How could we possibly have an economy that’s not based on constant growth? It’s absolutely inconceivable! I mean, what would we even do if we weren’t endlessly chasing that sweet, sweet GDP growth? Imagine a world where we actually meet everyone’s needs, live sustainably, and focus on well-being instead of mindless expansion—utter madness! Clearly, the only way to be “healthy” is to keep growing forever on a finite planet.
But that level of stability would mean no one could make themselves richer!
The thing is: nature will bring the stability anyway. It just won’t include us. Sucks that we all have to die because the greediest among us cannot pull head from ass.
I don’t think you necessarily need GDP growth to have a healthy small amount of inflation. Inflation has more to do with monetary supply than GDP growth.
I’d argue that inflation is best viewed as a result of decisions made by business owners rather than a passive outcome of market forces. Businesses increase prices to boost profit margins, often beyond what is necessary to cover costs. While external conditions like monetary policy or wage increases may create an environment conducive to price hikes, the decision to raise prices ultimately lies with businesses.
He’s dead right.
Humanist economics has a central pillar: abundance. Profit maximization requires scarcity, and geopolitical or other suppression of competition. In addition, higher interest rates prevent abundance, and funding of supply increases of farming production, and increase housing costs, insurance greed, and so affordability of other stuff.
The war on Russia led to higher interest rates in order to ration oil use, and employment, again limiting production.
Deflation is not even bad for the rich. Lower interest rates stabilize housing prices, and reduce government deficits, and improve financial asset values. Wages don’t generally go down, and they definitely don’t go down under policies of abundance.
Abundance means more work is available. Prices are lower letting workers and others afford more stuff leading to more abundance. UBI is the most important anti-slavery (also humanist) and prosperity (also humanist) policy alternative. It is inflationary, but makes high paying work that outpaces inflation easy to find.
The key about inflation vs deflation is how balanced income growth is relative to inflation. If it is only oligarchy making income/wealth gains, then you should address your complaints to that structure instead of the inflation.
The problem with deflation is that people end up hoarding all their cash because you get a return on it without doing anything with it.
So large swathes of money start getting taken off the playing field. Investment dries up, growth slows, people get laid off, and this cycle continues, one thing causing the next, causing the next in a circle. It’s one of the most destructive forces possible to an economy.
That’s why the central banks strive for around 2%. It’s enough to force people with cash lying around to invest it in something useful which will create jobs, etc, but not so high that it will make everyone panic and run the banks.
It’s a fair point, and typical thinking, but wrong. Deflation is better than inflation.
First, in general asset inflation vs goods inflation is usually different. Then for goods inflation, there is no good measure. Substitute goods exist.
Asset inflation definitely improves lives of the rich. Your “hoarding scare” can happen when savings/bond rates are higher than inflation. That is the genuine hoarding motivation. Lower interest rates supported by deflation supports more borrowing for more production/housing, with lower financing costs passed on to consumers. Either way, all money in the banking/financial system is hoarded money, and fractional reserve lends more the more demand for money there is. Deflation is better than inflation for this.
For goods, electronics and now EVs are deflationary. Your phone from 2008 cost the same as one from this year while having 100x less power/apps/value. While it can make sense to wait on tech/value improvements, competition/innovation creates work, and the deflation is the cause of that innovation, and there is a replacement cycle. Energy, food, clothing deflation would allow for higher consumption and also more work, though rarely would there be expectation of continued sustained deflation. Deflation is always technology or imported/slave labour costs. Never domestic wage reductions, unless slavery pressures can be manifested. Tariffs can stop it though.
Any economic competition creates a deflationary pressure. Deflation can be renamed value enhancement. When you favour inflation over deflation you are saying, “scarcity good, competition bad, innovation bad”
On the flip side, we’ve seen with inflation that just amazing amounts of debt have been created, with consumers massively underwater spending way beyond their means, leading to things like house values blowing up completely unsustainably.
So inflation is not automatically better, it’s just a different kind of bad.
This excuse only affects fractional reserve banking and investments. It does nothing to non capital focused economies, and China’s economy is less than 40% capital.
That’s a pretty important caveat. I would take it one step further to say that it only matters in non-communist governments. Yes, maybe China can pull it off. But even losing a large chunk of 40% of the economy will be pretty bad and they’d have to switch to something pretty close to fully communist pretty quick to pick up the slack.
Im no economist but with negative inflation it drives consumers to put off that next purchase.
Why buy the car you have been saving for, or put a bid on a house, upgrade your TV or get replacement running shoes if prices are staying the same or potentially going down? A way to make sure that people spend now and dont put it off is that they know the longer they wait the higher chance that the shoes are going to be $5 more in a months time or two.
If people arent spending then conversely people arent selling, building, labouring, etc and then everything grinds to a halt. People get laid off, people cant pay rent or mortgages, things go to shit.
At least this is the way i understand it, and like i said im no expert.
nooooo we need endless economic growth forever and ever
Now he’s just dabbing on us.
I bet he never has to check his bank balance before he goes to the grocery store.
Deflation is a great thing.
The working class has been conditioned to think it’s “bad” and inflation is “inevitable” because inflation is how the ruling class recoups any gains the working class has made, with interest.
Personally, I think it goes a bit deeper than this. Insecure people always want to feel they “know” everything, so they will often overreach and make claims about something they don’t understand just to look smart and fit in. For example, always using the word “consumer” instead of “customer.” They want to sound smart, like they went to school and learned about consumers, but they don’t realize how they’re acting without thinking. It’s all a show to avoid admitting they don’t really know what they’re talking about.
Inflation is the same. Since it’s almost guaranteed to happen and it benefits the ruling class, the average worker has been conditioned to see it as beneficial. They are praised for going along with the narrative that inflation is necessary and it makes them “feel smart” even if they are incorrect.
Saying “communism doesn’t work” is another example.
aren’t you doing the thing you are criticizing? because to me you are trying to sound like you know everything as well.
Nah. I’m not trying to fit in, which you seem to have conveniently ignored.
I could be wrong, but the evidence points to inflation being a result of the working class having more spending power. It means that no matter what gains the working class makes, the ruling class will take them back with interest.
If you think this is incorrect, feel free to say why.
You’re making it sound like wage growth always perfectly balances with inflation. It doesn’t. Regular people get fucked when wage growth falls behind price growth, but they benefit if wage growth outpaces inflation, which it sometimes does. This means that inflation is not some ever present gotcha that always keeps the people down. It’s one factor in the equation.
On another point, can you explain why you think inflation benefits the ruling class, and deflation benefits the working class? Because you never explained this which gives the appearance that it’s based entirely on “when prices go up, ruling class win,” which is not always the case.
you should go to China and ask average Chinese people about how they feel about their “cheap groceries”.
wealth inequality is a huge problem, and attribute it to inflation is naive. the rich has power in a capitalistic society, they will win no matter we are in an inflationary or deflationary economy. to think deflation will be good for the working people is very naive.
