So, sure, if you want to rephrase and lament that people are unable to afford stuff because of the recent drop in supply (or increase in demand) for the products they want, that would be logically consistent. But it would be factually wrong, as in fact in aggregate[1] world GDP is doing pretty well right now.
[1] As above, specific products and markets are always moving. Something is always more expensive than it should be and there's always a glut in something else. People were complaining about eggs last week, IIRC.
The mean purchase power has a very small impact on society.
And yes, the disruption tends to pass after the inflation goes away. But none of that makes the argument specious.
Yes, and it has a different temporal behavior from the impact on the purchase power. The same person can be affected by both.
As a rule, inflation infuriates people because almost everyone jut wakes up some day and discover they are much poorer than they used to be. You can't dismiss this by pointing that their net-worth improved. (But yes, the net-worth of a lot of people improves.)
I'll certainly grant this, not the least because they get terrible information about it from media and online sources.
> almost everyone jut wakes up some day and discover they are much poorer than they used to be
Like this. This is not true. This is a lie. You need to stop saying this. People are "much poorer" post-inflation only in the sense that they were "much richer" post-pandemic, due to the huge savings boom. If you aren't willing to look at the latter, then you're not doing the analysis correctly.
At most, "some" people are "much poorer" due to asymmetric effects. But you're just wrong here if you try to extend that to "almost everyone". Please stop.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cantillon#Monetary_the...