Aggregator

Ravens receiver Ja'Kobi Lane was selected in the third round of the draft this spring and quickly made his mark during camp this summer. 

The "Save the Last Dance" actress and her pro partner, Ezra Sosa, pulled out all the stops for their Quickstep honoring the late country music icon.

The "Save the Last Dance" actress and her pro partner, Ezra Sosa, pulled out all the stops for their Quickstep honoring the late country music icon.

The franchise player can understand the adulation Pete Alonso received during his visit to Citi Field this week better than most.

Border Patrol agents made a startling discovery in the scorching California desert after finding 31 migrants allegedly crammed into the back of a modified utility truck in a suspected human-smuggling operation.

Bill Belichick seems to be getting the hang of things on the field at UNC, and now it seems he’s trying to gain control off the field.

Why CPI Ignores Homes, Stocks, And The Cost Of Getting Ahead

Authored by Karl-Friedrich Israel via The Daily Economy,

The median-priced home in America now costs $440,600, while the median household earns roughly $84,000 a year. That gap has left a growing share of Americans priced out of buying altogether, while those who already own homes and hold stocks have watched their wealth compound. The renter-owner wealth gap is now the widest on record. Meanwhile, equity markets keep setting new highs. None of this, officially, counts as inflation.

In a previous piece, I explained that the Consumer Price Index leaves out a large and growing share of what households are really forced to pay for: government spending financed by taxes rather than purchased voluntarily on markets. That is one CPI blind spot. There is a second, and it is arguably more consequential for how Americans experience economic reality. The price of stocks, homes, and other assets essentially does not appear at all in conventional inflation measures.

Why Asset Prices Fall Outside The CPI

The reason again traces back to the index-number theory Gottfried Haberler laid out in Vienna in 1927, which I've written about elsewhere. Haberler showed that the standard price indices economists use - Laspeyres and Paasche, and averages of the two - can be trusted as measures of an individual's true cost of living only under a specific set of assumptions about that individual. One of those unstated assumptions is that the individual is a pure consumer: someone who spends the whole of their income on present consumption, full stop. No saving. No portfolio. No home, or even portion of a home, purchased as an investment rather than simply a place to live.

That assumption is a reasonable simplification for the sake of theoretical tractability. It is also the reason a stock portfolio or a home's resale value has no place in a cost-of-living index built on Haberler's logic. The CPI does track shelter, but only through "owners' equivalent rent" - an estimate of what it would cost to rent the service flow of a home, not the price of the home as an asset. Equities do not enter the index in any form. A pure consumer, by design, does not hold assets. An index built for a pure consumer has nothing to say about what happens to their prices.

A Reasonable Exclusion With A Widening Consequence

That exclusion made the CPI theoretically coherent - it's meant to measure consumer spending, after all. It also means that some of the fastest price inflation in the American economy over the past three decades has been completely invisible to the number the Federal Reserve targets (the PCE price index) and the media reports (the CPI).

Since 1995, the S&P 500 has compounded at roughly 9.2 percent a year (15x) and home prices, as measured by the Case-Shiller index, at about 4.7 percent a year (4x). The CPI, over the same period, rose about 2.6 percent a year (2.2x). Stocks have outrun consumer prices by a factor of more than three; home prices, by nearly two. The CPI alone has no way of seeing any of these inflationary pressures - not the run-up in home prices that has priced many younger Americans out of the market, nor the equity gains flowing overwhelmingly to households that already owned assets before the run-up began.

Why Assets, In Particular?

If asset prices simply drifted upward for reasons unrelated to monetary policy, and the PCE's and CPI's exclusion of them was a harmless accident, we might more easily excuse CPI's shortcomings. But there is a plausible monetary explanation for why the exclusion has mattered so much specifically since the mid-1990s.

If money were neutral and its growth simply distributed itself proportionally across real output growth and consumer price inflation, the M2 money supply should grow at roughly the sum of real GDP growth and CPI inflation over time. We can check that directly: take average M2 growth and subtract the sum of average real GDP growth and average CPI growth, before and after 1995.

From 1959 through 1994, M2 grew at 7.2 percent a year, against real GDP growth of 3.5 percent and CPI inflation of 4.7 percent - a combined 8.2 percent. The gap was slightly negative: roughly 1.0 percentage point a year. Money growth, if anything, ran a bit behind the pace of real economic growth and consumer price inflation combined.

Since 1995, the picture flips. M2 has grown at 6.2 percent a year, while real GDP and the CPI have grown at 2.5 percent per year each - a combined 5.0 percent. The gap is now a positive 1.2 percentage points a year, a swing of roughly two full points from the prior 35 years.

