Earlier quoted context omitted.
GDP per capita is a poor measure of general wellbeing since it doesn't account for changes in the cost of living and is skewed by funny business in stock markets.
Most importantly, it's measured using something that is halving in value every ten years. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL
Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
541–550 of 619 posts
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#542Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, no matter how the 2% figure was arrived at as a matter of historical happenstance, 2% is actually a very good number to shoot for. First of all, a rate of zero would be ideal, but, lets face it, like any measurement, this is going to have some error. So, if you are going to err, on which side do you want to err? In favor of a little bit of inflation, or a little bit of deflation? Well, inflation is painful, sur…
>if we had 50% deflation, your paycheck--the dollar amount you brought home--would be cut in half. However, your car payment, your mortgage, and your credit card bills would stay at the same nominal value If your contract says you make $5000/month in salary, then why would the number of dollars decrease? They wouldn't increase due to inflation unless the employer chose to "give you a raise" (just adjusting for inflat…
Well, deflation means everything costs less. And "everything" includes wages and salaries, even yours. If we had 50% deflation, that means the boss could hire somebody who was as productive as you for 50% less. This is elementary, right? That's what deflation means.
So either you are going to renegotiate that contract, or the boss will just fire you and hire somebody else.
"But I have a contract--how can he fire me??" Do you have a contract with your employer? If so, take another look at it--it will say you can be fired at any time for any reason.
There was a time in America when unions were strong enough that they could demand contracts for you which limited the conditions under which you could be fired. But (thank you, Ronald Reagan) those days were half a century ago. Some call it bullshit, some call it "efficient capitalism".
But the more efficient capitalism is, the faster your salary would decrease in lockstep with deflation. You would very rapidly not be able to pay your car payment, mortgage and credit cards. And if you think the banks are going care about your sob story, remember in 2008, the last time that large numbers of people couldn't pay their mortgages, they were kicked out into the street by the millions.
> (in countries that don't suck, anyway).
Well, two points, 1) America is a country that sucks, in that sense, and 2) Countries that don't suck do not let themselves fall into a deflationary trap.
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#543Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember reading it in a Harvard white paper, I deleted my MMT archives once it became obvious that it was not only economically unworkable (which I had already assumed) but also politically unworkable. Economists used to think that inflation was hard to start which made MMT more tenable and now they think inflation is hard to stop. It was only hard to start because speculative asset bubbles soak up liquidity and r…
What makes you think appealing to authority at Harvard is impressive? Or using the term “economist” when you have Powell talking about being guided by the stars? MMT is a description of how reserve accounting works in an economy with a floating exchange rate and how that is linked to the physical economy. If you have something that shows how that isn’t the case in practice then I’m all ears.
One of the reasons that MMT gained any traction at all is that many of their tenets are equally wrong to the tenets in neo-Keynesianism. So MMT people are correct when they say if X in neo-Keynesian is true then Y is also true. Which is why they can say they are simply describing what is already the case. But they’re both wrong because X is not true, you can’t presuppose neo-kensianism and expect to end up with a rational and coherent economic model. On that basis and more I really don’t respect practicing economists and wouldn’t use them as an appeal to authority either.
Also my invocation of economists was highlighting their fickleness and incorrect beliefs.
Since MMT is now politically impossible I no longer worry about it becoming a reality. It could have only been done at the same time as a raging speculative asset bubble and before the negative consequences of inflation has been felt by the middle and lower classes. But that’s too late now, Covid killed it. The lower classes blame the government for inflation and even if you don’t agree with them you’d still have to convince them otherwise and we have seen how futile that has been. It might still be possible to get MMT as part of a wartime economy but at that stage I’ll have bigger issues to worry about.
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#544Earlier quoted context omitted.
While society has gotten wealthier, have average people, at least in America, gotten wealthier? Technology has advanced so there's things that people can own now that they couldn't before, but if you look at things that are constant (e.g. housing) then it looks to me like people have gotten poorer.
> have average people You mean median person. If society gets wealthier the average nearly definitionally gets better (modulo population increase)
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#545Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should firms get a free 2% cut in salaries paid? Generally, firms are in a stronger negotiating position about salary, especially for the lowest skill labor and poorest people. If there's a downturn, then everyone will have to tighten belts, and firms can make that case to employees. Making a real 2% salary cut the universal default is cruel, and if your typical hourly wage-earner understood clearly the choice be…
You’re imagining every firm gets 2% savings every year. That isn’t how it works. Most firms have rising real wages: real wages rose during the 2% inflation period. But sometimes a firm needs to lower costs. Having a small bit of inflation lets a firm do so without either firing people or actually cutting nominal wages.
There is no consistent "2%" inflation period. If a year were to have 6.5% inflation (like with year 2022-2023), most firms will not raise real wages to match it. Over the last decade we've had a 2.82% average inflation rate with 4.41% variance showing how much we overshot both metrics.
source: https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/consumer-pri...
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#546Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Economic growth means producing more goods and services. How do you incentivize this? Your view seems fairly communist. Also how does a net new innovation factor into this framework. New pharmaceuticals for previously untreatable diseases for example. What slice of the fixed money pie do those get? > But that is because the quantity of Bitcoin is not fixed. People can mint more. Sorry pal this is sophistry. Your co…
> How do you incentivize this? Your view seems fairly communist. Also how does a net new innovation factor into this framework. New pharmaceuticals for previously untreatable diseases for example. What slice of the fixed money pie do those get? To be fair that did mostly work in the 1800s. The gold standard probably did have a significant negative impact on growth but to be fair I can't really think of a different sy…
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#547Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using fiscal policy would require a functional legislative branch.
Not in the slightest. We have these things called “autostabilisers” that are temporally and spatially more precise than jiggling a single interest rate and indirectly hoping something moves in the right direction two years later
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#548Earlier quoted context omitted.
super cherry picking and definitions bending: > no inflation between 2011 and 2022 iPhone 4S, iPhone 14 > increasing 8 times or so between 2000 and 2011 Pentium III @ ~1GHz 1C/1T, Sandy Bridge @ ~3.7GHz 4C/4T
Well if we're using the price of gold to measure that there was no inflation (which of course wasn't really the case). To be fair examples are pretty bad, the iPhone 4S and iPhone 14 are not equivalent products, you can get more capable smartphones for $100-200 or less these days indicating that their prices actually went down quite a bit over the period.
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#549Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using fiscal policy would require a functional legislative branch.
Not in the slightest. We have these things called “autostabilisers” that are temporally and spatially more precise than jiggling a single interest rate and indirectly hoping something moves in the right direction two years later
Can the executive branch unilaterally enact an autostabilizer policy?
If not, that would “require a functional legislative branch” as I posted in the post that you replied to.
Re: Why the 2% inflation target? (2023)
#550Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not good for society that ordinary people have to speculate their hard earned money just to keep it for retirement.
Holding on to currency or shiny objects is just another form of speculation. Maybe the bank fails. Maybe your house burns down and melts the contents of your safe. Maybe you're robbed. Maybe trade wars massively reduce your purchasing power. Maybe a new source of the shiny objects gets found and it's not are rare as you think. Maybe less people care about that shiny object in the future. Maybe that gold certificate w…
There are countless examples of countries where that trust was broken.