This is why I home school- so that I can more carefully choose what my children learn. Plus, I don't need them mixed in with a bunch of children "not being left behind", just to be limited on their growth & learning so some other kid feels more "equal". There seems to be this theme of "let's lower the standards of everyone, so that those that struggle or are lazy don't feel any pressure to do better". I'm not one that loves the whole "survival of the fittest", because I believe in compassion & understanding. However, I think when "compassion" and "understanding" are forced, then they are not real and they do not benefit anyone. Its a lot like what "Affirmative Action" has done in many cases- how is an employee supposed to know that they were hired for their knowledge & skills if the employer was required to hire them based on their race?

point is that 5 dollars went to the government and not to any individual. if counterfeiting does not matter, then I should be given a printing press and so should you.All the money printing has transferred wealth from producers to govt and politically connected. see wealthiest counties in the US. Each producer must work that much harder to produce what he could YESTERDAY not an increase for tomorrow. Real value does not come from stealing

I cringe when I think about what is in store. :( I wish you weren't right.

I completely agree with you. I just posted a comment below Maphesdus' comment about fiat money (oops) that I meant to put here. Anyway, I had the very same reservations about the article. I do believe, though, that this is why the liberty movement is having a rough time- we don't all agree on some of those issues. I'm glad that we can & do all think for ourselves. I wouldn't want others to just agree with everything I think, especially because I'm not perfect. Unfortunately, it easily translates into the movement being less effective than we'd hope. The socialist movement is sweeping & strong because the socialists are more unified in their opinions. They & their mindless followers see us as weak because of our independent minds & diverse opinions. At least this is how I understand it.

In a religious sense, it is like the principle of faith without works- its dead, fake & doesn't work. A lot of people talk about how great it was when they stopped using the gold standard because now prosperity is limitless, but it just created that facade. The way to create limitless value is to work more, innovate more, and limit less of those things. The true value isn't in how much gold there is, it is in the output of the human race. I think it is silly that a recession can even exist when the sun still shines, the earth still produces and the population is still growing. The recession only happens when people get greedy and lazy. Entitlement- the perfect way to ruin productivity.

That is easy to say when you have not felt the effects of it. I think the point of all of this isn't just how inflation is controlled. It is about control. I would like to live within my means and at some points that would have meant living in an RV with my children. However, this government, which is in bed with the Federal Reserve and all of their special interests, tries to tell me that I can't do that. I HAVE to live at a certain standard (or not have children) in order to keep them from taking my kids away. They are essentially telling me that I have to put my priorities in the order they deem worthy. Never mind that my spouse and I feel it is more important for my children to have a mother that home schools and teaches them daily how to do things that will enrich their lives. Never mind that we are less concerned with how many toys our kids have or whether they have their own full size bed than we are about how much time we spend with them and that they learn good principles. Inflation is such a small part of the picture, but it does make a difference. If someone is trying to get ahead, but they are coming from a less than ideal situation, inflation has put a damper on that more than it would seem to most people.

True. We (as a society) gave our power away to the government and neglected to take responsibility as the most important check & balance of our government. Now that our government leaders have handed that power over to who knows, it is so much harder for us to act as the ultimate check & balance for the whole system. It will be much more difficult to take our power back as a people. But those who are committed to it, deserve to live free and if they are fortunate enough to live to see the day, will enjoy the sweet fruits of the freedom fight.

Yes. I reject most of the comments here on money. Money is a medium of exchange. It cannot be some sacrosanct constant standard of value. I need only look at the cost of a service to provide a variety of on-demand films to watch from home. That will make it look like any medium of exchange has shot up in value. Value isn't dollars, and it's precious metals. It's people finding ways to get people want they want, either by hiring a courier to bring film strips ordered by the rich or by cramming bits on a phone line to pass streaming video. In twenty years, value will be completely different things. Looking for a hypothetical static store of value is pointless. Value is we the people going out in the marketplace and helping people with their wants and needs. It doesn't matter much if we use Bitcoin, silver, USD, or the Mexican Peso to trade with. All the value comes from people's hard work and ingenuity and solving one another's problems.

Clearly inflation hurts people holding dollars for long periods of time. Unexpected inflation is a problem, esp for people who enter long-term fixed interest rate instruments (mortages, long-term bonds, etc). Very high inflation is a problem b/c people have to keep changing menus, running their money to the bank, and recalculating prices every month. The US dollar has not had these problems since I was a baby in the 70s. We've had a nice, stable, positive rate of inflation all my life. I figure we're due for a period of higher inflation, but that's no big deal.

I reject all the posts that talk about inflation devaluing things like the price of labor, rent, food, etc. If there is inflation and the nominal price stays the same, the real price actually went down. That would happen regardless of the value of the currency in which you're measuring its value.

Real value comes from people making things that other people want. If the product costs $100 in 2013 USD and $105 in 2014 USD, it doesn't matter. The value is in people going out, finding ways to help other people, and executing.

