Not really a meme meme, but i felt like i had to :s
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2025
1106 points (97.9% liked)
memes
16520 readers
2668 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Again, facts and history disagree with you. See the great depression and other economic downturns.
Again, risk exists and is half of the risk-reward calculation. When your system entirely hinges on risk not existing... big sign that you're wrong lol.
It's a demonstration of the relationship between deflation and investment. And yes, it is basic economics. ๐
Invest with less risk? More risk? Or you're saying "just predict the future correctly" ๐ค I wonder if you'd learn something about this in an econ 101 class.
Gee, you're literally dead wrong, and the experts agree with me. It's inflation, not deflation, that is required for growth. There's a reason the government targets a rate of 2% inflation per year.
Inflationary currency motivates investment and consumption. When your money is going to lose some value anyway, you might as well take a risk and invest it for a potential reward. You might as well make that large purchase today, because your money will buy a little less tomorrow. This is healthy for the economy.
You are correct that deflation adds on top of interest, which makes loans more expensive. This stifles an economy by decreasing demand/consumption and the flow of money through the economy. When loans are more expensive to pay back, people are discouraged from taking a business loan and starting a new business or taking out a loan and investing it or using it to make a large purchase. This is bad for the economy.
Read the links you posted. Debt default was the crisis. Deflation was a symptom.
I have no idea why you claim my "system" has nothing risk. Reread this thread to correct your misunderstanding.
You need a higher return on investment in order to outpace deflation and make investing worth your while. Do assets with a higher potential return have more risk or do they have less risk?
Also I'm just going to keep posting these 2 paragraphs every comment until you actually address them lol:
Inflationary currency motivates investment and consumption. When your money is going to lose some value anyway, you might as well take a risk and invest it for a potential reward. You might as well make that large purchase today, because your money will buy a little less tomorrow. This is healthy for the economy.
You are correct that deflation adds on top of interest, which makes loans more expensive. This stifles an economy by decreasing demand/consumption and the flow of money through the economy. When loans are more expensive to pay back, people are discouraged from taking a business loan and starting a new business or taking out a loan and investing it or using it to make a large purchase. This is bad for the economy.
No, in an inflationary environment you demand a higher return on investment in order to outpace inflation. Look at Argentina if you are confused.
Deflation is the opposite of inflation. Keep up.
Nope, you literally have it backwards. No wonder you've got this all wrong.
If your money increases in value at a 5% rate (deflating), and a share of stock also increases in value at a 5% rate, then there's no reason to exchange your money for the stock. The stock needs to increase in value at a higher rate in order to make it worthwhile to give up the currency and possess the stock instead.
Inflation is opposite. For example, if your money is decreasing in value at a 2% rate (inflating), the stock doesn't even need to increase in value for it to be better. It would be worthwhile to exchange the money for the stock even if it was just holding a stable constant value.
Which is riskier, a stock that has a potential return of +5% or a stock that holds a stable value?
Rate of return needs to beat/outpace deflation. Technically you're half right, because rate of return ALSO needs to beat inflation, it's just easier to do because inflation is negative, so even investments that don't grow and just hold a stable value beat inflation. Which is why inflation encourages investment and stimulates and grows the economy.
As promised:
Inflationary currency motivates investment and consumption. When your money is going to lose some value anyway, you might as well take a risk and invest it for a potential reward. You might as well make that large purchase today, because your money will buy a little less tomorrow. This is healthy for the economy.
You are correct that deflation adds on top of interest, which makes loans more expensive. This stifles an economy by decreasing demand/consumption and the flow of money through the economy. When loans are more expensive to pay back, people are discouraged from taking a business loan and starting a new business or taking out a loan and investing it or using it to make a large purchase. This is bad for the economy.
People always want more money.
Deflation does encourage delayed consumption of none staples and big ticket items. This is a feature not a bug.
No. There is less interest charged on loans in a deflationary environment. Loans are cheaper. Remember the Argentinian counterexample ? Inflation high, interest rates high.
If you're an individual investor, given the choice between the 2 scenarios, would you rather exist in a world with 2% deflation, where you have to make more than a 2% return on investment in order for it to have been worthwhile, or a world with 2% inflation, where you don't even need to correctly pick a growing investment, and even an investment that just holds a stable value is worthwhile.
The choice is obvious, of course the individual would rather have the deflation scenario, because then they don't even need to invest or take any risk to grow their wealth. They can literally just sit around and do nothing, and their wealth grows for free without any risk.
But this is naive and childish to think that an environment where you just get free wealth for no reason by doing nothing is healthy for an economy as a whole.
Argentina had very high inflation, and I agree that's bad. The amount of inflation is key. What dictates the amount of inflation that is healthy? Hint: you'll have to scroll all the way to the beginning of this lesson in order to know. (jk I'll just tell you here, it relates to the growth rate of the economy). Argentina's inflation was out of sync with its economic growth.
Technically, deflation isn't always theoretically bad and inflation isn't always theoretically good, but we live in a reality of moderate economic growth, so therefore moderate inflation is required to maintain it.
And now we've circled back to the start and my position has remained entirely self-consistent, while yours has been easy to poke full of holes and point out the inconsistencies.
Deflation world. Invest $100 in a 2% risk free bond for a year. End up with $102 nominal ($104 real)
Inflation world. Invest $100 in a 2% risk free bond for a year. End up with $102 nominal ($100 real)
As an investor, the deflation world looks better to me.
You are literally describing the current world of investment. You have to go full communist to live in your "healthy" world.
I suspect this is not at all what you meant to write, but it's hilarious that came out like this.
This is not true. But you may be referring to the money supply rather than price inflation so I'll let it pass.
Agreed. We could leave the discussion here and part amicably.
The current world of investment involves returns without risk? ๐
Given you're demonstrated lack of understanding of even the most basic fundamentals of economics, I can already tell you can't actually correctly describe communism. Seems like at this point you're just typing words that you think sound smart. There wasn't really any coming back from when you mixed up loans and investments, and got deflation and inflation entirely backwards lol.
But it is true, and expert economists agree with me. Sorry! You're wrong again.
Duh. I can't believe you're only getting this at this point in the conversation, but at least you're starting to figure it out?