If ANY country on earth got rid of their central bank and allowed for natural deflation over a period of 5-10 years...

If ANY country on earth got rid of their central bank and allowed for natural deflation over a period of 5-10 years their citizens would be the richest in the world. They and the businesses in their country would be able to buy up the resources in other countries very easily.

Why do leftists complain that "le ebul capitalism" is exploiting these third world countries when all these countries have to do is end their central banks and allow their currency to rise?

Ever single country on earth has central banks that cause inflation, what a fucking joke.

inb4 cucks whine about "muh deflationary spiral" myth

bump

deflation causes jews to hoard money taking it out of circulation

Then why do all jews strongly support inflation(the government printing money and literally giving it to jews)?

Also money hoarded(SAVED) only increases the value of the money everyone else in the economy has, thus lowering prices/

Any third world shithole could say fuck the jews and do this themselves.

bump

>Any third world shithole could say fuck the jews and do this themselves.
I dunno man sounds like a country doing that might be in desperate need of some freedom

This.

Any country that tries to go on a gold standard or start their own deflationary currency gets fucking BOMBED by the USA.

I hope Trump audits the fed.

I hope he raises interest rates at least.

Come on Sup Forums you guys used to talk about interesting things.

6 am on a weekend was probably a poor choice. What do you think the end scenario will look like? hyperinflation collapsing economies starting ww3?

>6 am on a weekend was probably a poor choice.
But my sleep schedule is all fucked up and this is the only time I can shitpost....

Cuck

all the kids are on during the weekend. 2-5 am weekdays can be alright some aussies aren't retarded blacked shitposters

Does anyone have a refutation to this?

On the contrary; either the people would run out of money or the government would run out of money.

Either way it would make them much much much poorer.

At most, deflation only benefits those who are already rich, and when it comes at the expense of opportunity, even the rich can lose from it as well.

To make a country richer, you have to enable its people to do work of genuinely higher value. Messing with currency values is no substitute for that; the most it can do is enable that. But to enable that, they'd have to do almost the exact opposite of what you're suggesting.

>either the people would run out of money
How? Their savings rate would increase ginormously. Nobody is going to "run out" of money.

>Either way it would make them much much much poorer.
Lol making prices LOWER for them while increasing their wages will make them poorer?

You people are really dumb.

>deflation only benefits those who are already rich,
Inflation only benefits the rich, deflation benefits the poor who now have lower prices.

>Messing with currency values
But that's exactly what you want.
Central banks are the ones messing with currency values. I want the value of the currency to be decided naturally by supply and demand.

We need to bring back free banking.

OP: deflation would work as you say if taxes, housing fees, power bills and the like decreased like the prices, but they won't.

With a set of fixed and not decreasing expenses in place, deflation becomes a massacre.

If you don't like what the banks are doing buy Gold or Bitcoin. It really is that simple

>but they won't.
Of course they will.
What is competition?

>With a set of fixed and not decreasing expenses in place
In a deflationary economy. What kind of retard would you have to be to agree to fixed prices in a deflationary economy? No company would be retarded enough to offer such things.

The only reason we have fixed prices in today's inflationary economy is an incentive for people to buy products like this so the price doesn't rise.

Also things like debt would come with different terms like being adjusted for deflation etc.

>How? Their savings rate would increase ginormously. Nobody is going to "run out" of money.
If everyone could keep working during the deflation and not get a pay cut, the situation might be as you describe. But that's not a realistic scenario. In reality if everyone's saving more then they're spending less on employing people (unless there's a surge in net exports, which would make the country richer no matter whether there was inflation or deflation).

>Lol making prices LOWER for them while increasing their wages will make them poorer?
>You people are really dumb.
What's really dumb is ASSUMING their wages will INCREASE in a time of deflation. It's more likely wages will decrease (making it harder for people to pay off their debts) or worse still, they'll lose their jobs completely.

>But that's exactly what you want.
>Central banks are the ones messing with currency values. I want the value of the currency to be decided naturally by supply and demand.

You said you wanted deflation: make your mind up.

