Your premise is, providing incentive for economic activity is the duty of a currency alone
Where did I say or imply that?
I am saying it actually creates a major economic disincentive and results in the transfer of wealth from economic activity to economic inactivity. The ones creating the goods and services end up making richer the ones doing nothing. I cant see how thats a good thing, unless you happen to be on the receiving end of this scheme.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but "doing nothing" means not participating in the allocation of productive force. The claim that it is harmful seems to imply that inflation provides the only incentive for economic activity.
The ones creating goods and services are trying to make those who save give up their savings. That's the game. If you can resist that, you deserve to get richer. I think the only proof we need to understand that this works is the fact that this is already the case. That was the intention of my follow-up question.