I think debating and dismissing old bad ideas is something that every generation needs to do, lest they reinvent it.
My personal belief is that if we stop inflation, it will eliminate the pressure for continuous "growth", because money can now be a store of wealth that no longer leaks value and therefore there will no longer be a need for continuous investment. Perhaps the pace of society can slow down and people can relax. What would your expert opinion on that be?
Lots of economics seems to me like it's models that appear to work but don't generate testable predictions that turn out to be accurate.
What is the argument you're making here? That if one particular policy causes a problem, then every policy will cause problems?
Forcing people to consume and invest, because else the money will expire, leads to mindless consumption, reckless unwise investment, and the lack of safety nets provided by savings.
Don't think it actually means any actual knowledge.
The world collapsed ten years ago due to these beliefs. Stop repeating them as though they are actual science. They are not. You wasted your time.
The thing that amuses me about this is that you've probably flown through LAX or LaGuardia and driven across the Triborough bridge.
But sure, "make work".
>Source: Two degrees in economics.
It seems to bear a striking resemblance to theology these days.
Would that period have been worse for the working class if inflation had been higher?
"A job guarantee (JG) is an economic policy proposal aimed at providing a sustainable solution to the dual problems of inflation and unemployment." However, it is economic consensus that inflation is caused by government monetary policy (the "monetarist" view). It is also economic consensus that inflation is destructive and creates unemployment. So if government policy is creating inflation, and therefore unemployment, why would a government "job guarantee" be a sensible response? More alcohol doesn't sober a drunk man; more intervention doesn't balance an economy.
As the article correctly notes, "When inflationary expectations subside, [unemployed] people will get their jobs back." So isn't the most sensible solution to have the government stop inflating the currency? That would solve the "dual problems" without introducing a third. It would also be a fair and honest thing to do. After all, inflation is the government's way of raising revenue by cheating (it's "the hidden tax").
As a side note, it amazes me these antique economic fallacies consistently appear on HN, of all places. They are worse than nonsense, they're dangerous. When practiced, they really hurt people. Yes, they might help a few people - but they hurt far more than they help, and for far longer. Consider the government make-work programs during the Great Depression, which are now credited for dragging out that misery. Please, enough with the junk economics. There are far more fruitful government policy discussions to occupy intelligent minds - increasing efficiency, reducing deficits and debt, fighting corruption, stopping war, to name a few.
Source: Two degrees in economics.