3 ms·
If you cut checks for the bottom x% of wealth, thay bottom percentage is still better off. For example, if everyone in the bottom 25% of wealth got cut a check
by chickenpotpie 4y ago
If you cut checks for the bottom x% of wealth, thay bottom percentage is still better off. For example, if everyone in the bottom 25% of wealth got cut a check that doubled their wealth, inflation would not double but those peoples buying power would. The problem with the checks during the pandemic is that so many people qualified that inflation outweighed a significant amount of peoples increased buying power
- prottog 4y ago> inflation would not double but those peoples buying power would I mean, inflation wouldn't double as a result of giving the bottom 25% additional money, but unless there was a matching increase in the supply of goods and services, the additional money would make prices rise.
- p0pcult 4y agoRight, thereby increasing the purchasing power of those who need it most, aka, inflation relief. I dont like the recent inflation, but as someone one the upper end of the income distribution (likely true of many HN readers), my life isn't fucked up by it. Merely my discretionary income.
- svggrfgovgf 4y ago"if everyone in the bottom 25% of wealth got cut a check that doubled their wealth, inflation would not double" What makes you say inflation wouldn't double? It's not clear to me that there's a linear relation between money supply/money velocity and inflation. In addition, I think there's a large psychological component to inflation: people spending money sooner than they would otherwise, i.e., quick buy it now before prices go up more; and, demanding increases in wages to match the expected increases in prices.