeah, sure,

0:01:50.280 --> 0:01:53.200
<v Speaker 1>good prices will come down and bull whip effects and

0:01:53.320 --> 0:01:56.880
<v Speaker 1>inventories and all that. But now it's here and it's like,

0:01:56.880 --> 0:01:58.280
<v Speaker 1>oh man, this could be here for a while and

0:01:58.280 --> 0:02:00.200
<v Speaker 1>it's not slowing down yet. Yeah, And I think the

0:02:00.200 --> 0:02:02.240
<v Speaker 1>big question is how long does it take to feed

0:02:02.240 --> 0:02:04.000
<v Speaker 1>into the index and how long does it take to

0:02:04.200 --> 0:02:07.600
<v Speaker 1>kind of go away? And there are different data points,

0:02:07.680 --> 0:02:09.520
<v Speaker 1>and there's been some discussion of this as well. There's

0:02:09.560 --> 0:02:12.880
<v Speaker 1>private market data points, for instance, that show rents are

0:02:12.960 --> 0:02:16.639
<v Speaker 1>starting to slow, so when does that feed into CPI? Right, So,

0:02:16.800 --> 0:02:19.760
<v Speaker 1>various online companies like a Zillo or something, they'll have

0:02:19.760 --> 0:02:21.680
<v Speaker 1>a rent index. And this sort of gets to the

0:02:21.760 --> 0:02:24.080
<v Speaker 1>question because, first of all, the thing that one of

0:02:24.080 --> 0:02:26.919
<v Speaker 1>the big upward drivers of inflation and the last report

0:02:27.200 --> 0:02:29.440
<v Speaker 1>was rent. Everyone most people feel rent. It's like a

0:02:29.520 --> 0:02:32.560
<v Speaker 1>very salient category. There are some categories that maybe are

0:02:32.560 --> 0:02:35.520
<v Speaker 1>more hidden. Rent is not one of them. Shelter is

0:02:35.520 --> 0:02:37.799
<v Speaker 1>not one of them. But then yes, there is this thing.

0:02:37.840 --> 0:02:40.120
<v Speaker 1>So it's like, Okay, we have these private measures that

0:02:40.280 --> 0:02:42.320
<v Speaker 1>seem to be rolling over a little bit, but the

0:02:42.360 --> 0:02:44.600
<v Speaker 1>numbers in the CPI keep going up. So is this

0:02:44.639 --> 0:02:47.079
<v Speaker 1>the case where the CPI is just lagged like bad

0:02:47.200 --> 0:02:50.959
<v Speaker 1>data or is it people are misunderstanding the relationship between

0:02:50.960 --> 0:02:53.720
<v Speaker 1>the official government numbers and what some of these private

0:02:53.720 --> 0:02:57.680
<v Speaker 1>surveys are ship Today we're going to be digging deep

0:02:57.800 --> 0:03:01.360
<v Speaker 1>into those numbers, right, absolutely, So let's get right to it.

0:03:01.560 --> 0:03:05.880
<v Speaker 1>We have the ultimate guest for digging into inflation numbers,

0:03:05.919 --> 0:03:08.079
<v Speaker 1>and he knows more about like what these numbers actually

0:03:08.120 --> 0:03:10.639
<v Speaker 1>mean and how they're derived. I think you've talked to

0:03:10.680 --> 0:03:13.640
<v Speaker 1>him several times, and you're reporting on like the minutia

0:03:13.960 --> 0:03:17.639
<v Speaker 1>like you when you did like mayonnaise reporting, It's like, Okay,

0:03:17.639 --> 0:03:19.799
<v Speaker 1>where is this in which index? And how much of

0:03:19.919 --> 0:03:24.120
<v Speaker 1>this is like soy oils versus condiments? Like he knows everything.

0:03:24.320 --> 0:03:27.400
<v Speaker 1>The way we measure inflation never ceases to amaze me.

0:03:27.480 --> 0:03:29.400
<v Speaker 1>And there's just so much to say about the actual

0:03:29.440 --> 0:03:32.400
<v Speaker 1>construction of the indicries and things that people don't normally

0:03:32.440 --> 0:03:35.240
<v Speaker 1>talk about but we probably should. Let's talk about them.

0:03:35.240 --> 0:03:37.720
<v Speaker 1>We're gonna be bringing back to the show a past guest.

0:03:37.760 --> 0:03:41.880
<v Speaker 1>O'mar Sharif is the president and founder of Inflation Insights,

0:03:41.960 --> 0:03:44.080
<v Speaker 1>and he will answer all our questions about why some

0:03:44.400 --> 0:03:46.960
<v Speaker 1>numbers are going up maybe some hopefully that go down.

0:03:46.960 --> 0:03:48.720
<v Speaker 1>So Ama, thank you so much for coming back on

0:03:48.760 --> 0:03:51.720
<v Speaker 1>the show. What's going on? When is the numbers going

0:03:51.800 --> 0:03:54.480
<v Speaker 1>to start turning down? This is I thought inflation was transitor.

0:03:54.680 --> 0:03:56.360
<v Speaker 1>I made a whole like you know, I was like

0:03:56.480 --> 0:03:58.880
<v Speaker 1>I was like on team Transitory. Now I look ridiculous.

0:03:59.720 --> 0:04:03.520
<v Speaker 1>Um well, I think probably you know the turn of

0:04:03.560 --> 0:04:06.360
<v Speaker 1>this year is because what I'm thinking is we're gonna

0:04:06.400 --> 0:04:09.600
<v Speaker 1>start to see the monthly rate, especially the core, start

0:04:09.680 --> 0:04:11.080
<v Speaker 1>to really kind of come off. I mean, we've been

0:04:11.120 --> 0:04:13.280
<v Speaker 1>kind of stuck around point flat point six every month

0:04:13.280 --> 0:04:15.720
<v Speaker 1>on the core pretty much for close to a year. Um,

0:04:15.960 --> 0:04:17.919
<v Speaker 1>we haven't got a long relief, but I think that

0:04:17.960 --> 0:04:20.520
<v Speaker 1>relief is coming from a few different areas, hopefully in

0:04:20.520 --> 0:04:22.919
<v Speaker 1>the next couple of months. Okay, I'm gonna clip. It

0:04:22.920 --> 0:04:24.760
<v Speaker 1>doesn't matter how long it takes. I'm going to claim

0:04:24.839 --> 0:04:29.560
<v Speaker 1>victory in five years of inflation comes down. Great. Um, okay, well,

0:04:29.600 --> 0:04:31.680
<v Speaker 1>maybe we can talk about one of the things that

0:04:31.720 --> 0:04:35.479
<v Speaker 1>people expected to start coming down and it hasn't, at

0:04:35.560 --> 0:04:38.760
<v Speaker 1>least according to um last month's data, and that's used cars.

0:04:38.960 --> 0:04:41.160
<v Speaker 1>Car prices, and this was one of the big drivers

0:04:41.160 --> 0:04:43.760
<v Speaker 1>of inflation actually, you know, going up over the past

0:04:43.839 --> 0:04:46.600
<v Speaker 1>year or so. Why haven't prices come down? This is

0:04:46.640 --> 0:04:49.560
<v Speaker 1>what everyone was expecting to happen. Yeah, so use car

0:04:49.640 --> 0:04:52.240
<v Speaker 1>prices like a lot of things. Uh, you know, when

0:04:52.279 --> 0:04:55.120
<v Speaker 1>prices cool sale prices are going up, they are just

0:04:55.440 --> 0:04:57.960
<v Speaker 1>very quickly on the way up. When they are coming down,

0:04:58.040 --> 0:05:00.159
<v Speaker 1>they take a little hell to come down. And so

0:05:00.600 --> 0:05:03.080
<v Speaker 1>what we've seen, honestly all year long is that wholesale

0:05:03.120 --> 0:05:05.200
<v Speaker 1>prices are down very, very sharply. You want to look

0:05:05.240 --> 0:05:08.560
<v Speaker 1>at Manheim Black Book data and JD Power, which is

0:05:08.680 --> 0:05:11.760
<v Speaker 1>sourced data. Actually for the BLS um all of these

0:05:11.760 --> 0:05:13.679
<v Speaker 1>things that are down, you have ten and eleven twelve

0:05:13.760 --> 0:05:16.880
<v Speaker 1>percent depending on the indext over the last six seven months.

0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:19.839
<v Speaker 1>Retail litt on the other hand, has been kind of

0:05:20.040 --> 0:05:23.000
<v Speaker 1>roughly flat because a lot of sellers are not really

0:05:23.000 --> 0:05:26.080
<v Speaker 1>pulling down the crisis. But we're starting to see that change,

0:05:26.080 --> 0:05:27.520
<v Speaker 1>and really over the last six or seven weeks, I

0:05:27.520 --> 0:05:30.560
<v Speaker 1>would say that that is starting to adjust. So model years,

0:05:30.600 --> 0:05:32.280
<v Speaker 1>you know, two year old models, three row models for

0:05:32.440 --> 0:05:34.800
<v Speaker 1>those prices and retail prices are coming down. You can

0:05:34.800 --> 0:05:37.200
<v Speaker 1>see this in the BlackBook Retail Index, for example, prices

0:05:37.279 --> 0:05:39.280
<v Speaker 1>were down about two and a half percent in August.

0:05:39.600 --> 0:05:42.240
<v Speaker 1>So all we're really waiting to see is that data

0:05:42.600 --> 0:05:45.559
<v Speaker 1>translate into the CPI and the next we use cars

0:05:45.560 --> 0:05:47.800
<v Speaker 1>and I think, you know, September it is a good

0:05:47.800 --> 0:05:49.960
<v Speaker 1>point where that might enter, but I think October is

0:05:49.960 --> 0:05:53.080
<v Speaker 1>probably the month you really want to focus on. September.

