this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2025
842 points (98.8% liked)
pics
19745 readers
1328 users here now
Rules:
1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer
2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.
3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.
4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.
5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.
Photo of the Week Rule(s):
1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.
2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Can you explain it to me because I'd love to know more. My base assumption is if the US had a spike in food prices would they not dramatically increase interest rates, until food prices deflated?
Rising rates would then drop their current asset bubble due to a contraction in money supply. Hence it could be seen not to be as much a tax as it would be a large amount of pain for existing asset holders who hold nominally valued assets, which would mainly be the rich?
Another assumption I'd make is higher inflation would also lead to a lower unemployment and greater wage pressure, due to the phillips curve?
I'm no economician, but 1. this price hike has nothing to do with inflation, and 2. Interest rates aren't used to bring prices down, they're used to bring inflation down.
The price hike causes inflation, as the tariff is passed on to consumers. Interest rates control the growth in the money supply, with less physical money available the velocity of money slows and prices fall, which causes deflation.