The BLS does have regional CPI numbers. Here's their page for SF:

https://www.bls.gov/regions/west/news-release/consumerpricei...

Note that the CPI in the SF bay area has been >2% for over a decade and has been 3-4% since 2016.[1] This is noticeably higher than the national rate of <2%.[2] Until 2020, that is, when CPI dropped in the SF bay area but skyrocketed nationwide.

[1] https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUURS49BSA0&output_view=pct_... [2] https://www.bls.gov/charts/consumer-price-index/consumer-pri...

Yeah, I am concerned with the methodology more than the reporting.

> 11. How are CPI prices collected and reviewed? BLS data collectors visit (in person or on the web) or call thousands of retail stores, service establishments, rental units, and doctors' offices, all over the United States to obtain information on the prices of the thousands of items used to track and measure price changes in the CPI. We record the prices of about 80,000 items each month, representing a scientifically selected sample of the prices paid by consumers for goods and services purchased.[1]

> The CPI survey collects about 94,000 prices per month to compute indexes for commodities and services. Approximately two-thirds of price collection in the CPI is done by personal visits of CPI data collectors to brick-and-mortar stores. The remaining data are collected by telephone or on the outlet’s website. In some cases, these data are supplemented by data provided from other sources. The outlets where prices are collected are selected based on data from the CE survey. These outlets may be brick-and-mortar stores or websites (e-commerce); currently, about 8 percent of CPI quotes are collected from outlet websites.[2]

This seems easily biased and inefficient when considering theoretical alternatives.

1. https://www.bls.gov/cpi/questions-and-answers.htm#Question_1...

2. https://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/cpi/data.htm

> This seems easily biased and inefficient when considering theoretical alternatives.

What possibly leads you to believe that aggregating the price of 80k items from different markets is something that can be easily biased?

It would probably be more helpful if you could summarise your thoughts on the linked article here.

What I think is that it's completely a lie to misinform American consumers to not freak out.

A 1lb ribeye steak in 2017 was about 11 dollars. Today it's 17 dollars, in bulk.

If you want to look at 'cheap' things, just look at the printed price of Santitas chips.

$11 -> $17 in 4-5 years is ~9%/year. High, but not 20%, like the parent post claims.

CPI actually claims meat and poultry inflation is 10.5% (https://www.bls.gov/cpi/, click Food -> Food at home -> Meat and poultry), so that's not far off eitherr.

I don't think there's any lying going on. It's just that not everything is inflating at 10.5%, and the CPI is just one number describing the whole economy, and you probably mostly notice the things inflating the fastest.

You’ve chosen the one thing that has risen in price the most…steak. Why do you think you’ve done that, and is ribeye steak a very necessary part of your diet?

ribeye is not the cut that most people are buying. In a supply chain challenged environment with rising wages, premium cuts of beef are seeing price increases, but this is not evidence of outsized inflation. Also, if you want delicious beef, there are lots of other options both in cuts and preparations.

I do understand this point, but am trying to be honest as a consumer. My family has only ever really liked ribeyes. If they've doubled in price, that affects us. That say, stew meat or london broil didn't doesn't affect our bottom line.

> My family has only ever really liked ribeyes. If they've doubled in price, that affects us.

With all due respect, is it lost on you how utterly ridiculous this statement is?

It's not a ridiculous statement if everyone is saying their particular favourite product has gone up in price significantly more than inflation, as the original post (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29063208) in this thread does.

If all the products have increased in price then inflation is higher than reported.

The level of luxury people get acclimated to is pretty amazing. I'm trying to imagine the response I'd have received if as a child I had demanded ribeye regularly, or what my grandparents would have said if they heard it discussed in such a manner today, as a product deserved at a cheap price (I gather your family can still afford it.)

I think you might be getting to the core of the reason these replies have gotten so crazy. Measures like CPI are meant to estimate the expenses of a typical middle-class family. HN is full of people who fancy themselves typical middle-class, but in fact are not.

So higher inflation in premium goods is seen as a crisis. Notwithstanding how fast we'd cook the planet if everyone demanded ribeye every week...

You've stated the point well: there are substitute beef products that haven't seen the same price increases. This is not the same as me general inflation, or nearly as concerning.

> My family has only ever really liked ribeyes. If they've doubled in price, that affects us.

A particular consumer's habit of consuming very specific high-end goods or services which is immune to substitute goods is not how inflation is determined. It would make as much sense as claiming inflation skyrocketed because you only wear Air Jordans and the latest model is sold for around $200 while last year they sold for $120.