|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
||
|
Items |
|
|
|
|
|
Apples |
|
|
|
|
|
Oranges |
|
|
|
|
If one constructs a price index using the early quantities, one finds the market basket increases in price from $4.25 to $4.39, or a 3.3% increase. If one uses the market basket based on the consumption pattern of the second period, one finds the cost of the market basket drops in price from $4.35 to $4.31, a decrease of .9%. This pattern is normal; a price index based on early quantities will usually show a larger rise in prices than one based on late quantities. The reason is that neither basket takes into account that people substitute as the result of changes in price structure.
Beginning in January of 2002, the Labor Department began to update the consumption-expenditure weights every two years. Prior to the 1990s, the Department had updated the weights in ten-year intervals. The CPI for 1990 was based on a market basket formed from consumer buying patterns that existed in 1982. If the Department of Labor had done another survey of consumer buying patterns in 1990, it would have found that consumers were buying more of those items that had dropped in price or that had risen in price by small amounts. People would have been buying less of those items that had risen in price much more than average. If these new weights were used to recompute the price index, the large price rises would have a smaller impact on the total. The smaller price rises would have more of an impact on the total because they would be more heavily weighted. Therefore the resulting price rises would look smaller, which is what the example above explained. With more frequent updating of weights, the CPI should be a more accurate measure of inflation.
Another important economic measurement is that of production, done with Gross Domestic Product.
1 If you want a technical
discussion of this problem, check more advanced books under
the topics Paasche and Laspeyres indexes.
Copyright
Robert Schenk