Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Cross33 t1_ivjpxqc wrote

I think it does though? Because if the unadjusted cost is greater then the adjusted cost will always be greater with inflation

1

BeanpoleAhead t1_ivjq9p1 wrote

No, it won't, because inflation rises over time. A hundred bucks a hundred years ago was worth more than 500 today, and that 500 is only worth 500. Even if the unadjusted cost is lower, depending on how far back it was made it could still cost more when adjusted for inflation.

1

Cross33 t1_ivjrbab wrote

I think we're saying the same thing in a disagreeing way. I literally agree with everything you just said except for the word no.

1

BeanpoleAhead t1_ivjrlby wrote

Are we? You're saying if the unadjusted cost is greater, the adjusted cost will always also be greater, which is false. That's what I'm arguing against.

1

Cross33 t1_ivjxxrn wrote

How is that false? You literally said yourself 500 dollars a hundred years ago is worth more today?

1

BeanpoleAhead t1_ivjyae3 wrote

"A hundred bucks a hundred years ago was worth more than 500 today, and that 500 is only worth 500."

That's not what I said. I said a hundred dollars is worth more than 500 today, but 500 today is only worth 500. So even though the cost before adjusting for inflation is lower for the hundred, after adjustment the price is higher. So what you originally were claiming is false.

1

Cross33 t1_ivk2ant wrote

Is it though? Cuz what I originally claimed aligns with literally everything you just said. I honestly think you're fucking with me at this point and I'm done with this conversation.

1

BeanpoleAhead t1_ivk76s7 wrote

You claimed the exact opposite of what I'm saying, so you're either misunderstanding me or misunderstanding what you originally stated. It could very well be my fault if I'm not wording things in an easy way to understand.

1