Saturday, January 3, 2026

Is That Inflation?

Growing up, I learned that prices went up” is one of those phrases people use the way they use The dog ate my homework.”  Thats a catch-all excuse that explains everything and therefore explains nothing.  Its a little like saying, History happened.” 

But if you listen to the public conversation long enough, youll notice that we jam at least three different ideas into that one phrase:

  • A plain old price increase (the thing you buy got more expensive),
  • A relative price change (the thing you buy got more expensive compared with other things), and
  • Systemic inflation (damn near everything went up).

And because we treat these as interchangeable, we end up arguing past each other like two professors who are debating whether Plato would have liked TikTok.  (He would not.  Hed have published a dialogue about it and then banned it.)

So, lets untangle this, and do it with enough humor to keep your blood pressure below breaking news.”

Prices Went Up”: The Great American Catch-All.  When someone says, Prices are up,” they might mean one price is up.  Like eggs.  Or gasoline.  Or the kind of coffee beans that now require a co-signer.  Thats a price increase—often caused by something specific: drought, war, shipping snarls, avian flu, or a mysterious shortage of whatever it is my grandson collects.

A price increase is usually local to a product, or a small set of products, and it often has an identifiable, concrete cause.  The price rose because something got scarcer, or demand surged, or a regulator woke up feeling ambitious, or some jackass in California discovered that if you ate a half-ton of it within a single week it caused cancer.   In other words: a price increase is a micro story.  Its just about that thing.

This is different from inflation, which is the macro story.  Inflation is when the overall purchasing power of money declines, and a broad swath of prices rise—goods, services, and finally and a little later, wages.

So, the first key distinction is:

  • Price increase: “This thing costs more.”
  • Inflation: “Money buys less across the economy, and it keeps doing that for a while.”

If you want a quick gut-check:  if only a few items are spiking, youre likely looking at price increases and relative price changes.  If everything is creeping up, and it wont stop creeping, you might be dealing with systemic inflation.

Relative Prices: The Ratio That Ruins Your Dinner Plans.  Now lets talk about relative price changes, which are the economic equivalent of your neighbor buying a new pickup: the problem isnt the truck; its what it does to the neighborhood pecking order.

A relative price is the price of one thing compared to other things.  Economists love ratios because ratios dont care about your feelings.  So, when we say beef got expensive,” what we often mean in practice is: beef got expensive relative to chicken.  Suddenly chicken starts looking more attractive, and beef starts looking like something you buy only on anniversaries, funerals, and when your brother-in-law is trying to impress someone.

Relative price changes are important because they change behavior.  People substitute:

·      Chicken for beef,

·      Store-brand for name-brand,

·      “Maybe we don’t need a new bigger iPad” for “fine, I’ll just keep squinting.”

This is not inflation” in the big, systemic sense.  Its the economy doing what it does: rearranging who buys what, and at what price.  The prices of goods relative to other goods are constantly changing.  It might be disconcerting, but it is normal.

Episodic Price Increases: The Price Spike With a Plot Twist.  Now we add a wrinkle: episodic price increases.  Episodic” isnt about whether something is expensive compared to other things.  Its about the shape over time.  An episodic price increase looks like this:

·      A spike,

·      A surge,

·      A brief moment of panic,

·      Then a leveling off, and sometimes a partial retreat.

Think gasoline after a refinery outage.  Think eggs during an avian flu wave.  Think airfare around the holidays when airlines decide to test the outer limits of human patience.

So: Episodic price increase is a description of timing (it jumped in a burst”).  Relative price change is a description of comparison (it rose compared to other prices”).  These can overlap, but they dont have to.  You can have an episodic spike that changes relative prices, or you can have a broader inflation flare where lots of prices rise together, leaving relative prices mostly unchanged.

Inflation: When the Whole Price Level Decides to Get Ideas.  Now we get to the big evil one: systemic inflation.  Inflation isnt just prices are higher.”  Its persistent, broad-based increases in the general price level.  A classic feature of systemic inflation is that it tends to show up across many categories:

·      Goods,

·      Services,

·      Housing costs,

·      And anything else that makes you ask, “Is that what I used to pay?”

