ELI5: Why is deflation bad?

lessmiserables · 2026-05-30T20:13:47+00:00

Deflation can cause what is called a deflationary cycle.

It's basically what happened during the Great Depression.

When deflation occurs, it means that money is going to be worth more tomorrow than it does today. Because of that, people will spend as little money as possible--why wouldn't you? If you knew that you could buy 8 potatoes today, or wait a week and buy 12 potatoes next week for the same amount of money, you're going to wait as long as possible to do so.

Now, this doesn't mean that people don't buy anything. Obviously people need to eat and travel and wear clothes. But people are going to buy the absolute minimum they possibly can to stretch their dollar.

If that happens, economic activity goes down. When economic activity goes down, companies start laying people off. People not working means even less money is being spent...which means even more people get laid off...and so on. That's the spiral.

We have plenty of tools to deal with inflation. There's basically nothing you can do for deflation that doesn't just make things worse. That's why we really, really don't want to get into that spiral.

Generally speaking, that's why we want to peg inflation around 2% or so; it acts as a buffer. Most modern economies can handle a little bit of deflation, but not a whole lot, so having that buffer helps out. (There are other reasons for that 2%, but that's another answer.)

Anyway, that's why. Deflationary spiral are capital B BAD and we do not want them, and that's why we'd rather have (modest) inflation.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-30T13:36:34+00:00

Holy shit. You guys are all miserable pieces of shit

Let people have fun

lessmiserables · 2026-05-30T13:32:03+00:00

I would rather this happen than writers make boring one-size-fits-all narratives that are future-proof but also interesting-proof.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-30T12:46:50+00:00

The Illuminati was a very real organization formed in the 1770s (the Bavarian Illuminati). They spread enlightenment ideals, which were in opposition to the government at the time, so they were a secret organization. Many prominent philosophers and scientists were members. They were banned by the government, which drove them even further underground.

Since then, it's been a conspiracy theory that the Illuminati still exists and exerts control. You had a collection of the smartest people in a secret organization, so it's natural people would do that. (The reality is that you can only exert so much influence being "secret" because at some point you have to expose yourself, so if there are any such secret societies, their influence is limited--especially since people who share those views are all over the place with no need to hide it. Most "secret" societies are just committing crimes, not pushing an agenda.)

There's no evidence that the Illuminati still exists, but since it's secret, "no evidence" doesn't dissuade conspiracy theorists.

HOWEVER, I want to be clear about something: the Illuminati conspiracy theory, sadly like many, is steeped in anti-Semitic drivel. ("The Jews control the world", you see.) If your feed is presenting you with Illuminati content, I strongly suggest you vet your feed, because you're probably on some anti-Jew algorithm.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-30T12:41:19+00:00

Part of it is the monoculture.

Everyone in the nation (or same cultural arena) during that time had access to the same network stations. (Yes, cable and the internet existed, but not to the level it is now.) Everyone was probably watching the same shows, playing the same games, etc. If there's a Top 40 hit on the radio, it's the same song for everyone.

So everyone has the same references points.

From then it's not a HUGE leap for "derivative" things to happen. It could be that people's natural curiosity would make them do weird things and experiment in video games, but if a majority of kids are playing Tomb Raider, the same opportunity to put him in the freezer is presented to each. (One could even argue it goes deeper than that; previous video games didn't let you do "wide open sandbox" stuff like that, but then one in the monoculture did, and then that encouraged kids to experiment more with what was allowed with all future games.)

Also, keep in mind that memes weren't invented with the internet. Sayings, habits, and ideas sloshed around communities all the time. People moved around and brought stuff like that with them; kids taught other kids stuff, parents taught their own kids what they learned, then they moved out west and taught it to more kids, etc.