0:05:53.120 --> 0:05:55.680
<v Speaker 1>There's a lot of adjustments that are happening in September,

0:05:56.120 --> 0:05:58.800
<v Speaker 1>but September October, I think is when you really are

0:05:58.800 --> 0:06:01.360
<v Speaker 1>going to start to see the retail stuff on these

0:06:01.400 --> 0:06:03.400
<v Speaker 1>cars in next start to come come off in the

0:06:03.400 --> 0:06:05.159
<v Speaker 1>CPI and that that's going to be a big boon

0:06:05.240 --> 0:06:07.920
<v Speaker 1>in terms of you know, getting that core weight quarter

0:06:08.000 --> 0:06:10.799
<v Speaker 1>and next lower. How do you actually go about, because

0:06:10.800 --> 0:06:12.479
<v Speaker 1>this is your day to day business, how do you

0:06:12.520 --> 0:06:16.120
<v Speaker 1>go about trying to measure that lag between you know,

0:06:16.160 --> 0:06:19.159
<v Speaker 1>what we see in the market and what we actually

0:06:19.200 --> 0:06:21.720
<v Speaker 1>see showing up in the CPI data. First of all,

0:06:21.760 --> 0:06:24.400
<v Speaker 1>you're looking at these market industries, you know, whether it's

0:06:24.440 --> 0:06:27.800
<v Speaker 1>span Him or Black Book, and you're essentially mapping them

0:06:27.920 --> 0:06:31.279
<v Speaker 1>is at the wholesale level against the retail price index

0:06:31.400 --> 0:06:35.520
<v Speaker 1>for the CPI UM. Now, obviously wholesale, you know, typically

0:06:35.720 --> 0:06:39.679
<v Speaker 1>defined as the strongest correlations, will be with wholesale changes

0:06:40.320 --> 0:06:43.320
<v Speaker 1>feeding roughly about two months later into the CPI. Now

0:06:43.360 --> 0:06:45.960
<v Speaker 1>what's really interesting is like before the pandemic, this was

0:06:46.240 --> 0:06:49.040
<v Speaker 1>pretty much a constant roughly a two month lag, so

0:06:49.080 --> 0:06:51.840
<v Speaker 1>eight weeks later, whatever happened wholesale typically showed up in

0:06:51.880 --> 0:06:54.960
<v Speaker 1>the CPI. What the pandemic did was completely throw these

0:06:55.040 --> 0:06:57.839
<v Speaker 1>lags off to the point where you know, prices started

0:06:57.880 --> 0:07:01.279
<v Speaker 1>moving at the wholesale level, obviously they're going up, and

0:07:01.320 --> 0:07:04.880
<v Speaker 1>that immediately fed into retail like there was no lag whatsoever,

0:07:05.360 --> 0:07:07.960
<v Speaker 1>and if you're one of five six percent of wholesale

0:07:08.000 --> 0:07:10.240
<v Speaker 1>one month, guess what the CPI was going up five

0:07:10.520 --> 0:07:12.960
<v Speaker 1>pc and use cars the next one. Now, what we're

0:07:13.000 --> 0:07:15.120
<v Speaker 1>seeing now, I think is a little bit of a

0:07:15.120 --> 0:07:18.160
<v Speaker 1>reversion to that, um, you know, the old lag of

0:07:18.160 --> 0:07:20.200
<v Speaker 1>about to shoot three months. And that's why I think.

0:07:20.800 --> 0:07:23.200
<v Speaker 1>You know, we've seen wholesale come off the last several months,

0:07:23.200 --> 0:07:24.640
<v Speaker 1>and people are saying, we wait, it's like on the

0:07:24.680 --> 0:07:28.240
<v Speaker 1>CPI use cars index is you know, kind of unchanged

0:07:28.320 --> 0:07:30.840
<v Speaker 1>or maybe up a little bit. So I think it's

0:07:30.840 --> 0:07:32.560
<v Speaker 1>it's just the issues that the lags are are kind

0:07:32.560 --> 0:07:34.240
<v Speaker 1>of back to what they were. This is sort of

0:07:34.240 --> 0:07:36.240
<v Speaker 1>like gasolute. You know, when gasing prices go up and

0:07:36.280 --> 0:07:38.680
<v Speaker 1>wholesale level you feel it right away, and you see

0:07:38.680 --> 0:07:40.640
<v Speaker 1>it right away at the pub when they go down,

0:07:40.760 --> 0:07:44.560
<v Speaker 1>it's a very gradual decline, right you're kind of pocketing

0:07:44.560 --> 0:07:47.120
<v Speaker 1>that extra margin. And I think dealers are doing the

0:07:47.160 --> 0:07:49.680
<v Speaker 1>same thing and happened for a while. But I think

0:07:49.720 --> 0:07:51.560
<v Speaker 1>that jig is up and should be over the next

0:07:51.600 --> 0:07:54.560
<v Speaker 1>couple of months. So let's talk a little bit more

0:07:54.600 --> 0:07:56.520
<v Speaker 1>about this. And you know, I'm starting to like feel

0:07:56.520 --> 0:07:59.400
<v Speaker 1>a little bit better about always big wrong on everything

0:07:59.400 --> 0:08:01.800
<v Speaker 1>because I just got these measures, right, I look at trucking,

0:08:02.000 --> 0:08:05.080
<v Speaker 1>look at cars, I look at the triple A gasoline.

0:08:05.120 --> 0:08:06.760
<v Speaker 1>It's like, look, all these lines are going down. They

0:08:06.760 --> 0:08:09.400
<v Speaker 1>should show up. Can you talk a little bit about

0:08:09.520 --> 0:08:12.960
<v Speaker 1>why these legs exists, What is the difference between some

0:08:13.040 --> 0:08:16.200
<v Speaker 1>of these measured prices and the government prices and what

0:08:16.240 --> 0:08:19.360
<v Speaker 1>do you have any theories or sort of explanations why

0:08:19.640 --> 0:08:23.840
<v Speaker 1>past lags got disrupted? And so that the gap between

0:08:24.000 --> 0:08:26.920
<v Speaker 1>private survey measures of prices versus what showed up in

0:08:27.000 --> 0:08:30.320
<v Speaker 1>government data did not have the same temporal relationship as

0:08:30.360 --> 0:08:34.520
<v Speaker 1>it used to prepand the temporal is a good word. Yes,

0:08:34.559 --> 0:08:37.040
<v Speaker 1>I would I would talk about this with using you

0:08:37.080 --> 0:08:39.200
<v Speaker 1>know it'll go back to use cars. Yeah. One is

0:08:39.600 --> 0:08:41.920
<v Speaker 1>you know that in terms of the pandemic when it

0:08:42.000 --> 0:08:45.880
<v Speaker 1>hit um, what you had was basically a complete disruption

0:08:46.040 --> 0:08:48.560
<v Speaker 1>in the use cars marketing. So it wasn't just that

0:08:48.600 --> 0:08:51.160
<v Speaker 1>people demanded use cars because I say they were moving

0:08:51.200 --> 0:08:54.120
<v Speaker 1>in suburbs or whatever. The biggest ship was You've had

0:08:54.280 --> 0:08:57.800
<v Speaker 1>a natural seller in the used cars market. Car companies

0:08:58.160 --> 0:09:00.920
<v Speaker 1>who became a net buyer used to vehicles and we

0:09:01.000 --> 0:09:04.040
<v Speaker 1>really haven't seen that before. And what they did was

0:09:04.080 --> 0:09:06.559
<v Speaker 1>they scooped up all the zero to three year models

0:09:06.640 --> 0:09:09.920
<v Speaker 1>that they could to sort of replenish their stock. Um,

0:09:09.960 --> 0:09:11.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, things came back a lot stronger obviously twenty

0:09:11.840 --> 0:09:14.640
<v Speaker 1>one that people thought. So take a company like Davis.

0:09:14.960 --> 0:09:17.319
<v Speaker 1>They had about four hundred fifty thousand vehicles in their

0:09:17.320 --> 0:09:20.199
<v Speaker 1>fleet in two thousand. That got down to about two

0:09:20.400 --> 0:09:24.000
<v Speaker 1>d ninety thousand by the summer one, right when demand

0:09:24.040 --> 0:09:27.160
<v Speaker 1>was booted, So they couldn't replenish them for manufacturers. They

0:09:27.240 --> 0:09:29.920
<v Speaker 1>ended up going to the use cars market. So what

0:09:29.960 --> 0:09:32.480
<v Speaker 1>you found was pricing increases in the zero three year bucket,

0:09:32.480 --> 0:09:35.400
<v Speaker 1>which is all build buy those price increases skyrocket and

0:09:35.400 --> 0:09:37.480
<v Speaker 1>if you're a dealer trying to buy a car, you

0:09:37.520 --> 0:09:39.600
<v Speaker 1>can't find these vehicles and you need to go out

0:09:39.640 --> 0:09:42.000
<v Speaker 1>by four or five six yelds. So all across that age,

0:09:42.040 --> 0:09:43.880
<v Speaker 1>current prices spiked and it wasn't you know. I think

0:09:43.880 --> 0:09:46.559
<v Speaker 1>the issue is just the magnitude was so large that

0:09:46.800 --> 0:09:50.240
<v Speaker 1>you could really wait to price them out a retail right,

0:09:50.320 --> 0:09:52.920
<v Speaker 1>So you're paying way way more than you were used

0:09:52.960 --> 0:09:55.840
<v Speaker 1>to pay, and you had to pass that on a quickly. Uh.

0:09:55.920 --> 0:09:58.679
<v Speaker 1>And so I think we saw those lads disrupted for

0:09:58.840 --> 0:10:02.240
<v Speaker 1>that particular decide. Now on the way down, wholesales is

0:10:02.240 --> 0:10:04.800
<v Speaker 1>getting a lot cheaper, you can still sell it for

0:10:04.840 --> 0:10:07.440
<v Speaker 1>a bit more on the retail side. So again, just

0:10:07.480 --> 0:10:09.600
<v Speaker 1>like athlete, you kind of pocket the margins as long

0:10:09.640 --> 0:10:11.960
<v Speaker 1>as you can on the way down. And I think

0:10:11.960 --> 0:10:14.480
<v Speaker 1>that's what you're seeing. The other item I would actually

0:10:14.520 --> 0:10:18.560
<v Speaker 1>mention where honestly I am, I'm pretty stumbdusted. What's going

0:10:18.600 --> 0:10:22.400
<v Speaker 1>on is really furniture prices. Um. You know, we have

0:10:22.520 --> 0:10:26.120
<v Speaker 1>seen you talk about, you know, trucking rates going down, um,

0:10:26.360 --> 0:10:30.120
<v Speaker 1>import prices of furniture going down. Inventories are jumped, while

0:10:30.160 --> 0:10:32.840
<v Speaker 1>the big box retailers are telling you, you know, Walmart, Haargey,

0:10:32.840 --> 0:10:35.560
<v Speaker 1>we've got too much of the stuff that we're discounting heavily,

0:10:35.920 --> 0:10:38.000
<v Speaker 1>and yet the CPI is going up about one percent

0:10:38.360 --> 0:10:41.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, every single month. Um. And there, you know,

0:10:41.679 --> 0:10:43.679
<v Speaker 1>typically you would start to see the stuff coming through

0:10:43.720 --> 0:10:47.320
<v Speaker 1>pretty quickly. I've honestly been winning since March or April

0:10:47.400 --> 0:10:50.480
<v Speaker 1>for furniture to really slide, and it just continues to

0:10:50.480 --> 0:10:54.160
<v Speaker 1>sort of defy, um, defy expectations. So there, I don't

0:10:54.200 --> 0:10:57.160
<v Speaker 1>have as good as an answer in terms of what's happening,

0:10:57.200 --> 0:11:00.040
<v Speaker 1>but we know all the signs are planning to the

0:11:00.040 --> 0:11:03.040
<v Speaker 1>fact that they should be dropping, and the industry will

0:11:03.040 --> 0:11:05.600
<v Speaker 1>tell you that. I mean, you read any furniture industry

0:11:05.640 --> 0:11:08.280
<v Speaker 1>trade publication like I started doing when I was wrong

0:11:08.320 --> 0:11:11.120
<v Speaker 1>on furniture for a while, Um, you know, furniture to

0:11:11.160 --> 0:11:13.640
<v Speaker 1>a magazine will tell you, hey, they're preparing for recession.

