Stagnant Salaries vs. Inflationary Savings Tax

[CageMabok]

Inflation is very unpopular in any country, and you are right because inflation will disrupt the economy, making it difficult for everyone to meet the primary needs that must be obtained. If commodities can be suppressed or decreased and wages become stagnant, it will have no impact at all. It would be better if wages could actually increase, so that economic development will run better and everyone will be able to meet the needs for a decent living.

The problem is that workers' wages still seem difficult to increase in several countries, both by the government and by private parties who manage their own workers. So almost everyone has felt the impact of inflation at this time and I also think that workers are still receiving stagnant wages in conditions like today. Of course they can still be grateful even though this is only enough to support themselves on a daily basis without being in debt to certain parties. Because the decline in commodity prices is still difficult to reduce in conditions like today, so everyone must be willing to face this situation while facing inflation that is still occurring.

[bSpend]

Which of these economic situations would you prefer to find yourself in?

A- Your salary is stagnant but prices fall. Where this happens, your real purchasing power has increased.  It's called constructive deflation. And even if your salary falls, but prices fall faster, you are still ahead.


B- Having your savings taxed 2%+ a year by inflation.

Drop your thoughts

I never want to find myself in any of the situations mentioned above, the only situation I wanna find myself in is to wake up one morning and discover that I own more bitcoin than the united states of America.

With this, I never will have to worry about salary anymore, whether it be stagnant or not, and I also will never have to worry about fiat losing purchasing power due to increased inflation, and this is because the more fiat loss purchasing power, the more my bitcoins are adding more and more purchasing power.

Overall, option A looks or seems to many like the real deal, but lets not allow ourselves to be fooled, price of things will never continually go l down on a stagnant salary, but rather, they will go up due to inflation,, which is something that have become normal with the fiat system.

[lepbagong]

Which of these economic situations would you prefer to find yourself in?

A-  Your salary is stagnant but prices fall. Where this happens, your real purchasing power has increased.  It's called constructive deflation. And even if your salary falls, but prices fall faster, you are still ahead.

B- Having your savings taxed 2%+ a year by inflation.

Stagnant salaries are a big problem, in my country salaries are not going up a lot, I mean maybe just a little bit, but it is not even 20% of the inflation. Which means that everyone in the whole nation got a lot poorer and there is nothing we can do.

Overpopulation and education for all meant that we are going to have a lot more people fighting for the same jobs, and since there isn't enough jobs available, that means some people will be unemployed, and that means the workers can't ask for a raise, since there are many unemployed who are waiting to take their place. This was done on purpose, but unfortunately it doesn't really feel like it is going to end up making any type of money for anyone, and that seems like the problem.

Giving an increase when inflation occurs should be done, but sometimes companies cannot provide it according to inflation, because if they do, the company will experience losses and the company may close because of the losses received.
So that quite a few companies do not pay inflationary increases as long as they can hire employees and not lay off jobs.
Every year there will continue to be growth in jobseekers and there could be more than the availability of jobs themselves and this is a dilemma, so that companies can cut jobs by replacing them with new workers whose wages are cheaper.

[jrrsparkles]

Price will never increase, gotcha I will pick that for sure, why would I care about 2% which really means nothing especially for the salaried class and government is going to make the saved tax to go away in other way.

But prices of goods remain stagnant that is not even possible cause no one is really in control of the prices, it's just based on most factors but I would want the government to adjust the salary according to what the inflation rate is so that people can afford what they used to be instead of gradually starving to die.

[justdimin]

Stagnant salaries are a big problem, in my country salaries are not going up a lot, I mean maybe just a little bit, but it is not even 20% of the inflation. Which means that everyone in the whole nation got a lot poorer and there is nothing we can do.

Overpopulation and education for all meant that we are going to have a lot more people fighting for the same jobs, and since there isn't enough jobs available, that means some people will be unemployed, and that means the workers can't ask for a raise, since there are many unemployed who are waiting to take their place. This was done on purpose, but unfortunately it doesn't really feel like it is going to end up making any type of money for anyone, and that seems like the problem.

Giving an increase when inflation occurs should be done, but sometimes companies cannot provide it according to inflation, because if they do, the company will experience losses and the company may close because of the losses received.
So that quite a few companies do not pay inflationary increases as long as they can hire employees and not lay off jobs.
Every year there will continue to be growth in jobseekers and there could be more than the availability of jobs themselves and this is a dilemma, so that companies can cut jobs by replacing them with new workers whose wages are cheaper.

I could not get the point; if there is inflation, whatever that company is doing should increase their revenue, if there is a product you sell for 5 dollars, you should sell it for 6 dollars because there is inflation. If your revenue increases, then the salary of the people who work there should increase as well.

If the company goes through an inflation period, without increasing their revenue, then they are doing something wrong and in that case making a loss would be their own trouble, they should figure out how to do better. Just because a company is mismanaged, doesn't mean that workers have to pay the difference and work for cheaper. Even if you give people a raise lower than the inflation rate, they are not getting a raise, they are getting less because of inflation.

[Uhwuchukwu53]

Price will never increase, gotcha I will pick that for sure, why would I care about 2% which really means nothing especially for the salaried class and government is going to make the saved tax to go away in other way.