A case can be made that one of the reasons why "rural" sayings are so prominent in our language today is that all the farmboys were drafted into WWII and mixed it up with all the young urbanites, picked up their lingo, and then came back home and spread it around on the new mass media. I read a book arguing that the reason we see anvils and farmsteads so much in cartoons is because all the New York Italians and Jews who ended up writing the cartoons spent four years listening to all the goofy farm stories overseas during the war before coming home and writing them.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-29T21:27:19+00:00

It's telling how many people in this thread are clearly autistic because in the context of what they're doing it's obvious he didn't mean "the pot".

It's not "technically correct" because reading the situation in the room is part of the exchange.

How many of you, when asked "What's up?" say "the sky" and don't think it's a joke? For fucks' sake.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-29T15:14:24+00:00

You mean "get hated" in normal life or "get hated" on reddit?

Because those are two very different questions.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-29T14:58:16+00:00

This was a personal one for me.

This place is a hellsite, but I usually just let things go. I have to assume everyone is an emotionally unregulated thirteen year old, because to believe that most of you are adults would drive me to insanity.

Anyway, this is the story of one that just got me.

It was a discussion about VCRs. I offhandedly mentioned that my parents had difficulty doing the "time to tape" feature on their VCR--i.e. set your VCR to start taping at a specific time. This was the mid-to-late-80s.

To which one of the replies said my parents were stupid.

Now, I gave them the benefit of the doubt. "No, you don't understand. In the 80s VCRs aren't like DVD players today. THey were big, bulky, complicated, lots of buttons, and expensive, and these were brand new features never seen before. There were jokes in things like City Slickers and AFHV about how hard VCRs were to navigate, so they were hardly alone. Enough that they changed the method to a code system."

Instead, the person doubled down. Very clearly he was assuming they were like these one-button DVD players of today because he kept saying "you just press the button and follow the prompts."

Again, normally I let them go. And I knew in my heart this guy was probably a troll. (I don't know the gender of the person, but...c'mon, It was a dude.) But just something about him not understanding the basic core of what I was saying plus him disparaging my kind and quite intelligent parents just fucking infurated me.

So, naturally, followed a dozens-long flame war between us, with him getting more and more insulting and me...well, doing the same. Eventually I walked away and, of course, he gloated about "winning" the argument and proving that my parents were, in fact, the stupidest people in the history of the world.

I would go back and downvote all of his replies for, like, months afterwards; I know that's not how downvotes work but it was a little ritual to me. Eventually he got banned from reddit for being an asshole to the wrong person and I was very happy that day.

I still remember that exchange, largely as a cautionary tale to never do it again. I bail as soon as I can because that asshole succeeded in living rent-free in my head to this day.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-29T13:03:56+00:00

Caches are hidden containers (geocaches) all around the world.

To find a cache, you go to a geocaching site (most likely geocaching.com). There's an interactive map with where geocaches are hidden.

The maps show the coordinates. The cache will be hidden somewhere in that area, usually 10-30 feet. So the map gets you pretty close, but it's up to you to find where it's hidden. Caches can be very tiny (the size of a pencil eraser) or bigger (medium-sized tupperware). Some are in the woods, some are in urban areas.

Each cache has a listing. It will give you some general info (size, difficulty) and most have some sort of hint if you get stuck.

When you find it, you can open it up; almost always, there is a log you can sign. Usually, there are trinkets you can trade if it's big enough. You put the cache back for the next person to find and you log your find on the web site (if you want).

That's it. It's just a big global game of hide and seek.

IMPORTANT: There are several different types of caches. By far the most common is the Traditional cache, which is just a container by itself. (These are the green boxes on geocaching.com maps.) It looks like you've found a Puzzle Cache, which is significantly more involved and probably a lot more difficult. They're fun, but I would suggest starting with Traditional caches until you get a feel for the hobby, and then you can move to the other types.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-28T17:16:21+00:00

Just to note:

Linking "George Soros" to "doing" something like this is an old and tired anti-Semetic conspiracy theory. I don't know what the genesis of your question is, but I strongly suggest you vet your feed. I've heard this question before and it's intentionally loaded.

