Evaluating inflation in the US economy is a tricky business. A simple one-item inflationary chart often does not provide a complete picture of what the economy is doing, while various fields have different levels of inflation.

Interestingly, deeper analysis has shown that inflation is most problematic in sectors where the government is in control. These sectors have shown substantial price increases, while those without centralized authority have actually seen deflation.
Government’s Fault?
A quick perusal of the statistics indicates that the government is not good for inflation. In nearly every arena with government control, consumer pricing has increased dramatically over the past 20 years.
What gives?
The issue at stake is the nature of centralization . When pricing is centralized, rather than allowing a free-market economy to control it, pricing will always increase. The reason is based on subsidization or the process of using government funds to fix prices.
Subsidies decrease competition and fluidity in markets, resulting in corporate excess. Since businesses or services are no longer forced to compete to remain alive, they are freed to increase unneeded spending, passing those costs eventually to consumers. The result is increasing prices.
Where government control is high, prices will eventually increase as well. However, where government control is low, prices will eventually decrease through the process of competition and market control.

Bitcoin or Bernie?
In a recent Fox News op-ed , erstwhile Democratic socialist Senator Bernie Sanders has called for increased government control in order to improve the lives of lower-class Americans. This, of course, is not a viable solution.

It’s time for plan ₿. pic.twitter.com/UrTmm95L30
— Lyle Pratt (@lylepratt) April 14, 2019

Simply looking at the chart above should show that the past 20 years of increasing government involvement in markets has not improved the lives of lower and middle-class Americans. In fact, quite the contrary—inflation most hurts those with the least disposable income.
The problem is foundational. Increasing centralization and control will not yield freedom or financial stability. The issue is not wages, but prices. No matter how much someone is paid per hour, if the cost of goods and services increases, their pay will never keep up with those costs.
So what is the solution, if not greater government control?
In a word, decentralization. The market must be allowed to control and dictate pricing, rather than the government. Simply focusing on wages will only further increase the already painful inflation that consumers face in the current market.
Instead, focusing on decentralizing financial control should produce stability and long-term price corrections. While difficult in the short-term, decentralization occurs with financial freedom. This, above anything else, was the vision of Satoshi Nakamoto . By moving financial transactions into a ‘trustless’ environment, Nakamoto hoped to create a self-regulating free market economy.
In the end, America needs Bitcoin (BTC) more than Bernie.
Do you think Bitcoin and other decentralized options will eventually be the solution for inflation, or has America gone too far down the rabbit hole to recover? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!

Images courtesy of Shutterstock, Twitter.
The post Is Bitcoin or Bernie the Answer for Government Inflationary Policies?  appeared first on BeInCrypto .


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here