Inflation often involves feedback loops:  Businesses raise prices because costs are rising and they expect others to raise prices, and then, workers ask for higher wages because the cost of living is up, and next, higher wages push up costs for labor-intensive services, till finally, prices rise again restarting the entire cycle.

Thats not a single products story…that’s a whole economys story.  And heres the part people forget: inflation is a rate, not a level.  If prices jump once and then stabilize, you can end up with high prices, but with low inflation (its expensive, but its not getting more expensive every few weeks).

This is why you can hear someone say, Inflation is down!” and hear someone else shout, Then why is everything still so expensive?!” and both can be right.  The first person is talking about the rate of price increase.  The second is staring at the new, higher level of prices like it personally insulted their retirement plan.

Tariffs: The Political Version of Hold My Beer”.   Now to the big question:  If prices increase because of tariffs, is that not inflation?  The most honest answer is, “usually not”, at least not by definition—but a tariff can contribute, depending on how it plays out.  A tariff is a policy that raises the cost of imported goods (and sometimes key inputs), which often raises the prices of:

·      The tariffed imported items,

·      Domestic substitutes because producers can now charge more,

·      And downstream products that use those imports as inputs.

Thats first and foremost a relative price change:  the tariffed goods become more expensive relative to other goods.  It can also be a one-time increase in the overall price level if it hits a meaningful chunk of the consumer basket.  But heres the key:  a one-time increase in the price level is not automatically a self-sustaining inflation process.  Whether it becomes systemic inflation” depends on breadth, persistence, and reinforcement.

Tariffs look more like a price shock” when:

·      The tariff is narrow (a few products)

·      People can substitute away easily

·      Firms absorb some of the cost by lowering margins

·      The central bank doesn’t “accommodate” it by letting overall demand run hot

·      Wages and broad pricing expectations don’t spiral

That scenario gives you:  These things got pricier.”  Annoying.  Very real.  But not necessarily systemic inflation.

Tariffs can feed inflation when:  Theyre broad and large, they hit key inputs across industries, they raise costs for lots of businesses at once, businesses start raising prices more generally because everybody is,” and workers bargain for higher wages to keep up.  At that point, tariffs can become part of a broader inflation story, not because tariffs are inflation,” but because they can act like a cost shock that spreads and gets reinforced.

So, the best way to say it is: Tariffs are not inflation” by definition.  They are a policy-driven cost shock and a relative-price change.  But they can show up in inflation measures, and in some conditions, they can contribute to inflation persistence.

Perhaps an example would help.  If America imported all the widgets needed for manufacturing and every industry used them, a tariff on widgets would be inflationary.  But, if manufacturers could substitute American made flanges for imported widgets, or it spurs domestic production of widgets at a competitive price, this is not inflationary as the cost of production is only temporarily increased.

This is all very confusing, so lets put that into A Field Guide for Normal People.

If you want to decide what youre looking at in real life, try this:

Is it broad?  If only a few categories are jumping, its likely price increases and relative price changes.  If lots of categories are rising, especially services, inflation is more likely.

Is it persistent?  If it spikes and then settles, think episodic.  If it keeps rolling month after month, think systemic.

Are wages chasing it?  Broad inflation often involves wages rising too (even if they lag).  A narrow price shock often doesnt.

Can you substitute away?  If you can dodge the pain by switching products, its often a relative-price story.  If everything you switch to is also climbing, youre in inflation territory.

Conclusion: Words Matter, Because Wallets Matter.  So, yes, prices went up” is true in the same way water is wet” is true.  But if we want to be precise (and occasionally sane), we should ask:

·      Is this a price increase in a particular market?

·      Is it a relative price change changing what people buy?

·      Is it an episodic spike tied to a specific shock?

·      Or is it systemic inflation, where the general price level rises broadly and persistently?

And if the culprit is tariffs, we can say that tariffs typically create relative price changes and often a one-time bump in some prices, and sometimes in the overall price level.  Whether that becomes systemic inflation depends on whether it spreads, sticks, and gets reinforced by expectations, wage dynamics, and overall demand.

In other words, tariffs are not automatically inflationary—they’re more like the economic equivalent of tossing a wrench into the machine and then acting surprised when the machine makes a new noise.

