Typical of Yglesias, this is deeply, deeply stupid.

That’s not even what people mean by asset price inflation, as this comment points out. Who gives a flip about the very narrow definition the economics field has for it? And the definition is also related to the contention in economics that there is no such thing as a bubble, which is also specious and based on the-market-is-always-right ideology.

Also, dipshit Yglesias is using the most technical definition of inflation* to weasel out of the fact that the goods and services that consumers need most — housing, child care, medical care — have all risen enormously in price, while you can get a great deal on a fucking TV. Like this helps or matters. (“Let them eat 75 inch Vizios.”)

I kind of wish I’d gone to Harvard, so I could get away with being so wrong and deliriously obtuse and people would still line up to laud me for it.

I’ll just leave this here:

*What he means by “But that’s not what inflation is” is that inflation is technically a measure of the rise of prices of all items and services in the economy over time, not specific instances of same. So, if your TV and your computer get way cheaper, and you can no longer afford medical care or school, you’re still good, because as long as it averages out, inflation hasn’t risen. Tada!