News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:It takes now 53 weeks salary to earn same as 30 weeks in ... by AnimalMuppet on Thursday February 20, 2020 @07:14PM (#22379864)
What is your basis for saying "way more useful"? So far, I've got an argument why price inflation is way more useful, and you've got a bare claim.

Even the article you linked says "However, there is a general consensus on the importance and responsibility of central banks and monetary authorities in setting public expectations of price inflation and in trying to control it." That is, economists recognize the importance and value of price inflation as a measure, while they are divided on how to consider monetary inflation.

Re:It takes now 53 weeks salary to earn same as 30 weeks in ... by henvic on Friday February 21, 2020 @09:33AM (#22383369)
My basis? Quite obvious: if you are okay with inflation, this means that people who saves money end up worst off by subsidizing people who consume. This impacts society a lot, and especially, the poorest people without means that justify investing in the market (be it buying shares in companies, buying gold, or just having something in the bank better than a horrible savings account).
Re:It takes now 53 weeks salary to earn same as 30 weeks in ... by AnimalMuppet on Friday February 21, 2020 @12:10PM (#22384721)
I didn't ask what your basis was for opposing inflation. I asked what your basis was for saying that monetary inflation was the "real" inflation, as opposed to price inflation. You didn't answer that. Instead, you gave an answer that says that inflation is bad, which I agree with. But the negative effects you describe are at least as much the symptoms of price inflation as they are of monetary inflation.

I've given you a couple of chances to make a case that monetary inflation is the one that matters, and you have provided exactly zero (other than the bare claim that it was so). So I'm going to stick with my position, which is that your claim is wrong.