So this article only seems to discuss historical inflation over decades and generations and then points out that because technology and the standard of living h

So this article only seems to discuss historical inflation over decades and generations and then points out that because technology and the standard of living have improved so much more inflation isn't relevant. However iflation is an epstimplgocial fact that does need to be considered. There is X amount of good and services currently available or able to be produced. There are Y amount of dollars to do that with. If I increase Y that doesn't change the actual amount of stuff available that just means each X now costs more. The classic example of this is college prices. The government dumped a ton of money into the higher education sector via grants and subsidized loans now the quality of education hasn't changed drastically but the cost has risen astronomically because just making it easier for people to get money for something doesn't change the underlying problem that a thing is limited. I'll also say that the other argument I've seen used against inflation is that people have been wanrning about it for years and nothing bad has happened yet. Countries and national economies operate on a timescale of years and decades not weeks and months. Saying inflation doesn't matter because nothing bad has happened yet is similar to manager deciding developers are wasting too much time in meetings and discussion and they need to get coding then pointing out the burn down chart a week later as proof of his reasoning, completely ignorant of the fact that he's added crippling technical debt to the process.