0:11:14.040 --> 0:11:17.520
<v Speaker 1>They've got too much stuff, they're discounting, orders are declining,

0:11:18.080 --> 0:11:19.959
<v Speaker 1>and yet the CPI is that showing it. But I

0:11:20.000 --> 0:11:22.280
<v Speaker 1>will say one other thing to think about is some

0:11:22.320 --> 0:11:25.559
<v Speaker 1>of these samples in the CPI are not that large furniture.

0:11:25.600 --> 0:11:28.160
<v Speaker 1>If you're talking about bedroom furniture, they may only have

0:11:28.280 --> 0:11:32.040
<v Speaker 1>a couple of hundred quotes in the entire sample versus

0:11:32.440 --> 0:11:35.920
<v Speaker 1>you know, thousands for something like rent um or you

0:11:35.960 --> 0:11:39.319
<v Speaker 1>know thousand for airfare. So the smaller sample, the larger,

0:11:39.880 --> 0:11:42.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, the chance that you'll have some some errors,

0:11:42.440 --> 0:11:45.360
<v Speaker 1>you might miss some of the price changes, you know,

0:11:45.400 --> 0:11:48.080
<v Speaker 1>particular much so that can also impact the lads that

0:11:48.120 --> 0:11:51.319
<v Speaker 1>occur in the CPI. So, I mean it is true

0:11:51.400 --> 0:11:55.600
<v Speaker 1>on the whole, the goods inflation has been going down.

0:11:55.600 --> 0:11:58.880
<v Speaker 1>So I think it fell from like ten points seven

0:11:59.600 --> 0:12:03.400
<v Speaker 1>you know last year to seven point one last August.

0:12:04.120 --> 0:12:07.400
<v Speaker 1>And meanwhile, services, as we mentioned, is starting to pick

0:12:07.520 --> 0:12:09.880
<v Speaker 1>up and services correct me if I'm wrong, but I

0:12:09.880 --> 0:12:12.600
<v Speaker 1>think it's something like triple the weight in the core

0:12:12.640 --> 0:12:16.040
<v Speaker 1>indux something like that. Can you walk us through, like

0:12:16.200 --> 0:12:19.640
<v Speaker 1>a why do services get that much weighting and be

0:12:19.960 --> 0:12:22.800
<v Speaker 1>how significant is it for the core index that it's

0:12:22.840 --> 0:12:25.160
<v Speaker 1>now going up? Yes, so, I mean the bulk of

0:12:25.200 --> 0:12:28.640
<v Speaker 1>that weighting is is Shelter. It's it's rent and its

0:12:28.679 --> 0:12:31.439
<v Speaker 1>owner's equivalent rent um. You know, in the core CPI,

0:12:31.760 --> 0:12:33.920
<v Speaker 1>where do you present the entire core is just rent?

0:12:33.960 --> 0:12:37.920
<v Speaker 1>You know, we are combined and so within services, you know,

0:12:38.000 --> 0:12:40.840
<v Speaker 1>the bulk of the weight is coming from from Shelter.

0:12:41.000 --> 0:12:45.480
<v Speaker 1>So that's really what's driving UM that overweighting, if you will,

0:12:45.600 --> 0:12:48.640
<v Speaker 1>to services relative to two goods. The fact that it

0:12:48.840 --> 0:12:52.440
<v Speaker 1>is going up so dramatically, you know, that's obviously been

0:12:52.520 --> 0:12:55.640
<v Speaker 1>an issue for the core UM. I would really say

0:12:55.720 --> 0:13:00.640
<v Speaker 1>probably since since early spring when Shelter really started to accelerate. Now,

0:13:01.440 --> 0:13:03.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, one thing I want to mention UM is

0:13:03.679 --> 0:13:07.160
<v Speaker 1>that we I think the Shelter story, honestly is something

0:13:07.160 --> 0:13:11.000
<v Speaker 1>that most people knew was gonna happen coming into this year, right,

0:13:11.040 --> 0:13:13.720
<v Speaker 1>you mentioned some of these private market in the seas

0:13:13.760 --> 0:13:16.319
<v Speaker 1>like apartment lists and Zillo and so on. They were

0:13:16.360 --> 0:13:19.679
<v Speaker 1>showing these huge games and rents, you know, late last year,

0:13:20.120 --> 0:13:23.160
<v Speaker 1>last spraying, last summer, so we knew that this was

0:13:23.280 --> 0:13:25.360
<v Speaker 1>likely going to enter in the CPI this year. The

0:13:25.440 --> 0:13:28.160
<v Speaker 1>question was always about magnitude, so whether it was going

0:13:28.200 --> 0:13:30.760
<v Speaker 1>to be up six percent this year or seven percent,

0:13:30.800 --> 0:13:33.959
<v Speaker 1>which looks like we're headed for that some number. Um.

0:13:34.000 --> 0:13:36.840
<v Speaker 1>So to me, like, that's not really a surprise. On

0:13:36.880 --> 0:13:39.000
<v Speaker 1>the services side, I think most people who tracked this

0:13:39.040 --> 0:13:41.600
<v Speaker 1>stuff closely realized, hey, reds are gonna be up a

0:13:41.600 --> 0:13:44.680
<v Speaker 1>lot this year, probably someone in the six summers a range.

0:13:45.040 --> 0:13:47.959
<v Speaker 1>It's the other part of services and the non shelter

0:13:48.080 --> 0:13:51.280
<v Speaker 1>service stuff that I think is the more interesting part

0:13:51.600 --> 0:13:54.560
<v Speaker 1>of the story, and they're what you'll find is a

0:13:54.559 --> 0:13:57.400
<v Speaker 1>lot of people talking about how wages are driving those

0:13:57.440 --> 0:14:01.840
<v Speaker 1>services up. Um, you know how um all of these

0:14:01.840 --> 0:14:04.640
<v Speaker 1>other costs in the non shelter services, those are the

0:14:04.640 --> 0:14:07.760
<v Speaker 1>sticky elements of inflation. And until that stuff starts to

0:14:07.840 --> 0:14:09.880
<v Speaker 1>roll down, you know, it's gonna be really hard to

0:14:09.920 --> 0:14:13.680
<v Speaker 1>get correflation down. I would actually sort of counter that

0:14:13.720 --> 0:14:16.680
<v Speaker 1>a little bit by arguing that a lot of what

0:14:16.840 --> 0:14:19.440
<v Speaker 1>you've been seeing, and this has been true since really

0:14:19.560 --> 0:14:22.880
<v Speaker 1>last probably I would say fall, is we've had a

0:14:22.880 --> 0:14:26.280
<v Speaker 1>lot of oscillation in that non shelter service employment, and

0:14:26.360 --> 0:14:30.000
<v Speaker 1>that's mostly because of sort of the economy reopening and

0:14:30.040 --> 0:14:33.200
<v Speaker 1>closing and kind of fits its first. So summer of

0:14:33.200 --> 0:14:36.480
<v Speaker 1>twenty one, if you remember, airfare started to jump very significantly,

0:14:36.760 --> 0:14:39.120
<v Speaker 1>started traveling a bit again. So a lot of what

0:14:39.200 --> 0:14:41.480
<v Speaker 1>was driving services at that point was actually things like

0:14:41.560 --> 0:14:45.400
<v Speaker 1>affairs and hotels. It wasn't medical care services, it wasn't

0:14:45.440 --> 0:14:49.440
<v Speaker 1>recreation services, you know, it was really personal care services.

0:14:49.440 --> 0:14:51.960
<v Speaker 1>It was these sort of reopening categories, if you will.

0:14:52.520 --> 0:14:55.320
<v Speaker 1>Then you had you know, I think Delta was was

0:14:55.400 --> 0:14:58.440
<v Speaker 1>later in that year. Prices for those categories spell the

0:14:58.480 --> 0:15:02.920
<v Speaker 1>non shelter services inflation actually decelerate very sharply. So basically

0:15:02.960 --> 0:15:06.160
<v Speaker 1>what you've seen up until really pretty recently, it's just

0:15:06.360 --> 0:15:09.040
<v Speaker 1>this quarter to quarter oscillation that's been going on in

0:15:09.040 --> 0:15:13.080
<v Speaker 1>the non shelter um services in next really just reflecting

0:15:13.120 --> 0:15:16.560
<v Speaker 1>kind of the economy reopening and then slowing down. And

0:15:16.600 --> 0:15:18.560
<v Speaker 1>we got the same dynamic to spring, by the way,

0:15:18.600 --> 0:15:20.680
<v Speaker 1>when the airfare spite and now they've been down the

0:15:20.760 --> 0:15:23.120
<v Speaker 1>last few months, and so the non shelter stuff is

0:15:23.200 --> 0:15:41.800
<v Speaker 1>kind of moderating a little bit again. So let's talk

0:15:41.840 --> 0:15:44.520
<v Speaker 1>a little bit more on rent specifically for two reasons.

0:15:44.520 --> 0:15:47.360
<v Speaker 1>A because it is such a big part of uh,

0:15:47.440 --> 0:15:49.560
<v Speaker 1>you know, core cp I, but also it's one of

0:15:49.600 --> 0:15:52.320
<v Speaker 1>the most like people feel it and people complaining. Certainly

0:15:52.320 --> 0:15:54.960
<v Speaker 1>in New York everyone is aware of just like how

0:15:55.000 --> 0:15:59.880
<v Speaker 1>brutal the rent market is. But also elsewhere you mentioned there,

0:16:00.120 --> 0:16:03.240
<v Speaker 1>we sort of had reason to think that this number

0:16:03.320 --> 0:16:07.000
<v Speaker 1>was coming in part because the private surveys, We're flagging

0:16:07.040 --> 0:16:09.880
<v Speaker 1>this several of like maybe even a year ago, the

0:16:09.960 --> 0:16:13.320
<v Speaker 1>Zillois and all this. So for there reasons, one big

0:16:13.400 --> 0:16:16.480
<v Speaker 1>question which is like, is the data stale? And at

0:16:16.480 --> 0:16:18.680
<v Speaker 1>a time when people are worried about, oh are we

0:16:18.720 --> 0:16:20.840
<v Speaker 1>going to create is the Fed going to create a recession?

0:16:21.240 --> 0:16:24.080
<v Speaker 1>Is it being too aggressive? Uh? In light of you know,

0:16:24.160 --> 0:16:27.800
<v Speaker 1>is it whatever? Is it operating on old data that's

0:16:27.840 --> 0:16:31.560
<v Speaker 1>not as timely as what the private sector surveys are showing.

