Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

standarduser2 t1_j1af7wj wrote


aquarain t1_j1ahnrq wrote

I think I see your objection. It's the grammar time machine.

>With inflation approaching 10% and looking to get sticky the potential for a hard crash was there.

The placement of that "was" makes it difficult to tell that the former tense applies to the clause before it. English is tricky that way. Let's break down the sentence another way for you, and add in the supplemental information from the context since.

In June of this year annual inflation reached 9.06% over the year before, and the month to month increase suggested an annualized rate of inflation of 10%. Having accelerated at an increasing rate for the 26 months prior, from an annual rate below 0.2% to over 9%, it would have been reasonable at that time to expect this trend to continue without an upper bound until some change was undertaken, making a hard crash conclusion increasingly likely at that time. Fortunately, belatedly, the Federal Reserve Board had begun hiking interest rates and announcing an end to unlimited mortgage buying a couple of months earlier and so the inflation began to ease. Now with the pressure of inflation easing, the trend reversed and only limited impacts to the jobs economy a hard crash looks unlikely at this time and trending less likely as time goes on.

Is that better?