> - inflation hits the poorest classes the hardest re: devaluing their largely all-cash savings, and they have no accountability measures to change that. who will they call, the fed? their senators who approved the fed chair?

Inflation generally hurts the middle-class the most. Poor people generally don't have savings and are debtors. Debtors benefit from inflation.

Cryptocurrency being open source isn't really relevant to my point.

To your first point, the current views of holders isn't relevant as personalities are certainly not immutable, and as well all know, power corrupts.

> Inflation generally hurts the middle-class the most.

The middle class typically has a mortgage and student loan debt for which inflation benefits them.

The closer you are to the spiket, the more debt based inflation benefits you.

The poor do lose the most.

You're not wrong, the the middle class has far more savings than the poorest quartile. Is it this you disagree with?

I disagree that the middle class is hurt the most.

Whoever can leverage the most debt for assets benefits the most under an inflationary scheme. This tends to be banks and generally wealthy people.

Stated inversly the poorest are hurt the most as they are least a part of this wealth generating scheme.

Cash savings is largely irrelevant. Most Americans are net negative cash wise via credit cards. So stating the middle class is most hurt doesn't follow logically.

I'm basically middle class, but to keep a substantial cash savings would be financial idiocy in this inflationary system.

So who's losing if nobody has any meaningful monetary savings? Sounds like the rich because they will put like 5% of their portfolio into cash and higher wages eat into real wealth.

Basically everything you say is wrong. Inflation is typically priced in and therefore has little effect on debts.

You have no idea what you are talking about lol

There is no inflation Inflation is transitory Inflation is actually good

That was priced in? How about in other countries? Where the next day the currency devaluates 50%?

in short, you're focusing on savings while ignoring purchasing power

yes

There isn’t going to be a middle class left to hurt anyway.

Everything hits the poor the hardest, but I doubt there really is this hypothetical group of people with large cash savings they intend to hold for decades while keeping it in cash. At least in the US. I think that might be a thing in Japan, but not among the poor. The poor are generally debtors, who are helped by inflation because it reduces the real value of what they owe, whereas the goods they purchased on credit appreciate.

Honestly, I don't want to come across like I'm making an argument in favor of intentional inflation, but provided it isn't runaway levels that wreck an economy, I'm not even sure who it hurts. The poor are debtors. The middle class are the biggest holders of 30-year mortgages, which are about the best assets you can possibly hold when there is inflation. The rich hold their wealth in appreciating assets. Issuers of long-term debt and retirees who moved their savings into bonds and cash seem like the most likely to be hurt, but there are so many simple hedges they could have employed. Banks can issue long-term bonds so they're net zero debt holders rather than creditors. Retirees can move their savings into TIPS rather than cash.

> but provided it isn't runaway levels that wreck an economy, I'm not even sure who it hurts.

It gives governments a tool to erode its liabilities while continuing to spend irresponsibly.

This hurts everyone not willing or able to take cheap credit.

You know, it's not even intentional inflation. What the Fed is doing isn't creating inflation, it's moderating inflation downwards. Inflation simply happens through regular economic activities even if the government isn't involved. People borrow and spend their savings faster and faster, that's inflation. What the Fed is doing is like a PID control loop that hits the brakes when the economy is overheating. It needs 2% inflation as a buffer to achieve negative real interest rates. If arbitrary negative real interest rates were possible then the Fed could do price level targeting instead of inflation rate targeting and even in the latter the desired inflation rate could simply be 0% but any inflation shocks are permanent.

Artificially appreciating assets means paying more taxes when exchanging them via fiat even though no actual value was created in the exchange.

The poorest benefit the most from inflation since they get fired first during bad economic conditions. The only exception is housing costs because rent doesn't really flow to low income households.