0:16:31.840 --> 0:16:35.440
<v Speaker 1>Is the public data stale? So I wouldn't necessarily say

0:16:35.560 --> 0:16:37.960
<v Speaker 1>it's scale. I would just say that it measures something

0:16:38.080 --> 0:16:41.160
<v Speaker 1>different than what these private sector indussees are measured. So

0:16:41.200 --> 0:16:44.760
<v Speaker 1>most of these private sector industries are measuring new leases.

0:16:45.160 --> 0:16:47.160
<v Speaker 1>So when you think about moving into a new apartment

0:16:47.200 --> 0:16:50.160
<v Speaker 1>beside a brand new lease, that's what they are capturing

0:16:50.200 --> 0:16:52.120
<v Speaker 1>and capturing that change in the right for that unit

0:16:52.200 --> 0:16:55.840
<v Speaker 1>with a new tenant versus whatever it ready for for

0:16:55.840 --> 0:16:58.680
<v Speaker 1>for the last ten And that's true of all most

0:16:58.680 --> 0:17:01.120
<v Speaker 1>of these apartment list of lists on and so it's

0:17:01.160 --> 0:17:05.040
<v Speaker 1>really just one segment of um the market that those

0:17:05.119 --> 0:17:08.560
<v Speaker 1>private private measures are capturing. The CPI is capturing the

0:17:08.760 --> 0:17:11.600
<v Speaker 1>entire rental markets. So it's not just people who are

0:17:11.640 --> 0:17:14.560
<v Speaker 1>looking for new apartments were signing new leases. It's also

0:17:14.600 --> 0:17:18.880
<v Speaker 1>people who are renewing their lease, and it's also people

0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:21.840
<v Speaker 1>who are currently renting and still all on the same

0:17:21.880 --> 0:17:25.120
<v Speaker 1>lease they were, you know, five months ago. So they

0:17:25.119 --> 0:17:27.760
<v Speaker 1>want to capture the entire market versus just a slice

0:17:27.840 --> 0:17:29.879
<v Speaker 1>of the market. So in that sense, I don't think

0:17:29.920 --> 0:17:33.120
<v Speaker 1>it's stale. Now that said, you know, when you think

0:17:33.160 --> 0:17:35.600
<v Speaker 1>about is a FED operating on old day, we do.

0:17:35.720 --> 0:17:38.080
<v Speaker 1>We do know that it lacks right before this very reason,

0:17:38.680 --> 0:17:42.240
<v Speaker 1>it doesn't capture the BLS, doesn't capture turning points in

0:17:42.320 --> 0:17:46.800
<v Speaker 1>the market as as well as these private sector measures. Right,

0:17:46.920 --> 0:17:49.880
<v Speaker 1>if if something is changing in the marketplace, those new

0:17:50.000 --> 0:17:52.440
<v Speaker 1>lease the way those new leases are changing is gonna

0:17:52.440 --> 0:17:55.480
<v Speaker 1>be a much better indicator what's happening then than the CPNI.

0:17:55.920 --> 0:17:59.040
<v Speaker 1>That's true. But it's not as if the Fed number

0:17:59.040 --> 0:18:02.320
<v Speaker 1>one doesn't watch their private sector measures, not that you know,

0:18:02.400 --> 0:18:04.600
<v Speaker 1>they don't understand the lags. I mean, if I understand

0:18:04.600 --> 0:18:07.879
<v Speaker 1>the lags that rent and other people do, I promise

0:18:07.920 --> 0:18:10.480
<v Speaker 1>you the folks that the FED do as well. Uh So,

0:18:11.400 --> 0:18:13.840
<v Speaker 1>I don't think that they are you know, sitting here

0:18:13.880 --> 0:18:16.760
<v Speaker 1>working on on the sort of lagging indicators if you will,

0:18:17.560 --> 0:18:21.040
<v Speaker 1>because they are. They're capturing in a huge amount of

0:18:21.119 --> 0:18:24.400
<v Speaker 1>data to look at what's happening in India shelter um

0:18:24.400 --> 0:18:27.560
<v Speaker 1>and they also kind of see where shelter is likely head. Right,

0:18:27.640 --> 0:18:30.080
<v Speaker 1>These private sector measures have started to roll over the

0:18:30.160 --> 0:18:32.040
<v Speaker 1>last you know, depending which one you want to look at,

0:18:33.000 --> 0:18:36.200
<v Speaker 1>four to seven months, they've been slowing down quite a bit.

0:18:36.680 --> 0:18:40.919
<v Speaker 1>So another thing related to housing and the cost of shelter,

0:18:41.000 --> 0:18:43.320
<v Speaker 1>which again it seems important because of the way and

0:18:43.359 --> 0:18:45.639
<v Speaker 1>just how much, not how important it is for the public.

0:18:46.119 --> 0:18:50.320
<v Speaker 1>We have seen a clear slow down in anything related

0:18:50.320 --> 0:18:52.840
<v Speaker 1>to home buying and home purchasing, and of course that

0:18:52.960 --> 0:18:56.960
<v Speaker 1>isn't I don't believe is that captured directly historically speaking?

0:18:57.200 --> 0:19:01.200
<v Speaker 1>Is there a relationship or a stable relationship between activity

0:19:01.200 --> 0:19:03.600
<v Speaker 1>and the home purchase market. The price of a house,

0:19:03.800 --> 0:19:06.280
<v Speaker 1>the price of a monthly mortgage, which is shot up

0:19:06.320 --> 0:19:08.359
<v Speaker 1>if you're just if you're buying a house today verse

0:19:08.359 --> 0:19:11.800
<v Speaker 1>a year ago, and then what feeds through into rent prices?

0:19:11.880 --> 0:19:13.040
<v Speaker 1>Can I just say that was going to be my

0:19:13.080 --> 0:19:15.919
<v Speaker 1>next question. We've been working together so long, we always

0:19:15.920 --> 0:19:17.600
<v Speaker 1>do that, We keep asking the same questions, But can

0:19:17.640 --> 0:19:19.919
<v Speaker 1>I tag onto that? So one thing I've heard is

0:19:20.320 --> 0:19:23.560
<v Speaker 1>there are some people who say that, like interest rates

0:19:23.600 --> 0:19:27.760
<v Speaker 1>going up could end up increasing the pressures on rent

0:19:27.920 --> 0:19:31.320
<v Speaker 1>because more people decide they're not going to buy houses right,

0:19:31.320 --> 0:19:33.560
<v Speaker 1>They're going to stay where they are, keep renting an

0:19:33.560 --> 0:19:36.840
<v Speaker 1>apartment and things like that. Yeah, so on that latter point, yes,

0:19:36.880 --> 0:19:39.840
<v Speaker 1>that's that's very possible. Um, you know, if it's getting

0:19:39.840 --> 0:19:42.080
<v Speaker 1>too expensive to get a mortgage, or you can't find

0:19:42.080 --> 0:19:44.600
<v Speaker 1>a house to buy, you renew your lease, or you

0:19:44.600 --> 0:19:48.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, are moving into the apartment, that certainly can

0:19:48.280 --> 0:19:51.919
<v Speaker 1>actually push rents up in the short term until supply

0:19:52.080 --> 0:19:54.439
<v Speaker 1>does eventually catch up. But yeah, that's that's very possible.

0:19:54.520 --> 0:19:57.280
<v Speaker 1>We've seen that happen before. Uh, in terms of the

0:19:57.320 --> 0:19:59.600
<v Speaker 1>idea of you know, the housing market and and her

0:19:59.720 --> 0:20:02.160
<v Speaker 1>versus activity. It really is kind of what you're talking about,

0:20:02.200 --> 0:20:04.800
<v Speaker 1>which is the knock on effect on the rental market.

0:20:05.160 --> 0:20:07.280
<v Speaker 1>That's really the way it's going to feed through into

0:20:07.320 --> 0:20:10.919
<v Speaker 1>the rent index because you know, contrary to popular belief, like,

0:20:11.119 --> 0:20:14.360
<v Speaker 1>house prices don't play any role whatsoever in the CPI

0:20:14.520 --> 0:20:18.080
<v Speaker 1>at all, um, even though owners Equivalent Rent Index, you know,

0:20:18.119 --> 0:20:21.159
<v Speaker 1>it's not intended to measure house prices. It basically is

0:20:21.320 --> 0:20:26.120
<v Speaker 1>using the contract rent data that they capture and sort

0:20:26.160 --> 0:20:28.960
<v Speaker 1>of you know, rejiggering it a little bit to to

0:20:29.040 --> 0:20:31.320
<v Speaker 1>come up with with, oh, we are but no house

0:20:31.320 --> 0:20:36.160
<v Speaker 1>price goes into the index whatsoever. The mortgage inter stuff,

0:20:36.200 --> 0:20:38.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, it used to actually be in the CPI

0:20:38.200 --> 0:20:40.879
<v Speaker 1>prior to nineteen eighty three because they just it was

0:20:40.920 --> 0:20:43.920
<v Speaker 1>a very different methodology back then, UM. And so when

0:20:43.960 --> 0:20:47.160
<v Speaker 1>when rates were moving higher and the cost of servicing

0:20:47.160 --> 0:20:50.679
<v Speaker 1>your mortgage moved up, that price actually was reflected in

0:20:50.680 --> 0:20:53.520
<v Speaker 1>the CPI back in the day. Um. But in nineteen

0:20:53.520 --> 0:20:55.439
<v Speaker 1>eighty three, there was a lot of different problems with

0:20:55.520 --> 0:20:57.639
<v Speaker 1>it um and they ended up switching out to this

0:20:57.680 --> 0:21:00.159
<v Speaker 1>new method of rental equivalence in net eight three. So

0:21:00.200 --> 0:21:02.240
<v Speaker 1>now that doesn't really play play much of the role

0:21:02.280 --> 0:21:04.359
<v Speaker 1>again other than the knock on effect on the rental

0:21:04.400 --> 0:21:08.200
<v Speaker 1>market in most houses. Is that how Vulcar defeated inflation

0:21:08.720 --> 0:21:12.040
<v Speaker 1>removing mortgage trains from It's like, we want to raise

0:21:12.119 --> 0:21:14.840
<v Speaker 1>rates to fight inflation, but our current measure of inflation

0:21:14.840 --> 0:21:17.760
<v Speaker 1>includes mortgages. Got to change the rules because otherwise our

0:21:17.920 --> 0:21:21.920
<v Speaker 1>rate you can regime won't help us at all. So actually,

0:21:22.119 --> 0:21:26.959
<v Speaker 1>in that instance, because of the rate increases, mortgage interest

0:21:27.000 --> 0:21:31.720
<v Speaker 1>costs in the CPI skyworketed and actually the inflation higher.

