The interest rate is commonly given p.a. so per year. So if you take a shorter time it becomes arbitrarily small. But to take acceleration as an example. If you have an acceleration of 1 m/s² it is a derivate. But if you take it as the acceleration over a year you get 31,536,000 m/year² which is also technically a derivate, but a completely nonsensical expression.
And that was the joke @originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com made. And you showed why mathematicians don’t like it if economists want to brag about their math knowledge. Because you think your basic calculus qualifies you to be overly pedantic without showing real understanding of the concepts behind it.
doesnt stop my can of sparkling water from doubling in price in the last few years just because you want to limit “inflation” changes to ‘12 months’
You’re going the wrong direction yo to his original words. I don’t even know what you’re complaining about anymore. The original poster was trying to stretch time out to multiple years. My joke was that shorter-time frames is what is more accurate because that’s what mathematics / calculus has traditionally done.
I’ve said my piece, and I stand by it. I’ll repeat it here.
Prices are prices. If you want to complain about prices, then complain about prices. But we all know we aren’t going to do anything about prices. Furthermore: falling prices are utterly terrible for economies, so no one wants to force deflation.
I’ve done many inflation topics over the last 5 years. I’m surprised at how utterly shit people around here on this topic are. I’d expected more of lemmy users to know the basics of this subject. But I do appreciate you trying to catch me on a technicality, however arbitrary it was… you’ve demonstrated that you’re at least at the Calculus level to me.
The interest rate is commonly given p.a. so per year. So if you take a shorter time it becomes arbitrarily small. But to take acceleration as an example. If you have an acceleration of 1 m/s² it is a derivate. But if you take it as the acceleration over a year you get 31,536,000 m/year² which is also technically a derivate, but a completely nonsensical expression.
And that was the joke @originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com made. And you showed why mathematicians don’t like it if economists want to brag about their math knowledge. Because you think your basic calculus qualifies you to be overly pedantic without showing real understanding of the concepts behind it.
You’re going the wrong direction yo to his original words. I don’t even know what you’re complaining about anymore. The original poster was trying to stretch time out to multiple years. My joke was that shorter-time frames is what is more accurate because that’s what mathematics / calculus has traditionally done.
I’ve said my piece, and I stand by it. I’ll repeat it here.
I’ve done many inflation topics over the last 5 years. I’m surprised at how utterly shit people around here on this topic are. I’d expected more of lemmy users to know the basics of this subject. But I do appreciate you trying to catch me on a technicality, however arbitrary it was… you’ve demonstrated that you’re at least at the Calculus level to me.