Iosif, I appreciate your strong opinions about inflation. I'm sure Lenin would be proud [1]. However, you're too into the politics of it. We in HN should try to do some rational armchair economics, try to see the inflation/deflation debate as about tradeoffs, not principles of morality. "Government steals through insidious inflation!". "Rent seekers fatten when deflation happens!". Yeah, very useful.

First, the Keynesian/Monetarist Block does emphatically not claim that inflation is good, since last time I checked ethics was not a sub-field of economics. Inflation is a tool.

Second, deflation really is a big deal. Unless you're ready to argue that debt-deflation does not exist. Please spare us from such "deep" arguments such as found on the Bitcoin Wiki [2].

Third, the main problem of Bitcoin is not that it is deflationary, because it's not. Well, it is now, but not necessarily forever. The problem is that it imposes, through its fixed supply, a senseless corset on economic growth. It's neither central planning, which would have at least the possibility of being a somewhat enlightened planning, nor a rigorous market mechanism, that responds to shocks on the economy. It's just fixed because Satoshi said so. This lack of rigor in economic thought is what's really problematic in Bitcoin.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflationism#Political_debate

[2] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Deflationary_spiral . A sample from the well of deepness: "The key difference is that people don't foresee a fixed cost (unit amount) that they must pay with Bitcoin". Yes, they do, or will when lending in Bitcoins begins. It's called the principal. You should laugh now.