This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
WP:NEOLOGISM - Articles on neologisms that have little or no usage in reliable sources are commonly deleted,...
"To support an article about a particular term or concept, we must cite what reliable secondary sources say about the term or concept, not just sources that use the term (see use–mention distinction). An editor's personal observations and research (e.g. finding blogs, books, and articles that use the term rather than are about the term) are insufficient to support articles on neologisms because this may require analysis and synthesis of primary source material to advance a position, which is explicitly prohibited by the original research policy." ---Avatar317(talk)01:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to note that this is DIFFERENT than the other "Climateflation" article, so my comments here do NOT apply to that subject. But here, humans have been using fossil fuels since the industrial revolution for the vast majority of our energy needs, and it is well understood that energy prices (specifically understood as OIL prices) normally fluctuate so much that they are EXCLUDED from the Federal Reserve's CPI.
To claim that fossil fuel prices are causing inflation ONLY RECENTLY, rather than being a normal and well-understood phenomenon is Original Research WP:OR, or completely biased and incomplete reporting. In our 1973 oil crisis we have "In the US production, distribution and price disruptions "have been held responsible for recessions, periods of excessive inflation, reduced productivity, and lower economic growth." "
So the effect of the price of ENERGY (which across most use cases is OIL) is well understood to increase inflation when it increases, and correspondingly, TO DECREASE INFLATION WHEN OIL/ENERGY PRICES DECLINE.
It would be fine to have an article on this connection, (energy prices to inflation) but the fact that oil prices going up drives inflation as well as oil price declines driving deflation needs to be covered.
And it is completely POV to talk about this ONLY in reference to fossil-fuel prices; if we switch to only renewable electricity for the entire world economy, fluctuations in electricity prices will simply have a much greater effect on the economy overall. (A volcanic eruption which dims the sky for months will have a huge effect on solar generation, probably even more that the 1973 Arab oil embargo or this embargo of Russian oil and gas.) ---Avatar317(talk)18:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I hear you - it's not intended to be a recent phenomenon concept. The article clearly states "Mark Zandi of Moody's says that fossil fuel prices have driven every big episode of inflation since WWII." The concept applies to all commodities with wild fluctuations and maybe belongs in an article on the role of commodities and inflation. As for solar example, that is an interesting counterpoint and should be included in this discussion if made in secondary sources. Also, the exclusion of volatile sectors from CPI is a very flawed way to go about it - food and energy impact all other measures of inflation - they also weigh heavily on the public and the mind of voters regardless of which metric they are or are not included in. Superb Owl (talk) 19:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"the exclusion of volatile sectors from CPI is a very flawed way to go about it - food and energy impact all other measures of inflation - they also weigh heavily on the public and the mind of voters regardless of which metric they are or are not included in" - The Fed does this because they want a measure (economic indicator) of underlying inflation (a slower signal), and the (high speed) volatility of food and fuel prices add too much noise to that signal. ---Avatar317(talk)22:39, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you can invent a better economic indicator/monetary aggregate/gauge of the economy/economic thermometer which the Fed could use to better quantify the economy for their decisions of whether to raise/lower interest rates (raise or shrink the money supply) and whether to Quantitatively Ease or not, you could win a Nobel. ---Avatar317(talk)01:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I redirected to a new section in 'fossil fuel' article on inflation. Still might explore a section on this in commodities too but that will take more time Superb Owl (talk) 19:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