I'd rather see all currencies floated (so the market decides the value of them). But that doesn't diminish the need for central banks; their role changes, but ultimately it makes them more important than ever. And central banks generally can't induce deflation (or even passively maintain it) without decimating economic growth.

>If everyone could keep working during the deflation and not get a pay cut
Why would they get a pay cut?
This never happened historically.

>For example, both the U.S. and Germany enjoyed very solid growth rates at the end of the 19th century, when the price level fell in both countries during more than two decades. In that period, money wage rates remained by and large stable, but incomes effectively increased in real terms because the same amount of money could buy ever more consumers’ goods. So beneficial was this deflationary period for the broad masses that it came to the first great crisis of socialist theory, which had predicted the exact opposite outcome of unbridled capitalism. Eduard Bernstein and other revisionists appeared and made the case for a modified socialism. Today we are in dire need of some revisionism too – deflation revisionism that is.

>then they're spending less on employing people
There's still going to be people being employed. The savings people save will over time, be used for larger projects which will employ even more people.

>What's really dumb is ASSUMING their wages will INCREASE in a time of deflation
I'm not assuming that, it's mostly true.
Wages either stay the same or go up historically.

>It's more likely wages will decrease (making it harder for people to pay off their debts) or worse still, they'll lose their jobs completely.
Literally decades of american and german history prove this wrong.

>You said you wanted deflation
Yes, currencies deflate naturally over time as economic production increases.

Nah historically inflation hurts the rich.

It's because
Left ---> Jews
and
Federal Reserve ---> Jews

>Nah historically inflation hurts the rich.
t. Debt slavery supporting jewish piece of shit

You must LOVE our present day economy.

That's just incorrect. Rich people usually have some kind of property (land, companies, shares in companies) that are going to retain value even if there is inflation.

It works like this
Rich people: Ok with inflation
Poor people: might see some losses as wages fail to keep up with inflation, but are generally ok since they spend their money too quickly for inflation to be a major factor
>middle classes who hold cash savings but generally aren't wealthy enough to consolidate their wealth into a non-cash asset.: fucked

bump for redpillz

Someone who would live in a deflationary economy working at taco bell would make the same amount as an airplane engineer in an inflationary economy.

>Why would they get a pay cut?
Because the alternative is being out of work completely.

>This never happened historically.
On the contrary, it was common during economic downturns. And even when wages were "by and large stable", some people had to settle for less.

And note that I said "If everyone could KEEP WORKING during the deflation and not get a pay cut". You've focussed on the bit about not getting a pay cut, while ignoring the more significant part.

>There's still going to be people being employed.
Because there's still going to be money being spent. But with less money spent, fewer people are employed unless the ones who are employed are paid less.

>The savings people save will over time, be used for larger projects which will employ even more people.
Maybe, maybe not. It's completely moot because spending on large projects does not depend on past savings.

>I'm not assuming that, it's mostly true.
Even if it's mostly true, your assuming it.
But in reality it is mostly false.

>Wages either stay the same or go up historically.
Prices either stay the same or go up historically!

>Literally decades of american and german history prove this wrong.
Even in your cherry picked counterexamples, which involve rapid technological progress and workers having very little bargaining power, the increase in their prosperity occurred despite, not because of, the deflation.

>Yes, currencies deflate naturally over time as economic production increases.
Psychological factors result in countries growing much faster if there's some inflation.

>Someone who would live in a deflationary economy working at taco bell would make the same amount as an airplane engineer in an inflationary economy.
Now you're just being ridiculous. Aerospace engineers do a much higher value job than Taco Bell workers, regardless of what the economy is doing. But during deflationary conditions, there's less demand for workers so they'd be paid less.

I never understood the basic logic behind this.
Central banks use interest rates to set how attractive it is to invest in real assets. High interest rate = no need to invest in anything but government bonds; low interest rate = government bonds are pretty much useless.
So, wouldn't a -1% inflation be equal to a central bank setting a 1% interest rate? What possible difference does it make besides letting small players and non-banks in on the action?

Israel's had negative inflation for the 3rd year in a row, and everything's doing fine here. Better than ever, if statistics are to be believed.