Contradicting definitions

Milton Friedman famously said that “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it is and can be produced only by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output.” The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines inflation as “a continuing rise in the general price level usually attributed to an increase in the volume of money and credit relative to available goods and services.” Here, we can see that inflation is a relative term. It compares the value of goods and services to money.

A poster is trying to sort out the definition of inflation. Then he sorts is out with this:

There’s no surer way to scare a macroeconomist than to utter the word “deflation.” This euphemism for falling prices conjures up thoughts of economic depression, breadlines, unemployment, and poverty. Thus, deflation must be avoided at all cost it is thought. This fear has apparently short-circuited the critical thinking mechanism of some very bright people. None seem to realize that, by our modern definition, deflation is the hallmark of prosperity and progress. 

Taking this route simple confuses. Start with Milt.  Let us call direct inflation a partial default.  let us call debt based price hikes double entry accounting money, which attempts to be price neutral in the long term.

Then on to the second paragraph.  That makes productivity gains price neutral. The redefinttions fix thing up.  Productivity increases are no deflationary because the currency risk at the currency banker is bound, and gains or losses eventually passed to consumers and producers, creating price neutrality to within a error term.

Use sandbox theory. Construct the currency banker, see how that works. Then add government and the right to coin. We get the same results, the longer term just becomes 50 years, except we do not wit that long and will do a currency risk adjustment instead.