A Keynesian has been detected in the thread. I repeat a Keynesian has been detected in the thread. Phasers on stun
Seriously though. Any systems in which humans centrally make decisions on what's globally "good" for the economy is inherently flawed. You have no idea whether it's good or bad that the money supply is inflated and you know it (in fact it's neither). The only fair solution is 0%. Oh and the money in Europe is being inflated far in excess of 2% at the moment so if they are truly aiming for 2% some people need to lose their jobs.
Further, we already have a perfectly sound system to regulate the economy which is distributed in nature and will automatically be fair because no-one controls it. It's called the free market. Too bad governments outlawed it a long time ago.
In Europe the inflation is much less than 2 % (I think even below 1 % currently).
The problem is that despite Central Banks are trying push the money into the economy, it doesn't go all the way through but rather to assets and securities (stock markets keep rising and many companies are breaking their ATHs only because investors have cheap money but no places to invest it).
In Finland the car dealerships are offering 0 % loans and still complaining that there is not (enough) sales.
The Central Bank has lowered the deposit rate below 0 but still banks are not so much lending money as they should.
The difference between free markets and Keynesian approach is that Keynesians do not prefer so much volatility (the governement should increase their spending when business cycle is at low point). Keynesians do not suggest to waste money (this is a misunderstanding) but exploiting the opportunity to get cheap labor for building roads, hospitals, schools etc which are necessary. It is good for the labor force - they get job in down cycle from the governement and when the cycle turns, they get similar jobs from the private sector.
Wasting resources is something that Keynesians have to be avoided.
Below 2%? Try 30%. The ECB is printing like a motherfucker. I don't care much for your retarded definition of inflation as a proxy for prices.
Indeed Keynesians cannot stand volatility and that's why they fuck everything up. Just as people that have no appetite for volatility should stay out of the market they should stay out of the economy. Go was an old person or something.
Is the whole argument here merely on the definition of words?
Are you satisfied if I replace the word inflation by "increase of CPI"? It is longer way to write it so I prefer using term inflation (=inflating prices).
Sounds like the problem here is semantical.
ECB is printing money indeed but as I told you, it doesn't help real economy since the money is not channeled to real economy but to securities. I feel myself very retarded when I have to repeat myself.
Indeed I prefer lower volatility to higher volatility. Generally high volatility asset cannot efficiently serve as money - currency perhaps but not money.
No rich person will invest significiant amount of money in currency that can tomorrow become worthless or 10 times more valuable. Those who invest in such instruments are called gamblers. They could as well to Las Vegas playing their money in roulette.
I am not one of those.
Personally I am ready to donate as soon as my monero wealth grows in a significiant level in value (I want higher purchasing power for my moneros so that smaller donation will count more).
Yes I have heard you say this before with a price of 0.1btc/XMR before you donate. May I suggest you donate something now as it will increase the likelihood of it reaching that level. Also by the time the Monero economy grows to the point of 0.1btc/XMR I imagine funding might not be as much of an issue.
The devs can do things that will increase the marketcap of Monero. If they are unwilling to increase it by lowering the blockreward enough for more scarce coin, I am neither not that willing to donate. I donate based on results, not promises.