0:21:31.960 --> 0:21:33.919
<v Speaker 1>So even though he was boost in rates at the

0:21:33.920 --> 0:21:36.760
<v Speaker 1>same time you would think, okay, high rais you should

0:21:36.880 --> 0:21:40.040
<v Speaker 1>or inflation. In fact, inflation was moving higher partly because

0:21:40.040 --> 0:21:43.440
<v Speaker 1>mortgage interest costs were so much higher, and there was

0:21:43.440 --> 0:21:45.120
<v Speaker 1>a lot of problems with the idea of mortgage interest costs.

0:21:45.080 --> 0:21:48.040
<v Speaker 1>I mean, they knew about mortgage interns costs, and the

0:21:48.040 --> 0:21:51.439
<v Speaker 1>problems with sort of putting it into a cost of

0:21:51.520 --> 0:21:53.280
<v Speaker 1>living index. A lot of what you you know, a

0:21:53.280 --> 0:21:55.280
<v Speaker 1>lot of issues that people have with the CPI, whether

0:21:55.280 --> 0:21:58.760
<v Speaker 1>it's rents or other indexes is really about the constant

0:21:59.160 --> 0:22:01.720
<v Speaker 1>of how you design it, how you think about what

0:22:01.760 --> 0:22:05.159
<v Speaker 1>you should be capturing, and that fundamentally gets back to

0:22:05.200 --> 0:22:07.320
<v Speaker 1>the idea of you know, what is the purpose of

0:22:07.359 --> 0:22:09.679
<v Speaker 1>the CPI, and it's intended to be a cost of

0:22:09.800 --> 0:22:14.679
<v Speaker 1>living index UM And you know, they knew back I

0:22:14.680 --> 0:22:16.680
<v Speaker 1>think it was in seventies they had papers out the

0:22:16.720 --> 0:22:19.240
<v Speaker 1>b LS saying, look, we need to get away from this,

0:22:19.440 --> 0:22:22.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, mortgage interest costs because it doesn't really fit

0:22:22.119 --> 0:22:24.960
<v Speaker 1>the way that we're supposed to construct a CPO. You know,

0:22:25.000 --> 0:22:26.680
<v Speaker 1>you could do a whole separate episode on that, but

0:22:26.960 --> 0:22:30.439
<v Speaker 1>I think the short version is in three in eight

0:22:30.560 --> 0:22:33.120
<v Speaker 1>three they decided to say, hey, we've been talking about

0:22:33.160 --> 0:22:35.800
<v Speaker 1>this rental equivalence method for many years now, and we

0:22:35.840 --> 0:22:37.640
<v Speaker 1>think it's the right way to do it. By the way,

0:22:37.640 --> 0:22:40.359
<v Speaker 1>I will just say, very recently, UM National Caademy of

0:22:40.400 --> 0:22:44.000
<v Speaker 1>Sciences basically put out a report that said, you know,

0:22:44.080 --> 0:22:47.199
<v Speaker 1>here are our recommendations for improving the CPI in the

0:22:47.200 --> 0:22:50.240
<v Speaker 1>coming years. And they talked about looking at, you know,

0:22:50.280 --> 0:22:53.560
<v Speaker 1>these private measures of rent as potentially trying to incorporate

0:22:53.600 --> 0:22:56.080
<v Speaker 1>them into the CPI. But they said up until then

0:22:56.160 --> 0:22:58.120
<v Speaker 1>the best measure that we have is really the rental

0:22:58.160 --> 0:23:02.160
<v Speaker 1>equivalent method that we use today. Um, let me ask

0:23:02.160 --> 0:23:06.000
<v Speaker 1>a slightly less provocative question, um, other than how we

0:23:06.080 --> 0:23:10.520
<v Speaker 1>measure or don't measure mortgage interest in CBI. So historically,

0:23:10.840 --> 0:23:13.119
<v Speaker 1>one of the reasons we focus on rents is because

0:23:13.800 --> 0:23:16.520
<v Speaker 1>people feel them. Um, they're a big component of the

0:23:16.600 --> 0:23:19.920
<v Speaker 1>of the core index. But also because rents and wages

0:23:20.240 --> 0:23:23.720
<v Speaker 1>tend to be tightly linked. And I think there's concern

0:23:23.840 --> 0:23:27.480
<v Speaker 1>that as rent inflation accelerates, are we going to see

0:23:27.520 --> 0:23:32.040
<v Speaker 1>that knock on effect into wages. What are you seeing there? Yeah,

0:23:32.480 --> 0:23:35.320
<v Speaker 1>as you said, it is a pretty tight fit. I mean, basically,

0:23:35.320 --> 0:23:38.800
<v Speaker 1>I would saying labor income and and rent growth are

0:23:38.920 --> 0:23:43.400
<v Speaker 1>are pretty tightly correlated. Um. You know again, I think

0:23:43.600 --> 0:23:46.359
<v Speaker 1>as rents have gone up, they correlated well with this

0:23:46.560 --> 0:23:50.040
<v Speaker 1>improvement in wage growth. One of the interesting sort of

0:23:50.080 --> 0:23:53.520
<v Speaker 1>tickets is that a lot of even though rents are rising,

0:23:53.600 --> 0:23:56.520
<v Speaker 1>a lot of people who are reapinger pleases are actually

0:23:56.600 --> 0:23:59.240
<v Speaker 1>or side new leases in you know, sort of more

0:23:59.640 --> 0:24:02.760
<v Speaker 1>profess she manage department buildings. So more of your large

0:24:02.840 --> 0:24:07.640
<v Speaker 1>multifamily in the buildings are actually showing that their incomes

0:24:07.640 --> 0:24:10.879
<v Speaker 1>have increased pretty significantly over the last two years. So

0:24:10.960 --> 0:24:12.720
<v Speaker 1>even though we talk about you know, the idea of

0:24:12.760 --> 0:24:14.639
<v Speaker 1>a lot of people getting priced out because rents are

0:24:14.680 --> 0:24:17.320
<v Speaker 1>rising so sharply, people who are citing new leases and

0:24:17.359 --> 0:24:20.080
<v Speaker 1>having to provide the paperwork from their bank statements or

0:24:20.320 --> 0:24:24.480
<v Speaker 1>or you know, their their employment information are showing that

0:24:24.600 --> 0:24:27.960
<v Speaker 1>incomes have actually also increased pretty significantly. And so I think,

0:24:28.040 --> 0:24:30.679
<v Speaker 1>you know, as you start to see wage growth decelerate

0:24:30.720 --> 0:24:32.760
<v Speaker 1>a little bit, which is already starting to happen at

0:24:32.760 --> 0:24:36.720
<v Speaker 1>the margins um. You know, people who manage these apartments

0:24:36.720 --> 0:24:38.879
<v Speaker 1>sort of they get this kind of real time flow

0:24:39.000 --> 0:24:42.920
<v Speaker 1>of what labor income looks like. And I think that's

0:24:42.960 --> 0:24:46.280
<v Speaker 1>partly also why you odesty rents start to decelerate is

0:24:46.320 --> 0:24:49.000
<v Speaker 1>because they're not reasoning rent six percent when they see

0:24:49.040 --> 0:24:51.800
<v Speaker 1>labor income only. Yeah, let's say it's where did you

0:24:51.840 --> 0:24:54.199
<v Speaker 1>get where's that data from? That the people that the

0:24:54.280 --> 0:24:58.119
<v Speaker 1>cohort that is turning new leases is actually seeing wage

0:24:58.160 --> 0:25:00.840
<v Speaker 1>games that are keeping up with rent. Yeah, and that

0:25:00.840 --> 0:25:03.679
<v Speaker 1>comes from real page um. And that's another you know,

0:25:03.760 --> 0:25:08.200
<v Speaker 1>large sort of private market provider of everything from rent

0:25:08.280 --> 0:25:12.240
<v Speaker 1>data to all sorts of information on multiply buildings. Um,

0:25:12.320 --> 0:25:14.760
<v Speaker 1>and so they've been tracking this and sort of publishing

0:25:14.880 --> 0:25:16.880
<v Speaker 1>you know, stories on this for the last I think

0:25:16.880 --> 0:25:19.640
<v Speaker 1>about eighteen months or so, just this idea that even

0:25:19.640 --> 0:25:22.919
<v Speaker 1>though rents are are moving higher, people are able to

0:25:23.000 --> 0:25:27.360
<v Speaker 1>afford those rights because their incomes are arising alongside those

0:25:27.440 --> 0:25:30.520
<v Speaker 1>those rankings as well. So one other question on rent

0:25:30.560 --> 0:25:32.560
<v Speaker 1>before we go off it, and again it sort of

0:25:32.600 --> 0:25:37.840
<v Speaker 1>connects to uh broader housing questions. Uh. A lot of

0:25:37.840 --> 0:25:39.560
<v Speaker 1>people I think, in the last couple of years when

0:25:39.640 --> 0:25:42.960
<v Speaker 1>rates were low, bought houses as investment properties and maybe

0:25:42.960 --> 0:25:44.639
<v Speaker 1>don't want to sell right now in part because there

0:25:44.640 --> 0:25:48.320
<v Speaker 1>aren't a lot of buyers who are excited about the

0:25:48.320 --> 0:25:51.080
<v Speaker 1>sticker shock of what a monthly mortgage now cost them.

0:25:51.359 --> 0:25:55.239
<v Speaker 1>Could this bring more rental supply to market in your views, like, well,

0:25:55.280 --> 0:25:56.879
<v Speaker 1>I can't sell it, so I rented, and could that

0:25:56.960 --> 0:26:00.119
<v Speaker 1>have a dampening effect on rents? Yeah, very possibly. I mean,

0:26:00.640 --> 0:26:04.560
<v Speaker 1>most indusseries don't trap single family rentals. The only one

0:26:04.560 --> 0:26:07.480
<v Speaker 1>that I'm aware of that does is it's either zill

0:26:07.520 --> 0:26:09.600
<v Speaker 1>or poor logic. It's one of those who has a

0:26:09.680 --> 0:26:13.040
<v Speaker 1>single family right index where they do track what rents

0:26:13.160 --> 0:26:16.119
<v Speaker 1>are specifically for that sort of you know for that

0:26:16.200 --> 0:26:19.600
<v Speaker 1>type of rental um. And yeah, obviously if you can't

0:26:19.640 --> 0:26:21.719
<v Speaker 1>sell it and you want it as best investment property,

0:26:21.760 --> 0:26:24.159
<v Speaker 1>it makes quite a lot of sense given that, you know,

0:26:24.240 --> 0:26:27.760
<v Speaker 1>demand is still pretty robust for for rentals. Vacancy rates

0:26:27.800 --> 0:26:31.919
<v Speaker 1>have only barely started to edge higher from the lows

0:26:31.960 --> 0:26:35.040
<v Speaker 1>that we saw, you know, even six months ago, so

0:26:35.080 --> 0:26:36.600
<v Speaker 1>there's still quite a lot of demand out there, So

