“通货紧缩”是一个更难定义的概念。保尔森只是说“出现了通货紧缩，因为尽管销售价格通胀仍处于较低水平，企业再也无法跟上成本降低和/或效率提升的步伐。” Luskin和我都对这个答案有困难，因为它似乎只是一个解释。拉斯金的结论是，通货紧缩实际上是由“该国中央银行对一个国家货币单位的重估”造成的。从本质上讲，这确实是我们的清单中的因素1“货币供应量下降”。因此，“通货紧缩”是货币供应量相对下降造成的，“良好的通货紧缩”是由货物供应量的相对增加引起的。这些定义本质上是有缺陷的，因为通货紧缩是由相对变化引起的。如果一年的货物供应增加10％，而那一年的货币供应量增加3％导致通货紧缩，这是“良好的通货紧缩”还是“通货紧缩”？由于货物供应增加，我们有“良好的通货紧缩”，但由于中央银行没有足够快地增加货币供应量，我们也应该“通货紧缩”。询问“货物”或“钱”是否引起通货紧缩就像问“当你拍手时，左手或右手是否对声音负责？”。说“货物增长太快”或“货币增长太慢”本来就是说同样的事情，因为我们将货物与货币进行比较，所以“良好的通货紧缩”和“通货紧缩”这些条款可能应该退休。将通货紧缩视为一种疾病往往会在经济学家之间达成一致。 Luskin说，通货紧缩的真正问题在于它会导致商业关系出现问题：“如果您是借款人，那么您在合同中承诺提供代表越来越多购买力的贷款 – 同时您购买的资产也是如此开始时的贷款是名义价格的下降。如果你是贷方，你的借款人可能会在这种情况下拖欠你的贷款。
澳大利亚纽卡斯尔大学经济论文代写：通货紧缩
“deflation” is a more difficult concept to define. Paulson just said “there has been deflation, because despite the fact that sales price inflation is still at a low level, companies can no longer keep up with the pace of cost reduction and / or efficiency improvement.” Luskin and I have difficulty with this answer because It seems to be just an explanation. Ruskin’s conclusion is that deflation is actually caused by “a revaluation of a country’s currency unit by the central bank of the country”. In essence, this is indeed the factor 1 in our list, “the decline in money supply”. Therefore, “deflation” is caused by a relative decline in the money supply. “Good deflation” is caused by the relative increase in the supply of goods. These definitions are inherently flawed because deflation is caused by relative changes. If the supply of goods increases by 10% a year, and the 3% increase in the money supply that year leads to deflation, is this “good deflation” or “deflation”? We have “good deflation” due to the increase in the supply of goods, but since the central bank does not increase the money supply fast enough, we should also “defease”. Asking whether “goods” or “money” causes deflation is like asking “When you clap your hands, is the left or right hand responsible for the sound?”. Saying “goods grow too fast” or “money growth is too slow” is the same thing, because we compare goods to currency, so the terms “good deflation” and “deflation” may retire. Treating deflation as a disease often leads to agreement among economists. Luskin said that the real problem with deflation is that it can cause problems in business relationships: “If you are a borrower, you promise to provide a loan that represents more and more purchasing power in the contract – and the assets you buy are also like this. A loan is a decline in nominal prices. If you are a lender, your borrower may default on your loan in this situation.”