That is not a rounding error compounding harmlessly in the background. Over three decades, a persistent 1.2-point annual gap compounds into a very large sum of money that was created by government, but not absorbed by real output growth. By definition, it did not show up as measured consumer price inflation.

Money Is Not Neutral

Additional money does not raise every price by the same proportion, leaving the underlying structure of the economy untouched. It enters the economy at specific points - through banks, credit markets, and the institutions that first receive newly created liquidity - and its effects ripple outward unevenly from there. By the time new money reaches the people, higher prices have already consumed its extra value. Austrian economists, like Haberler's contemporary Friedrich Hayek, have long described this with the Cantillon effect. In an economy where basic consumption needs are largely saturated for a large share of households, additional liquidity is more likely to flow into savings and investment vehicles, such as stocks and real estate, than into proportionally higher demand for groceries and clothing.

That is precisely the pattern in the data. The monetary overhang that opened up after 1995 lines up closely with the period over which stocks and home prices pulled away from the CPI. None of this proves a single, simple causal explanation. Asset prices respond to many forces, from productivity growth to demographics to global capital flows. But a persistent, multi-decade gap between money creation on the one hand and real growth plus consumer price inflation on the other is exactly the kind of monetary overhang that should show up somewhere. In a consumption-saturated economy, the most likely place for it to show up is in the price of the assets the CPI was never built to measure.

That leaves conventional inflation measures with two blind spots stacked on top of each other. The CPI omits the government-financed consumption taxpayers cannot opt out of, and it omits the asset-price inflation driving the widening gap between those who already own homes and stocks and those still trying to buy in. Neither omission is a flaw in how the CPI is calculated. Both are consequences of what the CPI was, by its own underlying economic theory, never designed to measure.

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/16/2026 - 20:55

At least three people were killed as heavy rain impacted communities in the Southwest US while a tropical disturbance enhances monsoon-fueled floods in the region, according to officials.

The famous couple was shot down by village planners when submitting plans for a proposed security feature.

The famous couple were were shot down by village planners when submitting plans for a proposed security feature.

Saunders was a part of Season 1 of the reality series, which originated in the Netherlands.

Saunders was a part of Season 1 of the reality series, which originated in the Netherlands.

Ryan Reaves is calling it a career. 

Andrew Whitworth wants his former team to wake up.

“The body was on fire. His whole stomach was on fire. It was awful,” one witness said.

As the days grow shorter, so do the opportunities to listen to a genuine virtuoso at work.

The Knicks are currently at 13 standard NBA contracts.

Lavrov Warns That If NATO Attacked Russia, War Would Be "Very Short"

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has again responded to allegations of European officials that Moscow seeks to expand the war beyond Ukraine.

We earlier detailed how recent drone spillover from the conflict, including explosive-laden drones coming out of Belarusian territory and threatening the Baltics, has resulted in Western officials increasingly alluding to NATO 'collective defense'.

This is highly dangerous as it means the situation could rapidly escalate into full-blown Russia-NATO direct confrontation on the basis of a single aircraft shootdown.

In his fresh remarks from Ekaterinburg, Russia - where he was addressing the International Youth Festival on Wednesday, FM Lavrov made clear that Russia has not intent of ever attacking Europe.

Kremlin file image: FM Sergey Lavrov

But he coupled the statement with a very severe and ominous warning, that could have nuclear implications.

"I would like to emphasize that we have no interest in engaging in this [attacking Europe], but if Europe, which is talking about preparing for war against Russia on a daily basis, attacks Russia, it will be a completely different war, and it will be very short," Lavrov said in remarks translated by national media.

According to more:

The minister also expressed the hope that Europe had heard the warning about a short war in the event of an attack on Russia.

Sergey Lavrov expressed doubts regarding the idea that the world is being governed based solely on agreements between the United States and China, noting that China has a completely different approach to global affairs.

Again, though not expressly stated, Lavrov's warning hints a using nuclear weapons - given the emphasis on such a conflict being "short".

Reading between the lines, he is saying that while Russia doesn't want to go to war with Europe, the only scenario where that would be possible is if Russia is under direct attack and deems its existential survival at stake. Such a thresh-hold reached would likely justify use of strategic forces if President Putin made the decision. 

What's different or curious about the veiled Lavrov warning is that it is typically the 'hawk' Dmitry Medvedev making them. The former Russian president and current Deputy Chairman of the Security Council is typically the one making such maximalist warnings.

All of this suggests the Kremlin sees escalation with NATO in the atmosphere, which it authentically doesn't seem to want.

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/16/2026 - 20:30

Margaret Rog, 75, watched her husband — who suffers from dementia, Alzheimer’s and legal blindness — groan in pain, did not call anyone for help, and went to bed while he was still on the loo.

"Drive safely," the trooper said. "Take care, sir."