But prices of goods remain stagnant that is not even possible cause no one is really in control of the prices, it's just based on most factors but I would want the government to adjust the salary according to what the inflation rate is so that people can afford what they used to be instead of gradually starving to die.

I would say that this speak volume in my heart, allowing the government to act when there happened to be such an increase particular on goods is better because there is no way market determinant of price will be constant as law of demand and supply is concerned, it's possible, why thinking of this as possiblity one should first look at this two laws properly, secondly, death rate and birth rate it's critical clear that birth rate is always higher in population, therefore demand must increase on goods using 2% tax or charge  to balance or State constant of goods can't work.

[jrrsparkles]

Price will never increase, gotcha I will pick that for sure, why would I care about 2% which really means nothing especially for the salaried class and government is going to make the saved tax to go away in other way.

But prices of goods remain stagnant that is not even possible cause no one is really in control of the prices, it's just based on most factors but I would want the government to adjust the salary according to what the inflation rate is so that people can afford what they used to be instead of gradually starving to die.

I would say that this speak volume in my heart, allowing the government to act when there happened to be such an increase particular on goods is better because there is no way market determinant of price will be constant as law of demand and supply is concerned, it's possible, why thinking of this as possiblity one should first look at this two laws properly, secondly, death rate and birth rate it's critical clear that birth rate is always higher in population, therefore demand must increase on goods using 2% tax or charge  to balance or State constant of goods can't work.

If demand increases then increase the manufacturing the product simple isn't it/ But that's not what I am talking about even in the short term it is impossible to keep the prices at constant price for example take the vegetables it's production rate depends on the seasons so one month there will be hundred tonnes available and next month it will reduced by half which means the price has to be doubled if the consumption remains same.

[DeathAngel]

Obviously Option A is far more preferable. I’m not an economist but I don’t understand why governments can’t just freeze consumer goods prices & inflation for a few years to help people manage their finances better. I have never understood why things cost far more over time, it doesn’t make any sense. All I can think is that it’s all driven by reckless government fiscal policies, money printing & spiralling national debts. Regardless I protect myself with Bitcoin. Nobody is printing my future into the dirt.

[MissNonFall9]

Obviously Option A is far more preferable. I’m not an economist but I don’t understand why governments can’t just freeze consumer goods prices & inflation for a few years to help people manage their finances better. I have never understood why things cost far more over time, it doesn’t make any sense. All I can think is that it’s all driven by reckless government fiscal policies, money printing & spiralling national debts. Regardless I protect myself with Bitcoin. Nobody is printing my future into the dirt.

When the government does not control inflation or fix the prices of consumer goods, the system of government is corrupt. I also rely heavily on cryptocurrency or bitcoin to protect myself in such situations. Bitcoin helps me a lot to cover any unplanned expenses. However, the government often inflates inflation to maintain economic balance.

[Cookdata]

Which of these economic situations would you prefer to find yourself in?

A- Your salary is stagnant but prices fall. Where this happens, your real purchasing power has increased.  It's called constructive deflation. And even if your salary falls, but prices fall faster, you are still ahead.


B- Having your savings taxed 2%+ a year by inflation.

Drop your thoughts

I don't like the two. Money supply is a long chain that continues to increase and as that number continues to increase, there must be a general increase in price of goods and services, so I don't think there is going to be a way where price of things will remain the same in a year, there must be a change in price and stagnant salary is a bad idea for any working class person that depend on pay check.

In an ideal situation right, option A will help stabilized the economy but will there going to be growth without change, money will obviously be printed and more money into circulation means that we will be shifting from an ideal situations to real state and inflation  definitely set in, you don't expect not to have inflation when you borrowed money recklessly and then print more money than what is remaining in as foreign reserve, it will never work.

For the fun of discussion. I will go with option A still.

[dunfida]

Which of these economic situations would you prefer to find yourself in?

A- Your salary is stagnant but prices fall. Where this happens, your real purchasing power has increased.  It's called constructive deflation. And even if your salary falls, but prices fall faster, you are still ahead.


B- Having your savings taxed 2%+ a year by inflation.

Drop your thoughts

I don't like the two. Money supply is a long chain that continues to increase and as that number continues to increase, there must be a general increase in price of goods and services, so I don't think there is going to be a way where price of things will remain the same in a year, there must be a change in price and stagnant salary is a bad idea for any working class person that depend on pay check.

In an ideal situation right, option A will help stabilized the economy but will there going to be growth without change, money will obviously be printed and more money into circulation means that we will be shifting from an ideal situations to real state and inflation  definitely set in, you don't expect not to have inflation when you borrowed money recklessly and then print more money than what is remaining in as foreign reserve, it will never work.

For the fun of discussion. I will go with option A still.

A. IMPOSSIBLE
B. THIS IS CURRENTLY HAPPENING

On situation A then there's now way that purchasing power has increased or would be having that deflation. If we do tend to make out some comparison about price of goods and services back in the past
then we would be able to see that huge gap about on how far we've been able to reach out or have become. So having this kind of condition will really be that impossible even into our dreams.
We would really be wishing this one but having knowing on how economics works then there's no way that we could really be able to apply such condition.

On situation B, then this is something which is inevitably happening.Whether we do like it or not inflation is something that could happen year by year.