0:26:36.680 --> 0:26:38.920
<v Speaker 1>it makes sense to do that at this stage. And yeah,

0:26:38.960 --> 0:26:41.760
<v Speaker 1>hopefully that can help bring at least that one segment

0:26:41.960 --> 0:26:44.760
<v Speaker 1>of of rent of the rental market down. And by

0:26:44.800 --> 0:26:47.119
<v Speaker 1>the way, that is also captured in the CPI, right,

0:26:47.200 --> 0:26:49.159
<v Speaker 1>the CPI isn't when we're talking about rents, it's not

0:26:49.240 --> 0:26:54.160
<v Speaker 1>just apartments. They also to capture um single family rentals

0:26:54.240 --> 0:27:13.120
<v Speaker 1>in that entire sample as well. So we've been talking

0:27:13.160 --> 0:27:16.480
<v Speaker 1>a lot about rents um which have been pushing services

0:27:16.680 --> 0:27:20.119
<v Speaker 1>up higher, but are at the point you've been making,

0:27:20.160 --> 0:27:23.159
<v Speaker 1>are expected to start to decrease sometime soon, or at

0:27:23.200 --> 0:27:26.120
<v Speaker 1>least the rate of acceleration will start slowing down. Talk

0:27:26.160 --> 0:27:30.199
<v Speaker 1>to us about another big change that you see potentially

0:27:30.240 --> 0:27:33.280
<v Speaker 1>on the horizon that has to do with healthcare. Yeah,

0:27:33.280 --> 0:27:35.680
<v Speaker 1>so this is another one that I think is it's

0:27:35.760 --> 0:27:38.760
<v Speaker 1>coming very soon. It's gonna it's gonna help everyone looking

0:27:38.760 --> 0:27:46.680
<v Speaker 1>for that transitory in place story. Yes, you know kind yeah, so, um,

0:27:46.720 --> 0:27:48.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, right, as I mentioned the biggest part of

0:27:48.320 --> 0:27:53.159
<v Speaker 1>the course, the second biggest component is medical care UM.

0:27:53.160 --> 0:27:56.639
<v Speaker 1>That's worth just about of the court. And for the

0:27:56.760 --> 0:28:00.320
<v Speaker 1>last year, medical care has been rising in about, you know,

0:28:00.440 --> 0:28:04.280
<v Speaker 1>roughly zero point five percent in each month, which means

0:28:04.280 --> 0:28:07.480
<v Speaker 1>it's been adding about five basis points to the core

0:28:07.840 --> 0:28:10.600
<v Speaker 1>change every single month. That's been very set. It's kind

0:28:10.600 --> 0:28:14.040
<v Speaker 1>of like clockwork pretty much all all of last year. UM.

0:28:14.080 --> 0:28:16.479
<v Speaker 1>Starting in termre that index is going to turn negative

0:28:17.320 --> 0:28:20.600
<v Speaker 1>and it's gonna turn negative in most months over the

0:28:20.600 --> 0:28:24.679
<v Speaker 1>course of the next year. And so what was a

0:28:24.760 --> 0:28:28.880
<v Speaker 1>pretty constant um source of a boost to the core

0:28:28.960 --> 0:28:32.199
<v Speaker 1>every single month is actually going to turn into a

0:28:32.320 --> 0:28:36.720
<v Speaker 1>relatively decent drag on the core. And you know it's

0:28:36.760 --> 0:28:40.160
<v Speaker 1>not because medical care is getting cheaper or so on. Uh,

0:28:40.200 --> 0:28:41.920
<v Speaker 1>this is actually just one of these works in the

0:28:41.960 --> 0:28:45.360
<v Speaker 1>methodology that you kind of have to be aware of, UM,

0:28:45.400 --> 0:28:49.080
<v Speaker 1>and it comes very specifically from the health insurance index

0:28:49.320 --> 0:28:52.960
<v Speaker 1>within the broader medical care gage. Well, what's the me

0:28:53.200 --> 0:28:55.120
<v Speaker 1>So what is that change that's coming. Why is it's

0:28:55.280 --> 0:28:58.120
<v Speaker 1>what is going to switch from pushing up to being

0:28:58.120 --> 0:29:01.040
<v Speaker 1>a drag. Yeah. So so the story is basically that

0:29:01.280 --> 0:29:04.280
<v Speaker 1>first of all, health insurance is updated once a year,

0:29:04.400 --> 0:29:07.560
<v Speaker 1>typically in the October used to be September. Last year

0:29:07.600 --> 0:29:09.560
<v Speaker 1>was October. This year will be in the October report

0:29:09.600 --> 0:29:13.240
<v Speaker 1>again um. But this data lacks by almost about a

0:29:13.400 --> 0:29:16.120
<v Speaker 1>year UM. So the BLS takes the state of and

0:29:16.160 --> 0:29:18.760
<v Speaker 1>this is from an official source, the National Association of

0:29:18.800 --> 0:29:21.200
<v Speaker 1>Insurance Commissioners, So this is sort of you know, they

0:29:21.600 --> 0:29:24.800
<v Speaker 1>put out a big report on how much in premiums

0:29:24.840 --> 0:29:26.640
<v Speaker 1>has been collected and how much is being paid out

0:29:26.680 --> 0:29:29.440
<v Speaker 1>and how much is retained by insure. So this is

0:29:29.480 --> 0:29:32.600
<v Speaker 1>kind of the holy grail of this data set. Unfortunately,

0:29:32.600 --> 0:29:34.640
<v Speaker 1>it doesn't come out until that ten months apt into

0:29:34.680 --> 0:29:37.560
<v Speaker 1>the year, and so what we're really capturing this October

0:29:37.720 --> 0:29:39.840
<v Speaker 1>is going to be activity that happened in two thousand

0:29:39.920 --> 0:29:42.560
<v Speaker 1>twenty one. And so what's can happen here is that

0:29:42.600 --> 0:29:46.640
<v Speaker 1>if you think about and during the pandemic, people you know,

0:29:46.680 --> 0:29:49.760
<v Speaker 1>put off things like elective surgeries. They didn't go to

0:29:49.800 --> 0:29:51.840
<v Speaker 1>the doctor because people didn't want to be waiting, you know,

0:29:51.880 --> 0:29:55.000
<v Speaker 1>in waiting rooms with other people who might have COVID, right,

0:29:55.480 --> 0:29:59.560
<v Speaker 1>so there just wasn't a lot of utilization of healthcare services.

0:29:59.720 --> 0:30:03.520
<v Speaker 1>To US twenty premium income continue to increase, but the

0:30:03.560 --> 0:30:08.120
<v Speaker 1>benefits paid out actually declined. The way the CPI captures

0:30:08.240 --> 0:30:12.160
<v Speaker 1>health insurance is by looking at the change in these

0:30:12.240 --> 0:30:15.120
<v Speaker 1>retained earnings for insurance from one year to the next,

0:30:15.680 --> 0:30:17.600
<v Speaker 1>and you know very quickly. The reason they do this

0:30:17.760 --> 0:30:22.080
<v Speaker 1>is because it's really hard to price health insurance from

0:30:22.080 --> 0:30:25.240
<v Speaker 1>one month to the next because policies are changing all

0:30:25.240 --> 0:30:28.200
<v Speaker 1>the time. Right The what what a policy will cover

0:30:28.880 --> 0:30:32.000
<v Speaker 1>will be could be changing quarterly, monthly, you know, each year,

0:30:32.720 --> 0:30:34.960
<v Speaker 1>the risk factors that go into the policy can change.

0:30:35.320 --> 0:30:37.560
<v Speaker 1>So when the billness is pricing any good or service,

0:30:37.640 --> 0:30:39.720
<v Speaker 1>they want apples to apples from one of months to

0:30:39.760 --> 0:30:42.720
<v Speaker 1>the next, and if something changes, they want a quality adjusted.

0:30:43.400 --> 0:30:45.760
<v Speaker 1>But in healthcare and health insurance, they found that's just

0:30:45.840 --> 0:30:49.080
<v Speaker 1>way way too hard to do. So the roundabout way

0:30:49.120 --> 0:30:52.120
<v Speaker 1>of this indirect way of capturing the price to you,

0:30:52.360 --> 0:30:55.800
<v Speaker 1>the consumer of health insurance is basically, what does it

0:30:55.880 --> 0:30:59.800
<v Speaker 1>cost the business to offer you health insurance if they're

0:31:00.000 --> 0:31:03.680
<v Speaker 1>also administering health services or health insurance is rising, you'll

0:31:03.720 --> 0:31:07.280
<v Speaker 1>probably see that in your premiums, and so the way

0:31:07.320 --> 0:31:09.680
<v Speaker 1>they captured this by looking at these retained earnings and

0:31:09.720 --> 0:31:11.960
<v Speaker 1>how they're changing from one year to the next. So

0:31:12.080 --> 0:31:17.200
<v Speaker 1>during the pandemic, premiums kept rising. However, benefits paid out

0:31:17.240 --> 0:31:20.640
<v Speaker 1>to people went down quite substantially because of COVID and

0:31:20.880 --> 0:31:23.400
<v Speaker 1>the lack of utilization of healthcare. So what you saw

0:31:23.480 --> 0:31:27.640
<v Speaker 1>was a huge spike in retained earnings. And what that

0:31:27.680 --> 0:31:31.040
<v Speaker 1>meant for the cp I was that in October of

0:31:31.120 --> 0:31:36.520
<v Speaker 1>two thousand twenty one, which reflective is health insurance jumped

0:31:36.520 --> 0:31:40.480
<v Speaker 1>by two in the month of two which means that basically,

0:31:40.520 --> 0:31:43.640
<v Speaker 1>since you only updated once a year, it's effectively going

0:31:43.720 --> 0:31:47.440
<v Speaker 1>to print right around two percent every single month like clockwork.

0:31:47.880 --> 0:31:52.520
<v Speaker 1>Until the next Sunday fast forward, people started, you know,

0:31:52.840 --> 0:31:55.800
<v Speaker 1>going back and taking care of these elective surgeries and

0:31:56.000 --> 0:32:00.040
<v Speaker 1>utilizing healthcare much much more than they did premiums. It

0:32:00.320 --> 0:32:03.880
<v Speaker 1>really changed to dramatically. So now you have a SIS

0:32:03.960 --> 0:32:06.680
<v Speaker 1>match again where way more utilization of health care than

0:32:06.720 --> 0:32:13.080
<v Speaker 1>you had, and so then those retained earnings dropped on

0:32:13.120 --> 0:32:16.280
<v Speaker 1>a year a year basis. So what's going to happen

0:32:16.320 --> 0:32:19.040
<v Speaker 1>now when you update it is that you're going to

0:32:19.160 --> 0:32:21.760
<v Speaker 1>have a very large drag. So health insurance, which has

0:32:21.800 --> 0:32:25.600
<v Speaker 1>been two months pretty much for the last year, is

0:32:25.720 --> 0:32:28.600
<v Speaker 1>very likely to print in an October report around minus

0:32:28.640 --> 0:32:31.480
<v Speaker 1>four percent. You know, on the surface, you say, well,

0:32:31.520 --> 0:32:33.680
<v Speaker 1>plus two to minus four that doesn't really sound like

0:32:33.720 --> 0:32:36.360
<v Speaker 1>a lot, but if you kind of put it into context,

0:32:36.360 --> 0:32:39.000
<v Speaker 1>it actually is is kind of dramatic because number one

0:32:39.400 --> 0:32:42.560
<v Speaker 1>in the month of October itself, that alone is worth

0:32:42.600 --> 0:32:45.680
<v Speaker 1>almost a seven basis points swing on just a course tPON.

