Where are all the Chavez Fanboys

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
, 23 percent per year inflation for ten years? C'mon man.

Inflation is not equivalent to a bad economy. Inflation does tend to be an unequal tax on the poor, so one would hope it is countered by good social programs. But merely saying 'inflation=bad' is false.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Inflation is not equivalent to a bad economy. Inflation does tend to be an unequal tax on the poor, so one would hope it is countered by good social programs. But merely saying 'inflation=bad' is false.

OK, noted.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You don't even know what a "fascist" was if you think Chavez was one.

Egad I'm not resorting to Webster's. Let's just say that on the "you have two cows" spectrum of political systems he was a lot closer to "the government takes both and shoots you" than "you give one to your neighbor".

He was an authoritarian thief, an enemy of free speech, and of the rule of law.

Read this:
https://www.hrw.org/report/2012/07/17/tightening-grip/concentration-and-abuse-power-chavezs-venezuela

That's your hero.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Inflation is not equivalent to a bad economy. Inflation does tend to be an unequal tax on the poor, so one would hope it is countered by good social programs. But merely saying 'inflation=bad' is false.

Actually, if inflation is accompanied by salary increases (as it ought to be in most cases), inflation hurts the rich much more than the poor because it devalues savings, whereas salaries can keep up with inflation.

Stagflation, where inflation is accompanied by stagnated salaries (which is what cost Jimmy Carter the 1980 election) is a much bigger problem.

Still, even stagflation doesn't necessarily hurt the poor more than the rich (though the poor are naturally going to feel any pinch more than the rich are).

Originally posted by twhitehead
Inflation is not equivalent to a bad economy. Inflation does tend to be an unequal tax on the poor, so one would hope it is countered by good social programs. But merely saying 'inflation=bad' is false.

Inflation is not bad? It is fraud! In any nation which has its own currency, inflation amounts to counterfeiting. It is printing money, which devalues existing money. How is that not criminal? If you or I did it it would be, but somehow if a national bank does it, its OK?

Originally posted by sh76
Actually, if inflation is accompanied by salary increases (as it ought to be in most cases), inflation hurts the rich much more than the poor because it devalues savings, whereas salaries can keep up with inflation.

Actually no, it only negatively affects very small savings large savings including both bank accounts and assets are usually somewhat inflation proof. The rich typically have most of their wealth in inflation proof assets, and quite often they actually benefit from inflation.

Salary increases usually do not exactly match inflation and this can be used by companies to slowly whittle away at wages or to lower wages for certain sectors.
Here in SA there is a yearly battle between unions wanting above inflation increases and employers wanting below inflation increases.

Much worse than inflation is unpredictable inflation ie a different rate each year. This causes major planning problems for just about everyone and there are winners and losers. High inflation after a period of low inflation does usually indicate economic problems and results in the currency being devalued relative to other currencies (making everyone in the country poorer except for those with foreign incomes or assets). But again it negatively affects currency relative to assets which in turn affects the poor much more than the rich.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually no, it only negatively affects very small savings large savings including both bank accounts and assets are usually somewhat inflation proof. The rich typically have most of their wealth in inflation proof assets, and quite often they actually benefit from inflation.

Salary increases usually do not exactly match inflation and this can be used ...[text shortened]... vely affects currency relative to assets which in turn affects the poor much more than the rich.

The argument as to who inflation harms is to miss the point. I believe that sh76 is right, but regardless it is fraud or counterfeiting. It is not innocent or accidental. It is planned and intentional. Some benefit and others are harmed.

The truth is that it is fraud, and a crime if anyone but the government did it. Why is the government given a pass on criminal activity?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually no, it only negatively affects very small savings large savings including both bank accounts and assets are usually somewhat inflation proof. The rich typically have most of their wealth in inflation proof assets, and quite often they actually benefit from inflation.

Salary increases usually do not exactly match inflation and this can be used ...[text shortened]... vely affects currency relative to assets which in turn affects the poor much more than the rich.

Nothing is inherently "inflation-proof." People might have their assets in securities, which may or may not rise with inflation, but cash, CDs and bonds, in which rich people often keep significant assets, are all hurt by inflation.

While it may be true that there are times that inflation "can be used by companies to slowly whittle away at wages or to lower wages," that depends more on the employment market. In a free market economy where wages are based on supply and demand for labor, increase in the price that goods and services can be sold for (i.e., inflation) would allow companies to pay higher salaries and still be profitable, thereby increasing the supply of salaries and driving up the cost of labor.

Originally posted by sh76
Nothing is inherently "inflation-proof." People might have their assets in securities, which may or may not rise with inflation, but cash, CDs and bonds, in which rich people often keep significant assets, are all hurt by inflation.

While it may be true that there are times that inflation "can be used by companies to slowly whittle away at wages or to lower ...[text shortened]... still be profitable, thereby increasing the supply of salaries and driving up the cost of labor.

Common understanding is that "inflation" is just producers increasing prices for their goods or services.

This is to misunderstand what it is, and why. What is it that is inflated? To understand it, look at the means used to supposedly control it.

Originally posted by normbenign
Inflation is not bad? It is fraud! In any nation which has its own currency, inflation amounts to counterfeiting. It is printing money, which devalues existing money. How is that not criminal? If you or I did it it would be, but somehow if a national bank does it, its OK?

Inflation is not the same as "printing money."

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Inflation is not the same as "printing money."

In addition to printing it, it must be put in circulation. Look up your ECON101 textbook. Increasing the supply of anything with demand remaining static does what?

Originally posted by normbenign
In addition to printing it, it must be put in circulation. Look up your ECON101 textbook. Increasing the supply of anything with demand remaining static does what?

I doubt any ECON101 textbook will equate "inflation" to "printing money." Clearly the two are related, but inflation is not merely proportional to the amount of money that is being "printed."

Originally posted by sh76
Nothing is inherently "inflation-proof."

Assets essentially are. Inflation is, after all, a measure of assets vs currency.

but cash, CDs and bonds, in which rich people often keep significant assets, are all hurt by inflation.
No, they usually are not. My bank will readily give me an above inflation interest rate on savings. Why would any rich person be stupid enough to make other investments if they give below inflation returns? Further, many rich people keep such savings in foreign currencies (relative to countries with high inflation.)

In a free market economy where wages are based on supply and demand for labor,
Wages are never based on supply and demand for labour. No such 'free market economy' exists. Lets discuss the real world not some imaginary world dreamt up by delusional economists.

increase in the price that goods and services can be sold for (i.e., inflation) would allow companies to pay higher salaries and still be profitable, thereby increasing the supply of salaries and driving up the cost of labor.
Ha ha ha ha ha. Companies do not pay wages based on whether or not their profits allow it.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
I doubt any ECON101 textbook will equate "inflation" to "printing money." Clearly the two are related, but inflation is not merely proportional to the amount of money that is being "printed."

'printing money' is a...let's call it a euphemism for currency creation. Inflation is an over supply of currency, or another way you might put it, another tax, or yet another, stealing from everyone that holds a dollar, or a disincentive to save.