Tell me, what exactly is bad about an "inelastic" currency?
An "inelastic" currency just means one outside of the control of government agencies, i.e, in the control of the free market. Its ridiculous to think that by pumping more currency into existence you're enriching people. That's just dumb. If you want "more" money, represent your money in terms of Satoshis rather than Bitcoins.
In short, deflating currency ("represent your money in terms of Satoshis rather than Bitcoins") would be hindrance to a growing economy. There will be no incentive for producers to expand production (or even keep it at the same level) since there is a time lag between production (including all steps up to an end-product) and actual disposal of goods through stores - you would buy high and sell low
Expanded production makes people richer and comes first, money as such is only a utility, it's secondary to production
This is a completely noob theory for ridiculously obvious reasons.
Consider a scenario in which everybody receives a proportionally equal amount of an inflating money supply. What should be fairly obvious is that this doesn't matter, since you could achieve the same thing by just representing money first in Bitcoins, then in mBTC, then in satoshis, etc...
So, unless you for some reason think the situation above matters, you are proposing a system in which people DON'T receive a proportionally equal share of the "new inflated money." In other words, you seem to be saying that by having a fundamentally
unequal system, which is by definition
unfair, the economic output would be somehow greater.
An economy doesn't "grow" just because money is being inflated and thus its easy to say "more" money is changing hands and products are worth "more" and our GDP is worth "more." Incentivising expanding production, simply as a store of value, is in fact counterproductive, since it forces people to produce simply to maintain their original wealth-level and thus exceed what would normally be the optimum amount to produce. This means that excess goods are being produced, and in turn that excess real resources are being burned, for no real reason whatsoever.
True wealth is the value of natural resources, and the value of human labour. When you artificially drive up the future value of these resources, you force continued consumption of such resources
now, rather than later, when you'll have to pay more for it. This artificial skew causes market inefficiencies that should be fairly obvious. It makes employers not want us to wait and get educated, but work
now. It makes consumers not want to save, but spend
now. It makes producers not make what the market actually demands, but constantly over-produce, destroying real natural resources, in the hope that people in the FUTURE will hopefully want his product, when he can charge more for it. Human nature already drives us to want things
now, there needs to be no further economic incentive to highlight such wasteful tendencies in humanity. If anything, the opposite needs to be encouraged.
