Could someone explain to me?

quote:

---

Small steady inflation is a feature not a bug

---

I still have yet to find anyone that can explain why this is a good thing. It incentivizes people, on the margin, to spend rather than to save. Why is this good? Boosting aggregate demand looks good on the paper for calculating GDP, but it seems like a relic of defunct Keynesian policy.

Let the market determine the price of money.

ETA: Not to mention it’s really just a tax. The government uses inflation to service its debt by taking value from Americans’ wealth. If our government wants to raise taxes, they should do so through legislation and face political consequences, not through hidden and surreptitious means.

I’m pretty sure Japan also has a central bank manipulating the money markets. I don’t know a lot about Japanese monetary history, but I’d be willing to place a small bet that their deflationary struggles were in part created by central bank/ governmental manipulation.

People should be able to make the decision of whether spending or saving is right for them and not nudged into it by manipulated rates/ manufactured inflation. Let the money go where it is most desired.

You're talking about a rather lengthy timeline so there are going to be some other factors.

I think the first factor we have to consider is getting off the Gold Standard (which was a little more than just leaving Bretton-Woods). Under the Gold Standard, an ounce of gold equaled $20.67, this lasted from 1834 until FDR began making changes to how the USD and gold interacted in 1933 (including not only no longer allowing banks to exchange currency for gold but also making all gold currency the property of the federal government, gold coins and bars owned by individuals would be purchased at a premium).

From there we fast-forward to the dissolution of Bretton-Woods. The USD went from being tied to the value of an ounce of gold to being a fiat currency (value was derived, at least in part, by how steadfast the US federal government was in paying its debt).

Following the stepping away from Bretton-Woods, the federal government began engaging in "baseline budgeting". The CBO uses current spending levels as the "baseline" for establishing future funding requirements and assumes future budgets will equal the current budget times the inflation rate times the population growth rate. The short-hand version of this is that budgets start with the previous year's spending then add a percentage to it and that's their starting point. Currently, it's around 7%.

This particular bit is important when hearing a President or members of Congress (or talking heads) discuss how they've "cut spending". What they usually mean is that they've cut the rate of growth in spending from baseline budgeting (so instead of a 7% increase, they increase spending by only 5%, for example).

As the federal government continues to accrue debt at an alarming rate, especially when it has been paying only the interest for over 2 decades now (and especially now that the interest is coming in at just over $1T per year), the security of buying US debt begins to come more and more into question (as we've essentially been borrowing more and more just to pay for the ability to continue borrowing more and more so we can pay for the ability to continue borrowing... etc. for at least the last 10 years). As potential investors in US debt find other vehicles, that hurts the value of the USD.

Another aspect of this is that as the USD is a fiat currency, it falls under the Laws of Supply & Demand as it's ability as a storage of value is now heavily impacted by how many Dollars are in the economy.

The following is paraphrased from an example I once heard given by the late, great Dr. Walter E. Williams:

quote:

---

Let’s say you’re walking down an old dirt road and you’re starving. I don’t mean “I missed my mid-morning snack and am simply faaaaaamished”. That’s merely “hungry”. I’m talking about “I haven’t had a single morsel of food in over a week and my organs might begin shutting down on me soon”.

I mean starving.

As you do your best to ignore that ever-present gnawing in your stomach, in the distance you notice a sign on the road. As you get closer you see that it’s advertising “24-HOUR ALL YOU CAN EAT BURGER BUFFET – ONLY $1.00!” and beyond that you see the restaurant in the distance.

You begin to feel hope, but then quickly remember that you are flat broke. You don’t have a dollar, you don’t have even a penny. You become even more dispirited.

As you continue to trudge along the road, contemplating your eventual death from starvation, you see a crumbled, dirty dollar bill on the side of the road. In that moment, how valuable to you is that dollar bill? Pretty freaking important, I would guess. That crusty old dollar literally means you get to continue living.

Now, imagine that entire exact scenario except that instead of being broke you’re pulling a wagon filled with dollar bills all stacked and bound but easily accessible. How valuable to you is that dirty, crumpled roadside dollar now? Would you even bother to pick it up?

That difference in attitudes towards that roadside dollar is the inflationary effect of too much money in an economy.

---

So we're in an environment where the federal government has been borrowing obscene amounts of money to pay for borrowing lesser obscene amounts of money while also putting metric fricktons of currency into the economy.

And people wonder why inflation is being so "sticky".

Could the Dollar strengthen? Sure. Will it? Not likely. There's absolutely nothing in the pipeline to change the deficit/debt issue within the federal government. This means not only is the problem going to continue, but basic math tells us it will continue to escalate. Along with that, the US consumer has been engaging in similar behavior since COVID (yes, it was going on prior to COVID, but not nearly at the post-COVID rate and now those consumers are facing historically high interest rates which serve only to make the issue even worse).

The federal government would have to cut something like 20%-25% from its total spending just to balance against revenues and that's simply not going to happen.

The other way the USD could strengthen would be for a recession (or depression) large enough to kill GDP to the point where the amount of consumers able to buy goods and services dropped to a point where surpluses built up. This would mean large-scale unemployment (at least 8%, and lasting for at least months) which would also lead to large-scale unrest as government social services failed completely (ie: where does the extra money come from to fund the new, extra entrants to these programs, especially now that they are no longer paying taxes).

Could the US battle its way back from that? Possibly, but it would take a tremendous toll first.