0:32:46.160 --> 0:32:48.280
<v Speaker 1>So if you're forecasting let's say the core and you

0:32:48.280 --> 0:32:50.920
<v Speaker 1>get a point forward in October, you're probably looking at

0:32:50.960 --> 0:32:53.760
<v Speaker 1>something that's more like a point through instead, just because

0:32:53.760 --> 0:32:56.320
<v Speaker 1>of this movement in health insurance. And you know, that's

0:32:56.400 --> 0:32:58.320
<v Speaker 1>kind of the difference between a five percent in realize

0:32:58.400 --> 0:33:00.400
<v Speaker 1>rate and you know something that's more like a three

0:33:00.440 --> 0:33:02.280
<v Speaker 1>and a half percent in US. So that's a pretty

0:33:02.400 --> 0:33:05.280
<v Speaker 1>big gap. The other issues here. On a year a

0:33:05.360 --> 0:33:08.800
<v Speaker 1>year basis, health insurance currently is about twenty five percent

0:33:08.880 --> 0:33:11.480
<v Speaker 1>year year because of the steady you know, two percent

0:33:11.520 --> 0:33:14.440
<v Speaker 1>hours every month. When the next report comes out September,

0:33:14.440 --> 0:33:16.760
<v Speaker 1>which is sort of the last herald before it, terms

0:33:16.760 --> 0:33:21.760
<v Speaker 1>of negative will probably hit at once this minus four

0:33:21.840 --> 0:33:24.240
<v Speaker 1>comes in in October and it stays here for the

0:33:24.280 --> 0:33:28.280
<v Speaker 1>bulk of the year. By September three, Health Insurance I

0:33:28.640 --> 0:33:32.400
<v Speaker 1>suspect we'll go from plus twenty eight to about minus four.

0:33:32.880 --> 0:33:38.720
<v Speaker 1>Ye're here. That swing is worth almost about any basis

0:33:38.760 --> 0:33:42.440
<v Speaker 1>points on the core CPI. So you have an index

0:33:42.520 --> 0:33:46.760
<v Speaker 1>that's worth just over one percent of the entire course

0:33:46.800 --> 0:33:52.080
<v Speaker 1>CPI that by itself will subtract almost a full percentage

0:33:52.080 --> 0:33:57.320
<v Speaker 1>point from cornflation. An extreme that's is so crazy to

0:33:57.360 --> 0:33:59.440
<v Speaker 1>be because the whole point of like measuring the stuff

0:33:59.440 --> 0:34:03.440
<v Speaker 1>and then mondetary policies like countercyclical and this huge component

0:34:03.760 --> 0:34:07.600
<v Speaker 1>as you just described, it has no there's no actual

0:34:07.720 --> 0:34:11.239
<v Speaker 1>like economically cyclical impulse part of it. Well, this was

0:34:11.280 --> 0:34:13.719
<v Speaker 1>actually going to be my next question, and oh, Mary,

0:34:13.800 --> 0:34:17.200
<v Speaker 1>that was absolutely fascinating. And the thing about qualitative adjustments

0:34:17.400 --> 0:34:20.799
<v Speaker 1>was something that I only like really discovered this year,

0:34:20.880 --> 0:34:22.960
<v Speaker 1>so I didn't know the BLS, you know, if they're

0:34:22.960 --> 0:34:25.759
<v Speaker 1>looking at the cost of a refrigerator, for instance, will

0:34:25.760 --> 0:34:29.120
<v Speaker 1>take into account technological advances on the cost of the

0:34:29.160 --> 0:34:31.720
<v Speaker 1>refrigerator if it now comes with I don't know, WiFi

0:34:31.800 --> 0:34:36.520
<v Speaker 1>connectivity or something, yeah, blockchain enabled fridge um and they

0:34:36.560 --> 0:34:39.640
<v Speaker 1>will factor that into the c p I. But I

0:34:39.640 --> 0:34:42.680
<v Speaker 1>mean this gets to one of the major criticisms of

0:34:42.719 --> 0:34:45.200
<v Speaker 1>the indices themselves. You can kind of see what they're

0:34:45.239 --> 0:34:49.720
<v Speaker 1>trying to do, so it's difficult to measure qualitative improvements

0:34:50.360 --> 0:34:54.640
<v Speaker 1>in things like healthcare insurance. But on the other hand,

0:34:54.880 --> 0:34:58.359
<v Speaker 1>it does lead people to look at these things and go, well,

0:34:58.400 --> 0:35:00.880
<v Speaker 1>what are we actually measuring here? And isn't it weird

0:35:00.960 --> 0:35:03.239
<v Speaker 1>that the cost of living, you know, as measured by

0:35:03.239 --> 0:35:07.719
<v Speaker 1>the CPI, which includes rent, healthcare, food, energy, whatever, can

0:35:07.840 --> 0:35:10.919
<v Speaker 1>change just because of like the way this one thing

0:35:11.520 --> 0:35:15.280
<v Speaker 1>is measured retained earnings versus the way we measure goods

0:35:15.280 --> 0:35:17.680
<v Speaker 1>and things like that. What do you say to that

0:35:17.760 --> 0:35:21.600
<v Speaker 1>criticisms It's fair to to make those sorts of criticisms.

0:35:21.640 --> 0:35:23.759
<v Speaker 1>I guess I would say couple. One thing is that

0:35:24.560 --> 0:35:27.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, this is never a static process in terms

0:35:27.719 --> 0:35:31.400
<v Speaker 1>of the methodology, so the BLS is always trying to

0:35:31.440 --> 0:35:35.760
<v Speaker 1>improve upon whatever is that they're doing. A good example

0:35:35.840 --> 0:35:39.080
<v Speaker 1>of this something like new vehicles. Um just in April

0:35:39.120 --> 0:35:41.080
<v Speaker 1>of this year, in fact, they introduced a brand new

0:35:41.120 --> 0:35:44.480
<v Speaker 1>methodology for capturing the price of new vehicles. So before

0:35:44.520 --> 0:35:47.160
<v Speaker 1>they used to go to dealers figure apples selling, you know,

0:35:47.200 --> 0:35:50.480
<v Speaker 1>try to capture those prices. Now they're using a massive

0:35:50.560 --> 0:35:54.680
<v Speaker 1>data set from Shady Power, which captures you know, essentially

0:35:54.760 --> 0:35:59.160
<v Speaker 1>real live transactions that are occurring. So they've updated that

0:35:59.440 --> 0:36:01.480
<v Speaker 1>quite in the forget me to really reflect kind of

0:36:01.480 --> 0:36:03.920
<v Speaker 1>the conditions on the ground for people who are providing

0:36:03.920 --> 0:36:08.640
<v Speaker 1>new cards. So there's always there's always this sort of, uh,

0:36:08.719 --> 0:36:12.239
<v Speaker 1>you know, goal to improve upon the methodology. So that's

0:36:12.280 --> 0:36:14.719
<v Speaker 1>that's number one. Number two is you know, you kind

0:36:14.719 --> 0:36:17.040
<v Speaker 1>of do the best you can with what you're given.

0:36:17.280 --> 0:36:19.759
<v Speaker 1>And by that I mean that a lot of these

0:36:19.800 --> 0:36:24.200
<v Speaker 1>things are subject to things like budget constraints. Um, you know,

0:36:24.360 --> 0:36:27.360
<v Speaker 1>when we talk about the rent for example, the BLS,

0:36:27.440 --> 0:36:29.839
<v Speaker 1>if you survey a unit, let's say in January, and

0:36:29.840 --> 0:36:32.000
<v Speaker 1>you say, hey, how much you're paying the rent? You

0:36:32.080 --> 0:36:33.680
<v Speaker 1>come back to that unit, you don't come back to

0:36:33.719 --> 0:36:35.440
<v Speaker 1>in February or March rate whill you come back to

0:36:35.480 --> 0:36:38.759
<v Speaker 1>it in July six months later. Part of the rationalist

0:36:38.840 --> 0:36:41.759
<v Speaker 1>because you know, rents don't change a lot in terms

0:36:41.760 --> 0:36:44.600
<v Speaker 1>of the contracts, so six months seem like an adequate

0:36:44.640 --> 0:36:47.239
<v Speaker 1>amount of time. But the two other reasons are one,

0:36:47.320 --> 0:36:50.480
<v Speaker 1>respondent burden, Right, if I'm knocking on your door every

0:36:50.520 --> 0:36:52.200
<v Speaker 1>single amount asking where the rent is, you might be

0:36:52.280 --> 0:36:55.120
<v Speaker 1>less willing to participate in the survey. But the other

0:36:55.200 --> 0:36:58.279
<v Speaker 1>is also there's a budget much terry constraint involved here

0:36:58.800 --> 0:37:00.839
<v Speaker 1>in terms of you know, sending people out into the

0:37:00.880 --> 0:37:04.000
<v Speaker 1>field to capture a lot of these data sets. Um,

0:37:04.040 --> 0:37:07.239
<v Speaker 1>so that all of these things sort of constrain what

0:37:07.960 --> 0:37:11.360
<v Speaker 1>uh you know, the BLS can ultimately produce in this

0:37:11.440 --> 0:37:13.879
<v Speaker 1>particular instance for health insurance. You know, I can sort

0:37:13.880 --> 0:37:15.520
<v Speaker 1>of understand a bit more of the criticism, but the

0:37:15.600 --> 0:37:19.239
<v Speaker 1>issue here is really the data is just black ten months. Um,

0:37:19.560 --> 0:37:21.520
<v Speaker 1>we can't do anything about that. I mean, the data

0:37:21.600 --> 0:37:25.440
<v Speaker 1>that they are getting is from the National Association of

0:37:25.440 --> 0:37:28.560
<v Speaker 1>Insurance Issues. And if you think about capturing all of

0:37:28.600 --> 0:37:32.080
<v Speaker 1>the premium inverture, all of the claims that are paying

0:37:32.120 --> 0:37:34.440
<v Speaker 1>by all of these health insurers, you know, it just

0:37:34.480 --> 0:37:36.319
<v Speaker 1>takes up for for the last year. It just takes

0:37:36.320 --> 0:37:38.600
<v Speaker 1>a while to put those numbers together. So this is

0:37:38.640 --> 0:37:40.920
<v Speaker 1>just something with the BLS just has to wait on

0:37:41.560 --> 0:37:44.520
<v Speaker 1>the data that they're capturing. Again, this that data set

0:37:44.560 --> 0:37:46.680
<v Speaker 1>is you know, effectively like the bible for for health

0:37:46.680 --> 0:37:50.360
<v Speaker 1>insurance data, right, and so this istance they can't do anything.

