4 ms·
Is -0.1% deflation really that disastrous for economies? Is it really worse than 10% inflation? I've never experienced it, so can't speak too authoritatively,
by cwkoss 5y ago
Is -0.1% deflation really that disastrous for economies? Is it really worse than 10% inflation?
I've never experienced it, so can't speak too authoritatively, but it kind of feels like accepted wisdom in the economic academia: so it isn't questioned - but a lot of economics is propaganda for the powerful, IMO - would minor deflation really hurt the common man significantly? Or would it mostly just punish the rich and powerful who are extremely leveraged?
> Who wants to pay 10% interest on their student debt?
Private student debt lenders already can and do charge in excess of 10% (which seems borderline criminal to me)
- sleepingadmin 5y ago>Is -0.1% deflation really that disastrous for economies? Is it really worse than 10% inflation? Yes, it has to do with how people react. Japan has been fighting it for awhile now. http://honesteconomics.com/history/japan-and-deflation/ http://honesteconomics.com/history/japan-and-deflation/ Japan has many problems. Their immense debt basically requires them to have a total tax burden of ~95%. That is to say, you work for the government for the entire year and you dont even get anything for it. They are just paying the interest payments on their debt and dont get services from their government. Then you have the real factor that as boomers leave the workforce. There isnt enough people to replace them. The only thing that seems to be keeping Japan afloat is their government owned slaves. Their judicial system still has forced labour and also a 99% conviction rate. Get accused of a crime and you're going to be producing goods for japanese companies. There's also the "technical intern training" which basically enslaves non-citizens and traps them in these jobs for life. The numbers are extremely suspect as well. The number of goods produced and recorded by big entities like their automotive industry or electronics like Sony couldn't possibly have been produced by the these government slaves. Makes you wonder where the forced labour camps are that aren't making it into the numbers. >I've never experienced it, so can't speak too authoritatively, but it kind of feels like accepted wisdom in the economic academia: so it isn't questioned - but a lot of economics is propaganda for the powerful, IMO - would minor deflation really hurt the common man significantly? Or would it mostly just punish the rich and powerful who are extremely leveraged? This derives from the fractional banking system. Basically a bank will lend out $20 for every $1 it has. That is to say if they have a 20:1 ratio. The central bank manages this ratio. The idea is that in a deflationary environment, you kind of break the fractional reality. Interest rates would be bottom or negative. So you are giving money away AND deflating which means the people you give money to can just hold the free money and make money? Who wouldn't jump at such a wonderful thing? You can see this happening. Germany's 10 year bond right now is -0.065%. So you buy that bond and the person lending you money has to give you 0.065% per year? for 10 years? LOL? Japan is positive at 0.14% but has been awfully negative lately. Obviously Japan/Germany are worse off because they were the losers of WW2. The boomers retiring harms them the most. To avoid deflation, they are giving away free debt. Why? Debt is money. For every $ that exists, it's just debt. That's the fractional banking system. Oh and here's the real kicker. https://medium.com/navigating-life/we-just-went-from-fractional-reserve-banking-to-zero-reserve-banking-and-its-a-pretty-big-deal-c501432e9be6 https://medium.com/navigating-life/we-just-went-from-fractio... The USA on March 26, 2020 eliminated the fractional banking ratio. They can lend out $1000 per $1 if they so please. What a disaster.
- zcw100 5y agoYes, it is. I'm no economist but the problem is deflation isn't stable, it tends to run away. It's like standing on a big pile of TNT and saying, "This match isn't really that big of a deal is it?" In a super simplified example, you have a dollar that's going to be worth more than a dollar tomorrow (the definition of deflation). So maybe you'll wait to buy that shovel till tomorrow. But now less gets done today so tomorrow the money supply is the same but there are fewer things to buy, making your money even more valuable. Then you think, "Shit, things are really looking good for this dollar. If I just hold on to it, it's more valuable then what I was going to do with that shovel" so now you're never going to buy that shovel and pay that person to dig that ditch. So they're just sitting around without a shovel and you're not going to pay someone to just sit around. They'd be perfectly happy to dig that ditch if only they had a shovel, so you lay the person off. Now we have even less productivity and your dollar is looking really good. Next thing you know you realize that every time you shut things down your dollar is looking even better and better. You used to have to work hard for your money but now you're getting rich for not doing something. If you really want to get rich you realize having money is where it's at so you sell off all the shovels you already have for scrap metal, fire all the workers, and sit on the cash. It's completely perverse. You aren't just paying people to not do anything, you're paying them to destroy productive things. Things that would be good for everyone but while it might be good for everyone in aggregate it's even better for you do do nothing while on a whole most people suffer. So you're sitting in your mansion, doing nothing, amassing a fortune while workers watch as ditches that need to get dug, don't, you're melting down all the shovels, they're unemployed and starving. What do you think the next step is? It's not pretty.