So putting it beyond your argument doesn't really make any sense.
> it's not as though more money will make them poorer
If I have 1000 dollars today and then have 2000 dollars in 10 years, but the dollar itself has dropped down to below 50% it's initial value, how exactly am I not poorer?
On the contrary, compounding interest is key to my argument. Inflation is entirely absent in my argument. You introduced inflation to construct your straw man. Promoting fallacy does not make for valid argument.
> If I have 1000 dollars today and then have 2000 dollars in 10 years, but the dollar itself has dropped down to below 50% it's initial value, how exactly am I not poorer?
I have already addressed this straw man in my previous comment: historically, interest rates always increase to counter inflation. My argument did not mention inflation, but I also kept the interest rate at a flat 5%. If you want to introduce inflation, then I will increase interest rates to counter it, resulting in nullifying your inflation and your straw man argument, twice.
Ignoring inflation is total idiocy. Otherwise you might as well just push the government to add a zero to every denomination. Then there are more dollars in circulation and you don’t need to wait a century.
> If you want to introduce inflation, then I will increase interest rates to counter it
Your “argument” is basically “I will make up numbers and conditions to match the desired imaginary future I want to see.” You truly are a deep thinker.