this means that there’s less demand, prices go downer, businesses may start to fail, putting people in unemployment, reducing demand,
I’ve always been skeptical of this and I’m not really aware of historical examples that prove it. The part I just quoted - “less demand, prices go downer, businesses may start to fail” - that means supply decreases too. All that’s really happening if you have a couple % deflation is that people are slightly more incentivized to hold onto their money, and the fact is that currencies don’t just naturally appreciate in value that much, at most in the long term I think you have “the same amount of money in circulation” vs. population growth causing it to chase a slightly larger economy.
If you want a historic example look at the politics In Germany that got Hitler into power. Wikipedia is sadly only in German, but you can see from the graph that there was 10% deflation in 1932, with bad consequences.
I’m sure this does get lumped into “causes of Hitler’s rise to power/WWII” list somewhere. I seem to recall the inflation immediately prior being a lot more famous - that Germany was mandated by treaty to pay reparations after WWII, and that the Weimar Republic printed so much money people were using it as wallpaper or burning it as firewood (supposedly at least). In general, that there was a widespread sense Germany had been wounded somehow, which he was able to capitalize on, telling people to “fight back” against the minority groups he characterized as the forces of oppression. That’d be everywhere between 1918 and 1933 or so. Not so much “the purchasing value of money marginally increased for a one year period prior to Hitler’s rise”.
It’s a myth that the hyperinflation was the reason for hitlers rise. The hyperinflation occurred in 1923. Hitler tried a coup in November 1923, failed miserably, was thrown into prison and the party was banned for a while. In 1928 they had 2,6% in the election.
Only during Brünings deflation politics the nsdap gained momentum. The vote 1930 gave them 18,3% and in 1932 37,3%. Now compare that to the deflation graph of the other Wikipedia link I gave last comment.
Well, simply attributing it to either side of inflation/deflation is overly simplistic. The simple way of putting it is that people were unhappy in Germany and Hitler was able to capitalize on it in a political campaign against a supposed cause. The German economy in general was on shaky ground following WWI but this was alleviated partially by the Dawes/Young plans, right up until the Great Depression actually started affecting that foreign aid and the economy took another major hit, at which point the Nazis were able to use this as evidence of a “failure in leadership” from the current government, getting Hitler appointed as chancellor, then Reichstag fire started & he seized power.
I’ve always been skeptical of this and I’m not really aware of historical examples that prove it. The part I just quoted - “less demand, prices go downer, businesses may start to fail” - that means supply decreases too. All that’s really happening if you have a couple % deflation is that people are slightly more incentivized to hold onto their money, and the fact is that currencies don’t just naturally appreciate in value that much, at most in the long term I think you have “the same amount of money in circulation” vs. population growth causing it to chase a slightly larger economy.
If you want a historic example look at the politics In Germany that got Hitler into power. Wikipedia is sadly only in German, but you can see from the graph that there was 10% deflation in 1932, with bad consequences.
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflationspolitik
I’m sure this does get lumped into “causes of Hitler’s rise to power/WWII” list somewhere. I seem to recall the inflation immediately prior being a lot more famous - that Germany was mandated by treaty to pay reparations after WWII, and that the Weimar Republic printed so much money people were using it as wallpaper or burning it as firewood (supposedly at least). In general, that there was a widespread sense Germany had been wounded somehow, which he was able to capitalize on, telling people to “fight back” against the minority groups he characterized as the forces of oppression. That’d be everywhere between 1918 and 1933 or so. Not so much “the purchasing value of money marginally increased for a one year period prior to Hitler’s rise”.
It’s a myth that the hyperinflation was the reason for hitlers rise. The hyperinflation occurred in 1923. Hitler tried a coup in November 1923, failed miserably, was thrown into prison and the party was banned for a while. In 1928 they had 2,6% in the election.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1928?wprov=sfla1
Only during Brünings deflation politics the nsdap gained momentum. The vote 1930 gave them 18,3% and in 1932 37,3%. Now compare that to the deflation graph of the other Wikipedia link I gave last comment.
Well, simply attributing it to either side of inflation/deflation is overly simplistic. The simple way of putting it is that people were unhappy in Germany and Hitler was able to capitalize on it in a political campaign against a supposed cause. The German economy in general was on shaky ground following WWI but this was alleviated partially by the Dawes/Young plans, right up until the Great Depression actually started affecting that foreign aid and the economy took another major hit, at which point the Nazis were able to use this as evidence of a “failure in leadership” from the current government, getting Hitler appointed as chancellor, then Reichstag fire started & he seized power.
This is a big step away from your “hyperinflation lead to Hitler” claim before.
Well, that’s not what I wrote.
It probably only is problematic in the same amount that inflation is bad. If it’s a little, it’s fine. If it’s a lot, you’re screwed
TBH this strikes me as the kind of thought that doesn’t come from careful consideration of how it would actually play out.