Good questions.
It has to be a basket of prices across industries to eliminate undue influence of single factors like an oil shortage. Better to keep oil out entirely. Things like locally produced food are a much better indicator of money supply as there are many suppliers across the whole country and not subjected to whims. 10,000 farmers aren't suddenly going to get up one morning and collectively decide to limit the amount of wheat or what.
Yes the money supply has to be adjusted after the fact so it plays a bit of catch up. Interests rates are usually adjusted every 3 months or so IIRC.
I'll do some research on this. I think in today's hyper digitized economy it's actually possible to get a much better bird's eye view of the economy that the old fashioned ways of people born last century. Amazone would probably do a better job as issuing a stable currency that any government.
Login to reply
Replies (2)
This seems really complicated and easily manipulated, I think central banks are trying to do something of the sort already and it's not looking great to be honest. I, for one, would stick to a fixed money supply or a fixed rule like Friedman suggested many decades ago (money is neutral and all that)
Yes that's exactly what central banks are doing. Yes it can be easily manipulated as you can see in Zimbabwe or any of the failed economies of the past.
It's not looking good? Inflation is in the low single digit percent depending on where you live. That's pretty stable. That's pretty good. That's why you like dollars and obsess over the dollar price of Bitcoin.
Your fixed money supply will lead to wildly swinging prices and kill any business quickly.
Central bank fiat is the best we have until you come up with a better price stability mechanism but you have to have one.