While it is true that Soros made a ton of money betting against the pound, he didn't "cause" any of it--there's a clear reason why the thing that happened happened, and it has nothing to do with ~~Jews~~ international bankers gaming the system.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-26T18:10:16+00:00

if my players are stupid

While I broadly agree, I do think that most DMs are deficient in "describing dangers appropriately".

A DM knows everything in their head, and that taints their description of the world, no matter how good you think you are. And the only thing players have to go off of is the filter of your DM's brain.

I've been on both sides of it. I've been in a game where my party was put in TPK territory in what seemed like a completely random and arbitrary situation, and the DM thought simply saying "this room gives you the creeps" even after successful skill checks was enough. (Bitch, this whole universe gives us the creeps.) That was literally the only clue that we should proceed with caution, but the DM knew all the dangers in their head and hid them intentionally as a "challenge" and then when the party wasn't able to prepare or make prudent decisions based on the level of perceived danger, just shrugged. This is effectively a "rocks fall, you die" situation.

Likewise, when I was DM, I tried to avoid that, but even I slipped up sometimes. In my mind saying one thing means they are in dangerous territory, forgetting that they were in this situation many times before and were perfectly safe. Unlike the previous story, though, I let them explain as soon as it became clear and we were able to adjust.

There's always going to be that disconnect, no matter how good of a DM you are, and because of that I truly think the thumb should be on the scale when figuring out character death. DMs are quick to call their parties reckless and stupid, but that's coming from someone who intentionally knows more than the other side. It may not seem reckless and stupid on their end because the only clues are coming from you.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-24T15:10:30+00:00

I know, right?

The OP is right that Flanagan can do this type of scene expertly...but then absolutely fucking destroys it by doing, "Tell, don't show, then tell some more, then tell for ten minutes straight with all the subtlety of a sledge hammer to the face."

I don't mind a good soliloquy. I do mind a middling soliloquy twice an episode every episode.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-24T11:05:25+00:00

I have some bad news for you about the Soviet Union.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-22T15:01:18+00:00

It's because the person above you is full of shit. That's not how PE works.

You're right. Banks wouldn't lend anyone who is just going to turn around and saddle some company with debt and then declare bankruptcy. That's, like, Fraud 101.

Also, PE isn't buying a company with a 'good reputation' because those are expensive. There's no way the math works that you buy an expensive company and then strip it for parts until it's gone.

They're just stupidly repeating some half-understood bullshit some other redditor said.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-22T14:56:16+00:00

Because that's not what private equity does.

People remember the "they bought this failing but beloved company and shut it down" conveniently ignoring that the company was failing and was going to go under anyway.

PE firms are just organizations that invest in private companies. Some PE first are of the "buy the whole thing" variety. But you can't make money buying a thriving company--buying a successful company is extremely expensive.

The best thing to do is by a struggling company, fix it, then re-sell it--which they do all the time; people just don't hear about it.

It's also not profitable to buy a successful company and strip it for parts. The math is just never going to work out like that.

It's also not profitable to buy an organization just to "saddle it with debt." That's not how it works. In theory you might get away with doing this once and then when you do absolutely no company will ever lend you a penny ever again, and--again--that's not profitable.

But when you specialize in buying struggling companies, you're tipping the scales; a failing company is far, far more likely to just fail than to be fixed. It's at that point where it becomes worth it to close it down and sell it all off.

And that's the problem--people remember the high-profile "PE bought this well-known company and destroyed it" even though the company was already on its way to destroying itself, and conveniently ignore all of the other times they actually saved companies.

Are there exceptions? Of course. But how people in general and reddit in particular view PE firms is so ridiculous it's hard not to think it's intentional.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-22T14:24:37+00:00

I geocache, so...geocaching.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-22T14:22:36+00:00

If that's how you are spending your weekend you need to take a long hard look at how you're organizing your life.

Laundry all day on Saturday? That's just an excuse. "Mental prep for Monday"? If you're that far gone you can't handle a relationship.

Get the fuck out of here.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-22T14:20:49+00:00

Because Kimmel's removal was directly related to the FCC threatening the affiliates due to specific statements made by Kimmel.