Which, come to think of it, describes a lot of public policy.

2 comments:

  1. And then the US invades Venezuela, arrests Maduro, and proceeds to take back former US oil facilities and then releases Venezuelan oil, hurting Russian oil revenues from countries that don't like Russia, but were forced to buy Russian oil because the aforementioned Maduro was holding back oil sales to please Russia and China and Iran and North Korea to create a monopoly on communist or near communist oil in many parts of the world (also with help from American democrats who drove up the price of American crude and fuel costs in the west). Imagine the dismay of Venezuelan socialists when the "impenetrable air defenses" the Russians and Chinese gave them, shut off and became useless when Trump's military came calling one dark night and stole their president.

    If Trump turns the Venezuelan oil industry loose, the Venezuelan people dancing in the streets may be able to eat something besides zoo animals for a change. Juan Baldez may even open some new coffee plantations in Venezuela too. Who knows?

    Some weird things are going down all at once.
    1. Venezuela is fixing to play catchup and flood the oil market lowering gas prices.
    2. The administration is going to get some pipelines opened up everywhere in the US except California.
    3. Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and the Yukon have threatened to secede from socialist Canada and join the US whose leadership doesn't mind if they pump oil, or ship gold, timber and whatever they have of value and make money. It would also give us a land passage to the riches of Alaska. The cost of transporting goods around the country (except to California) will go down causing prices across the board to stabilize if not to fall. We might even start driving around on vacations again and give the tourist industry a nice kick in the pants.
    4. Happy voters may give the administration a bigger boost in Congress at mid-terms and the crazy old man might do some other things that screw up the "inevitable march toward socialism."
    5. The deflowering of President Maduro may result in his making a deal to save his fuzzy butt whereby he 'splains the deal he made with those voting machines he sold to the leftist officials in the US who run those elections that gave Joe Biden 85,000 votes in the middle of the night against 0 votes for Trump. This should be fun.
    6. California just lost a major oil pipeline AND a refinery and with regulation such as it is, fuel prices are going to be outrageous there.

    ReplyDelete
  2. High fuel prices have, of course long been a pipe dream of the eco-activists who in a meeting in DC that I attended in 2002 chose as their goal to force gas prices to $10 a gallon as part of a plan to force people to give up their cars and go public transportation all the way. They also were charged up about walled cities where you couldn't go out into the country/nature without permission from the government. California's soon to be frightening collapse is going to trigger God only knows what reaction when you frighten half the population that doesn't know what's going on and really doesn't follow history or politics. For the activists who dreamed of the collapse of the oil industry, this is going to be a rude awakening.

    When I studied Psychology at the graduate level, I was shocked when I realize that fully half the people in the world have IQs that are less than 100. For every "smart" person who is out there busily making things as complicated and "nuanced" as they can, there are an equal and opposite number of ordinary folk who are going to struggle with the intricacies of politics and economics. Most of them aren't going to be thrilled at the sacrifices they will be forced to make in order to save the planet. Ayn Rand was skeptical that altruism in itself was anything more than a way to manipulate the simple - making them feel good about their suffering, or as Churchill characterized it, "the equal sharing of misery, although some eco-activists are more equal than other. You can tell them as you look out the window of your bus and watch them drive by in their shiny red convertibles.

    The current situation reminds me of 1859. Something was going to give what with the mounting tension between the two paradigms represented by the North and the South, Democrats and Republicans then. We're every bit as divided now. Something is going to give again I fear. Trouble is the two sides are not geolographically separated as they were then. Things WILL get messier.

    When the left realizes they are going to lose the Utopia that Marx and Engles and the rest of the socialist ideologues promised them, there will be a fight. We below 100 schlubs will be told the evil conservatives are taking away, what southern Confederate soldiers (poor folk to a man) called their "rats." The Union wanted to take away the rights of the plantation owners to own slaves and the Constitution as it was, carried within it what Alexander Stephens, Confederate VP, called "the seeds of the end of slavery." Sadly the poor folk being thrown against Union cannons didn't recognize that those "rats" they were dying for, were the "rights" of the wealthy plantation owners to make money off the backs of slaves. The left still thinks the lower half of the IQ spectrum are still that stupid.

    ReplyDelete