You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Does Deflation Spur Consumption? (Contrary to conventional Wisdom)
I think there is something missing in your sentiment.
If we look at inflation vs deflation, to me it is the same coin, with two different sides. Inflation means you need to hoard assets (stocks, real estate), deflation means holding money itself is profitable.
In both situation things are artificially made worse or better to invest in.
This to me is the issue with both inflation and deflation. Value is automatically transferred within society. What is needed is money of stable value. Anything else is suboptimal.
Dude. You are confusing price inflation with supply inflation and therefore you cannot understand the article.
The only way to have price stability with a growing economy is to have monetary inflation.
No I am not confusing monetary supply with inflation.
I am not saying I don't understand the article, but that it misses the point.
Both inflation and deflation are counterpructive. Arguing that delfation is good even though we have been taught that inflation is good misses the point, while every one of your arguments is technically correct.
Am I making sense?
You keep using inflation and deflation without specifying monetary or price.
I just mean inflation/deflation. not sure why you think i mean money supply.
Again my point is that from a productivity perspective both directions are counterproductive for the ecology - just in opposite way but with the same effect.
Let me know if you disagree. I'm just here for dialog and to learn. Feel like you are attacking me and don't quite understand why?
To be clear inflation to me is always price inflation. I.e. If a product service cost less over time that would be deflation, more inflation. Money supply on the other hand is just something that impact price, among other things. It is possible to have deflation with increased money supply and vice versa. I would not say that steem has an annual inflation rate of 100% vs. 9.5% after dec. 6th. I would consider that statement to be technically incorrect