True, but when you compare the price of housing, rent, higher education, or health care, or art, you'll see a different story. The Consumer Price Index (at least in the US) excludes so many things as to not be a real measure of the dollar's buying power. If the dollar isn't debasing, how do we explain so many sectors with rising prices? Is college education today really multiple times more valuable than 10 or 20 years ago, or have dollars lost real value?

Perhaps the basic consumer goods you mentioned continue to benefit from the deflationary effect of automation and technology, thus their prices fall in real terms (assuming that the dollar has lost value during the last decade, given rising prices in the sectors I mentioned).

I think we're in a period of both dollar inflation (due to the Fed's monetary policy and government's continued debt spending) and deflation (due to technology/automation and the Eurodollar system's global demand for dollars), resulting in dollar debasement while many everyday consumer items retain their nominal price or even decline in dollar terms.

College education is probably mostly explained as being a positional good being propped up by a bubble. On the other hand, I actually agree with you that inflation may have sneaked into specific domains. Eggs are cheap, but we've also gotten much, much better at making eggs cheaply. A static egg price actually implies inflation, if it costs less to produce an egg.

Sounds like you are going down with the ship. Its completely irrational to believe you can print yourself into prosperity. I could just as easily point to Tech stocks, Tesla, gold, silver, bitcoin or any other inflated commodity as a counterpoint.

> Its completely irrational to believe you can print yourself into prosperity.

This is clearly a straw man.

MMT provides an alternative theoretical basis that might explain the apparent disconnect between money supply and inflation:

https://www.investopedia.com/modern-monetary-theory-mmt-4588...

> According to MMT, the only limit the government has when it comes to spending is the availability of real resources, like workers, construction supplies etc. When government spending, meaning the amount of money introduced into the economy, is too great with respect to the resources available, that's when inflation can surge if decision makers are not careful.

In between the extremes of 'hard money' enthusiasts arguing that the amount of money an economy needs to grow automagically happens to coincide with levels of worldwide gold mining and MMTers (and 1950s Keynesians) arguing it coincides with whatever the government needs to spend is basically the entire field of economics and the mechanism the money supply actually operates based on (which is central banks looking at numbers to ensure the supply of and demand for credit are in balance)

MMT promises money for nothing and the debt for free. The idea isn't modern - its just debasement with a new name. As old as humanity.

Well, that's twice, now, that you've caricatured ideas you don't agree with, choosing to knock down straw men instead of engaging in a genuine discussion, and that means there's little point in continuing.

Have a nice day!