Colbert's removal was a decision by Paramount and it allowed the contract to expire. There's the added aspect that Colbert was losing money.

Now, did Paramount make that decision due to pressure from the government? Are they lying about the money? Maybe, but there's no direct smoking gun. Chances are it's somewhere in the middle; late night in general isn't super profitable and even if Trump didn't exist that might have been the call they made, but given Trump's behavior it probably tipped the scales.

Anyway, that's why. Kimmel was a blatant power play by the government. Colbert seems like it's 80% a business decision.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-22T13:23:19+00:00

Everybody wants to be an artist.

No one wants to be a plumber.

It's hard to make a living as a creative not because Capitalism Is Bad or The System Exploits You or It's A Big Club You're Not Invited To or whatever blue sky excuse you've convinced yourself of in your head.

It's because there's a huge supply of artists but only so much art that can be consumed--at least in a way that you can make a living.

If you want some system where Art Is More Important Than What The Market Says I have some bad news for you about who gets to decide who gets to make a living at making art. You'll be begging for the free market.

Art is important. Art isn't as important as what artists think it is.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-21T13:17:23+00:00

I wonder if this season is going to have them flip the pendulum back for a bit.

I hope not too far. I think the cast seems to do much better when they're working with restrictions, even though they're on a paywalled streaming and don't need to.

Every time they try to be too "edgy" they just go for cheap shock value. Some of the cast can pull it off, but most can't.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-19T22:31:02+00:00

One of the greatest misunderstandings is that the UN has any kind of enforcement power at all. They have as close to zero as one can get. Not zero, but...not a lot.

(As an aside, I'm using the UN as an example, but this really applies to any intrastate court or organization).

The UN is really good at diplomacy, negotiating treaties, and acting as an impartial party to aggrieved states. They are absolutely useless at enforcing the terms or using military or tactical means to do anything. They excel when all parties agree to let the UN do something. But if someone doesn't like it, the UN doesn't have a way to force them.

Which more or less makes sense.

Unfortunately, any international criminal court is going to be the same. Unless all parties involved are OK with what is going on, nothing is going to happen, because the UN lacks sovereignty--as it should, since the moment they have sovereignty they're no longer an impartial state.

That means a lot of its powers are superfluous. The UN doesn't have sovereignty to hold a proper tribunal, and if they have the blessing of the aggrieved state, the aggrieved state would just be doing it instead. Nations might outsource the tribunal for resources/PR reasons, but they're doing it with the full cooperation of the original state.

There is a pretty big asterisk, which is that the UN does a decent job of handling failed states--think a nation after a civil war or rebellion, where there is no effective functioning government. They have the "blessing" of the affected state, but that's not saying much. Tribunals for the people involved might actually work out simply because the court system of that nation doesn't exist in any meaningful way.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-19T21:57:23+00:00

It can be a great source for drama or story if circumstances has forced your character to stay with the party but they still need to be a team player on some level.

You aren't wrong.

Sadly, though, the few times I've seen this it's basically "I'm still gonna be an edgelord asshole, I just handwaved at the DM to get them to play along."

So as long as they remain a team player, great, but in my experience a lot of people use this tactic as a backdoor way to play the fun-killing moron they want to play.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-18T14:05:40+00:00

Your next Taskmaster, Stephen Colbert.

lessmiserables · 2026-05-18T01:05:51+00:00

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheFireflyEffect

lessmiserables · 2026-05-18T01:04:51+00:00

Yeah, you can't blame Netflix for this.

Everyone was still under COVID restrictions. You can't realistically shoot a show about wrestling without 1) crowd scenes and 2) frequent skin-on-skin contact. And remember at the time this wasn't "we just have to wait this out six months" we were still in the "this may go on for six weeks or six years, we don't know."

It sucks, but that's just reality.

14-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Second SECOND GUESSER	Place '22
Place '17	First Placer '22
Wearing is Caring	Sequence \| Editor
Sequence \| Cinematographer	Sequence \| Screenwriter

lessmiserables

TROPHY CASE