The "unwarranted" part of the traditional definition implied 'Not justified by a proportional increase in goods and services (GDP) in the market.'

Nobody would ever recommend currency "deflation", but there is such a thing as neutrality. All you have to do is quit financing the gov't by means of creating new monwy our of rhin air and revert to conventional taxation (no budget deficits).

However, I don't think I'm the only one these days who understands that the phrase "inflation has fallen" now means, in the more technical sense that you've identified, "the *rate of* inflation has fallen".

Say we agree that inflation in and of itself means rising prices, whether by expansion of the money supply or contraction of the goods and services supply or even monopolistic profit-seeking. Inflation in this sense simply cannot fall, by definition (that would make it deflation, of course).

But everyone from the president on down talks about rising or falling inflation and have done so for many decades now. Thus my suggestion or assertion that "inflation" has become the useable and universally understandable shorthand for "rate of inflation".

Actually, the correct definition of the word "inflation", from day one of the 'science' of Economics up thru some point in the 70's, was "An unwarranted expancion of the money supply, leading to rising prices". (look it up in an old 'Webster's New Collegiate' if you can find one.)

Then, sometime during the 70's, in the middle of one of the worst inflationary periods of U.S. history, it somehow morphed into being simply synonymous with "rising prices", and that led to a massive misunderstanding on the part of most people as to what most frequently causes rising prices.

Now, you wish to re-define it as "The current RATE at which prices are rising."

I'm betting most people will just stick with the new traditional "rising prices", in which case Biden deserves no credit.

Inflation always means the *rate of rise* in prices of goods. To say inflation has fallen over the past year doesn't mean prices have fallen, and that's not what Biden meant.

When he says inflation has come down by more than half over that period, he means prices are rising less than half as rapidly as they were a year ago. That's not a "slightly slower rate", it's a much slower rate.

I suppose that's something. :)

Again utter nonsense. The only thing that has "fallen" is the RATE by which prices are RISING!!

The vast majority of retail prices are still rising everygawdam day, they'r just rising at a slightly slower rate.

Here is an interesting discussion from earlier today on the situation in Ukraine and Russia I just listened to over at the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace youtube channel ...

Oh, yeah?

Name one.

No, seriously, name one indicator of economic well-being that can be linked to the sound tax and fiscal policy of any Republican administration since 1981 and I'll consider retiring the phrase Republican cult of economic failure.

Democrats really do have to take the long view on the economy and talk about it terms of Republicans ALWAYS being bad for the economy and certainly not the great stewards so many mistakenly view them to be, regardless of when the US enters or exits a recession.

Dems just need to harp on the basics that Republican administrations always get wrong. Which leads to economic messes on the order of magnitude of the Augean Stables. Which, in turn, Democratic administrations clean up. And the cycle repeats.

It's about damn time! Best news I've read all day. :-)