Quote from: evoorhees on July 18, 2011, 05:41:40 PM

Quote from: netrin on July 18, 2011, 05:18:32 PM

I am careful to distinguish between 'monetary xflation' and 'price xflation'. I have not confused terms; You have. I'm sure you've read a lot of Austrian, but perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the mainstream (aka the century in which you live), if only to know thy enemy, if you will:

Yes, the mainstream economists misuse the term. Given that they were unable to predict the largest economic disaster since the Great Depression, I tend not to lend credence to their opinions and misguided definitions. Not to mention the manipulation of this terminology is insidious, it has confused the entire world as to the reasons for the increasing price of milk. It has gotten to a point where people believe "inflation" is just a natural phenomenon in a market economy, instead of an intentional and deliberate policy by the central bank.

Like it or not, fractional reserve banking exists and must be described. The Fed created M0 inflation to counter M1, M2 deflation. Bad money deflates, people default or pay off principal, contracting the debt based money supply. Many of those same people/institutions who once had debt now have newly printed dollars. Is that inflation or deflation?

The more 'real' (food, energy, metal, M0) inflated massively in the last three years. The less 'real' (M2, M3, deposits) deflated.

Quote from: evoorhees on July 18, 2011, 05:41:40 PM

The discrepancy in definitions is not an innocent evolution of language, it is an intentional perversion of meaning which obscures an extremely important phenomenon. I refuse to mislead other people and follow suit by adopting and perpetuating molested vernacular.

Please read the article I personally retrieved for you. It's short.

There's certainly been a perversion of the language to a point, but you have to be realistic. The vast majority are confused by archaic usage. Even those 'in the know' can not be expected 'to know' without context unless you preach to the choir. Perhaps you can use the monetary- and price- terms as I have, which would have been just as well understood in Jefferson's day as today.

I have a pet peeve against the loose usage of 'irony' - the contradiction of the context - not just contradiction nor unfortunate circumstances. Or the use of 'tea' to refer to any herbal infusion. The use of 'liberal' to mean economic conservative and 'conservative' to mean liberal. But what's the point? Whether by manipulation, improvement, or laziness, language changes.