[throwawaymaths]

You cant be serious. Inflation is a policy. it is mandated in the fed charter. and at the end of the article, he says "let's have more inflation". he is prescribing it.

> rather than firing them

Absolutely nuts outcome. why dont we enable capital to be lazy terrible dishonest management instead of having them actually respond to market forces with hard truths and look their employee in the eye and fire their employee. what could go wrong with this sort of social policy?

[Gareth321]

I strongly disagree with your policy prescription. I would prefer lower unemployment. Workers are still free to leave their jobs and seek out better wages. It's just that they're no longer forced out, and I think that's an objectively better outcome.

[throwawaymaths]

well im sorry your worldview has been captured by depressing corporate fetish of measurement and Goodhart's law.

imagine a society where not everyone had to be employed. some could afford to stay at home and take care of the kids, or take care of someone else's kids, the elderly, or just do random social improvement activities.

well in a society incentivized to maximize the employment statistic, the society will craft policies to incentivize people to be employed, and a lot of unemployable social good will be imobilized and the capacity to do it will be undeployed. by far the worst mechanism to do this is inflation, whose mechanism of incentivizing individuals to be and stay employed is a compounding treadmill which if you fall off, youll be homeless or foodless or both.