Deflation is bad because it’s literally your economy shrinking. It’s not prices dropping, it’s less spending across the board. Depending on your demographics you end up with huge unemployment numbers or a standard of living for the older generation that can’t be sustained by the new generation.

If you’re arguing a fringe point of view please make that clear up front. If I knew you think deflation is good I wouldn’t have ever replied.

And by the way, you say Japan is an economic success story because of deflation, but I guess you never bothered looking up their 300% debt ratio that they have been running for decades, exactly because they didn’t want deflation to ruin their economy.

> Inflation or deflation, by definition, doesn't impact how much someone can buy in real terms. Because wages and goods are theoretically changing at the same rate.

From your earlier post: > Frankly I suspect that if prices go down all else equal most people will be better off and able to afford more stuff. Wild take, I know.

As you mention above, this isn't likely to actually be that different.

But:

>In practice though inflation policy is typically masking money printing projects or policies that destroy wealth

Inflation rewards moving money into goods, and deflation rewards moving money out of goods. Generally, an economy where money moves around is better than one where it sits idle. Yes, it does penalize saving cash (), which offends many puritan mindsets (including mine), but it rewards risk-taking and committing your currency towards capital, both of which tend to make the economy more productive.

() - So, if your 'wealth' is in currency, then inflation does devalue your wealth. But if your wealth is in capital, that capital should fluctuate with the currency, and inflation doesn't devalue that.