If you want to back up your proposition that inflation is beneficial, I would challenge you to find an economist who shares your ideals. Good luck.

You seem to be confusing growth in the money supply with inflation and these are two distinct entities. Inflation is the relative value of a set good or service as expressed in monetary terms from one period to the next. Arguing that inflation is good is saying that somehow a basic good or service has increased in its utility simply because there is more money with which to purchase that good or service. This is absurd: prices are a function of money and its extrinsic value in relation to the goods or services on the market. Basic economics dictate that when demand remains constant, you can't move along the supply-demand curve without SUPPLY changing. Money is not immune to these laws simply because it is money.

Is the value of a gallon of milk (assuming scarcity holds constant) really worth $2 in one time period and $4 in the next? The item hasn't changed in its utility. What has changed is the purchasing power and relative value of the money itself. It is worth less in the second instance (the very definition of inflation) and so more of it is required to purchase the very same commodity. Money simplifies the barter system but is in no way immune from the basic concepts of supply and demand or intrinsic value.

Your observation about the size of the money supply is interesting, but I'm going to challenge the notion that inflation drives its increase. Again, it goes back to the roots of money: we select something to act as money that is portable, rare, and which represents (either intrinsically or extrinsically) a certain value. Inflation destroys value, however, and is largely the product of the ability to create the representation of money - pretty simple to do with paper. So having currency tied to a real asset (like precious metals) acts as a very real limit to inflation simply by preventing the arbitrary creation of money which has no real value - either intrinsic or extrinsic.

Further, the concept that inflation reflects the rate of economic activity is similarly absurd. Inflation represents a difference in monetary value of a given commodity over time - it is not a point-in-time indicator. It can not be used as such. The mere growth in economic activity has no bearing on the value of a gallon of milk, it merely represents a larger population of transactions and is more accurately represented by the number of individuals participating in the market. Why do economists always have to compensate for inflation when comparing the economies of different periods? Simple: inflation is not a causal indicator of market growth but rather an artificial byproduct of monetary policy. Look at the 1970's and early 1980's in the US as an example. We had staggering inflation of up to 14%, yet zero economic growth. Prices went up, yet the market wasn't growing. Then look at the late 1980's - inflation was largely held in check yet the size of economic activity boomed.

You misunderstand the very basic concepts of money, money supply, and economics when you confuse inflation with money or the money supply. Inflation is a product of monetary policy but neither causes nor is caused by economic activity other than growth in the money supply. You can have zero inflation simply by limiting the growth of the money supply to the growth of economic output. If the money supply remained constant while economic activity increased, money would become MORE valuable and not less (deflation).

The reason the government pushes inflation is because inflation devalues debt, and the US is in a heap of debt. Inflation allows the arbitrary reduction in debt without actually paying anything! Inflation is nothing more than value theft.

I strongly encourage you to further study basic economics. I wish high school students were required to study less advanced math and simply understand basic economics and the principle of compound interest. A core understanding of market economics is the backbone of sound decision-making, because at its heart, economics is all about the study of value: value creation, value assignment, and evaluation.

good points. I recently watched an interview with Peter Schiff on Bitcoin. He was very bearish about it. came this close to to calling it a ponzi of sorts. He pointed to the intrinsic value of gold as a distinction between the two. Of course, he did not address that gold prices are controlled.

Inflation is when the govt increases the money supply. There should not be legal tender laws. But inflation is nothing more than counterfeiting. If it is "good" why can't we all do it? why only the govt benefit?

I found the article interesting and mostly factual. The Federal Reserve certainly deserved mention and more. No, it is not government run, but government is led by it. Look what happened when JFK announced he was going to limit the powers of the Federal Reserve ... It is run and owned by bankers, who serve themselves, not the taxpayers of the US. Who wants one world everything - the international bankers.
I did notice the article quoting what Obama was told did not work, that being capitalism and free markets.. However, the author did not note, that Obama has always been a Marxist, and that has not worked at all at anytime for any people. Name one Marxist government where the worker is free and has prospered.
To some over the cliff, but what Eudaimonia said is correct, with one addition: Barry may have be the spawn of a communist on the FBI watch lit,t who tutored young Barry in communist beliefs, which are anti-capitalist and anti- personal freedom.

This is disturbing in many ways. His statements are consistent with his whole time in office. He is a communist at heart and if he gets his way our country will disappear from the face of the world. Everything our founding fathers and our own fathers have fought for in the years that we have been in existence will have been in vain. We can't let that happen..

That is one of my favorite quotes of his. Although I believe he was still ok with some form of government to arbitrate and for collective issues, such as roads, etc. In many of his stories there was still some government, just not very much!

I agree... Each instance you mention is an example of why we need some government... But not very much.. We need a government to stop the 'criminal' aspect of greed.. but allow the economy and markets to work as they will otherwise..

Both sides have been saying this for over 50 years. What makes Berry different? Is it because he is a half breed???

Funny. I was thinking the same thing. I want to read more of his articles.