[amjnsx]

This argument falls apart when you consider technology though. And even daily essentials. No one would not buy food and water because they can get more in future. They need it now.

The same goes for technology. We all know next year’s iPhone will be better than this year but we still buy them…because we need them now.

I’d argue inflation’s incentives are worse - the constant need to invest/spend so that your money doesn’t lose value. It means money flows into anything and everything like zombie companies, over consumption, property. Those on the poorest end are just trapped because as soon as they get any money it starts depreciating.

[strogonoff]

> We all know next year’s iPhone will be better than this year but we still buy them

Next year’s iPhone will not only be better, but also (even with the same price tag) cost more, inflation-adjusted. That factors into the decision to buy now.

> I’d argue inflation’s incentives are worse - the constant need to invest/spend so that your money doesn’t lose value.

It is a problem when it is at extreme, like in unstable countries where money can be a liability to unhealthy degree. However, I’d argue it should be a liability to a smaller degree.

What you highlight is the ever-present conflict between personal benefit and societal benefit. Obviously for an individual it is more preferable that the value of their money increases; I would never argue that. However, for society as a whole it is more preferable if the value of money decreases at a stable rate.

Perhaps this is why all major economies settled on the idea that an amount inflation is crucial to have.

[amjnsx]

I do not buy into the idea that “everyone did it then it must have been a good idea”.

We’ve already seen the negative side of fiat currencies in how they eventually collapse (Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Argentina) and even in more developed countries wages have not kept up with inflation. Money is trending to zero People are trending to destitution.

We saw it recently in the UK - where public sector workers were not given pay rises because the government argued it would fuel inflation. So how does that even make sense.

[strogonoff]

Let’s continue this discussion when you show me a successful economy with a deflationary currency.

The only reason you can provide examples of failed states with inflationary currencies is because all currencies are inflationary. This is not a coincidence, perhaps because deflation does not correlate with things going well. For some famous examples of deflations, read on The Great Depression in US and Lost Decades in Japan.