afterzir

What I like about the lender/borrower def. is that it implies productivity (since the borrower isn't going to put the money under his mattress and then return it. The problem I have with the money supply def. (among others) is how to separate between real and pointless printing, like if I find a special substance underground that is great for making buildings and money is printed to match its value that's one thing, but if Germany decides to print money like crazy for the sake of printing money that's another thing.

Do you mean there would be less capital investment under deflation as opposed to under inflation, or do you mean there will be less capital investment than at present today?

a) I got into a discussion with my brother about deflation. He thinks that deflation would lead to there being little capital investments going on. How do I show that deflation will lead to more capital investments? b) There are 3 definitions for inflation that I'm aware of: 1) increase in prices 2) increase in money supply 3) borrower is favored over the lender. I like 3), my brother likes 1), and Austrians like 2). Which is the best? Also, I believe that deflation should have the opposite definition as inflation (so if 2) was good, would deflation be a decrease in the money supply? **** Also, there is a youtube video I like called 'deflation is normal' where the speaker assumes a society with a FIXED amount of money, so I don't know how the money supply can be altered) Also (these requests are starting to pile up) could someone explain what is bad about using definition 3)? Thanks a lot.

I can't find Stef's vid on Obama's 'you didn't build that' remark. Does anyone know where it is?