0:37:50.360 --> 0:37:53.920
<v Speaker 1>They just have to wait until that's produced. UM. So

0:37:54.000 --> 0:37:55.640
<v Speaker 1>I think you know, in some instances that I get

0:37:55.640 --> 0:37:57.920
<v Speaker 1>the criticism. I just think you've got to understand that

0:37:57.920 --> 0:38:02.080
<v Speaker 1>they were working within a number of different constraints, UM,

0:38:02.120 --> 0:38:04.839
<v Speaker 1>and you know sort of take that into account when

0:38:04.840 --> 0:38:10.560
<v Speaker 1>you're thinking about criticizing them for particular approaches, UM, in

0:38:10.680 --> 0:38:14.440
<v Speaker 1>terms of, uh, you know, how they constructed it. Can

0:38:14.480 --> 0:38:16.440
<v Speaker 1>we do a live event if you wondering where people

0:38:16.600 --> 0:38:19.319
<v Speaker 1>throw out a CPI category and then you like on

0:38:19.400 --> 0:38:21.440
<v Speaker 1>the fly explained No, I serious, people would love to

0:38:21.480 --> 0:38:24.399
<v Speaker 1>explain how it's constructed because we could this. We could

0:38:24.440 --> 0:38:27.640
<v Speaker 1>just talk forever on every category. I found this conversation. Seriously,

0:38:27.640 --> 0:38:30.319
<v Speaker 1>Can we can we do that someday? Yeah, there's you know,

0:38:30.360 --> 0:38:34.240
<v Speaker 1>there's uh two hundred forty three individual components and the CPI.

0:38:34.320 --> 0:38:36.600
<v Speaker 1>I love it. I think I've got most of them

0:38:36.600 --> 0:38:39.800
<v Speaker 1>down that we could probably do that. Other facts and oils,

0:38:39.800 --> 0:38:43.320
<v Speaker 1>including peanut butter. Yeah, I can. I didn't say. I

0:38:43.480 --> 0:38:47.200
<v Speaker 1>didn't say we could do the PPI. Okay, that's true. Wow,

0:38:47.239 --> 0:38:49.920
<v Speaker 1>you actually knew that was a PPI code versus the CPI.

0:38:50.080 --> 0:38:53.800
<v Speaker 1>That's verysive. We talked about one final thing. I just

0:38:53.840 --> 0:38:55.600
<v Speaker 1>wanted to be showing the self insurance stuff is that

0:38:55.920 --> 0:38:57.120
<v Speaker 1>you know. Part of the reason why I think it

0:38:57.200 --> 0:39:01.200
<v Speaker 1>is pretty important is because this to set uh, the

0:39:01.239 --> 0:39:03.680
<v Speaker 1>official report is coming out and thinking about a week.

0:39:03.760 --> 0:39:06.799
<v Speaker 1>I tend to use separate source, which is you know

0:39:06.840 --> 0:39:09.800
<v Speaker 1>carverage quite well. But basically, you know, my feeling is

0:39:09.840 --> 0:39:13.080
<v Speaker 1>that folks who are either treating in place shan or

0:39:13.120 --> 0:39:17.120
<v Speaker 1>who just generally following play shit are pretty unaware of this,

0:39:17.120 --> 0:39:19.960
<v Speaker 1>this change that's coming. So this is gonna be something

0:39:20.000 --> 0:39:22.239
<v Speaker 1>that you know, is at the margin going to help

0:39:22.320 --> 0:39:26.600
<v Speaker 1>the FED month over month for the next year, along

0:39:26.600 --> 0:39:28.080
<v Speaker 1>with I think the coming to kind of used cars.

0:39:28.080 --> 0:39:31.480
<v Speaker 1>So really Q four potentially is shaping up to to

0:39:31.560 --> 0:39:36.279
<v Speaker 1>see some lower core inflation. For instance, I'm going to

0:39:36.360 --> 0:39:38.480
<v Speaker 1>spike the football at the end of Q far well

0:39:38.520 --> 0:39:41.760
<v Speaker 1>Mer Sharif. Thank you so much for coming on. Fascinating conversation.

0:39:41.880 --> 0:39:44.759
<v Speaker 1>Always love chanting with you. Always learned something and we'll

0:39:44.880 --> 0:39:46.960
<v Speaker 1>have to have you back again to thank you. Take

0:39:47.000 --> 0:40:02.320
<v Speaker 1>care of Thanks. That was great. I love talking to

0:40:02.920 --> 0:40:04.799
<v Speaker 1>I always learned so much sitting as said, the fact

0:40:04.800 --> 0:40:06.839
<v Speaker 1>that he gave me, you know, the like throws, these

0:40:06.880 --> 0:40:09.440
<v Speaker 1>little like bits of red meat for team transitory. I

0:40:09.560 --> 0:40:11.360
<v Speaker 1>just actually like learning about this, Like I had no

0:40:11.440 --> 0:40:14.120
<v Speaker 1>idea how they captured health to church. That's so interesting

0:40:14.160 --> 0:40:17.040
<v Speaker 1>to me. Yeah, So I think I have maybe three

0:40:17.280 --> 0:40:22.160
<v Speaker 1>major takeaways from that. Like one, it's just crazy how

0:40:22.239 --> 0:40:24.880
<v Speaker 1>much of the market and our daily lives are linked

0:40:24.880 --> 0:40:27.920
<v Speaker 1>to the construction of this one index, and hat well't

0:40:28.000 --> 0:40:30.160
<v Speaker 1>I mean it's multiple indexes, but p p I c

0:40:30.360 --> 0:40:33.520
<v Speaker 1>p I and how it works, like think about all

0:40:33.520 --> 0:40:36.279
<v Speaker 1>the payments, Treasury link securities, things like that that are

0:40:36.400 --> 0:40:38.719
<v Speaker 1>linked to c p I, and so much of it

0:40:38.760 --> 0:40:42.160
<v Speaker 1>depends on the individual construction. And then the second takeaway,

0:40:42.280 --> 0:40:44.320
<v Speaker 1>you know what he was saying about the time lags

0:40:44.360 --> 0:40:47.200
<v Speaker 1>and how COVID kind of messed those up. I think

0:40:47.280 --> 0:40:49.160
<v Speaker 1>is a really good way of looking at why there's

0:40:49.200 --> 0:40:54.480
<v Speaker 1>been so much confusion over inflation. And Then thirdly, this

0:40:54.520 --> 0:40:57.799
<v Speaker 1>is something that I'd heard before, but the resource constraints

0:40:57.840 --> 0:41:00.360
<v Speaker 1>on the BLS in terms of a set bling some

0:41:00.440 --> 0:41:03.080
<v Speaker 1>of this data and trying to adjust it. I think

0:41:03.160 --> 0:41:06.239
<v Speaker 1>that is maybe an underappreciated factor over the past couple

0:41:06.239 --> 0:41:08.319
<v Speaker 1>of years. Well, and especially like some of these some

0:41:08.440 --> 0:41:11.520
<v Speaker 1>of the stickier prices within goods that like, of course

0:41:11.560 --> 0:41:13.759
<v Speaker 1>these should come down right, because we have every big

0:41:13.800 --> 0:41:17.160
<v Speaker 1>box retailer saying we have tons of inventory. The housing

0:41:17.200 --> 0:41:19.760
<v Speaker 1>markets slowed down, so it's like all kinds of reasons

0:41:19.800 --> 0:41:22.120
<v Speaker 1>to think, yeah, we should be seeing some deflation and furniture,

0:41:22.120 --> 0:41:24.080
<v Speaker 1>it's not happening. But then he says, oh, they you know,

0:41:24.239 --> 0:41:27.799
<v Speaker 1>maybe they only contract a couple of hundred in the survey. Well, right,

0:41:27.880 --> 0:41:31.040
<v Speaker 1>if your survey respondents are like the big box stores

0:41:31.080 --> 0:41:34.720
<v Speaker 1>that have pricing power, still have pricing power for a while,

0:41:34.840 --> 0:41:38.280
<v Speaker 1>then it'll be sticky. Now there's something, and we should

0:41:38.360 --> 0:41:42.000
<v Speaker 1>at some point do an episode on when they changed

0:41:42.360 --> 0:41:45.319
<v Speaker 1>the rules of inflation, because they look, it's crazy. I

0:41:45.360 --> 0:41:47.239
<v Speaker 1>think that, like, you know, forty years ago, if they

0:41:47.360 --> 0:41:51.520
<v Speaker 1>raised great that mathematically raised measured inflation because interest in

0:41:51.560 --> 0:41:54.120
<v Speaker 1>mortgages was including the CPI, which is also like kind

0:41:54.120 --> 0:41:56.040
<v Speaker 1>of maybe intuitive to a lot of people. Well, it's

0:41:56.080 --> 0:41:58.279
<v Speaker 1>one of those things like you can see why they

0:41:58.320 --> 0:42:00.480
<v Speaker 1>would do it, but on the other hand, it also

0:42:00.560 --> 0:42:03.200
<v Speaker 1>seems odd if you think that CPI is supposed to

0:42:03.239 --> 0:42:07.160
<v Speaker 1>measure the cost of living. Fascinating stuff. Yeah, we can

0:42:07.200 --> 0:42:08.759
<v Speaker 1>talk about this for a long time. Okay, shall we

0:42:08.800 --> 0:42:10.719
<v Speaker 1>leave it there. Let's leave it there. This has been

0:42:10.800 --> 0:42:13.800
<v Speaker 1>another episode of the All Thoughts podcast. I'm Tracy Alloway.

0:42:13.880 --> 0:42:16.360
<v Speaker 1>You can follow me on Twitter at Tracy Alloway and

0:42:16.400 --> 0:42:18.520
<v Speaker 1>I'm Joe wi Isn't All. You could follow me on

0:42:18.560 --> 0:42:22.160
<v Speaker 1>Twitter at the Stalwart. Follow our guest Omer Sharif He's

0:42:22.280 --> 0:42:25.360
<v Speaker 1>at f Cast of the Month. Follow our producer Carbin

0:42:25.480 --> 0:42:28.399
<v Speaker 1>Rodriguez at Kerman Armine, and check out all of our

0:42:28.440 --> 0:42:32.320
<v Speaker 1>podcasts Bloomberg under the handle at podcasts. Thanks for listening.