駁斥20%通脹基本分析！在支持基本分析之前進行事實核查是非常重要的，這些基本分析有極其荒謬的聲稱！

DD 👨‍🔬

I've seen multiple posts (Post 1and Post 2) rise to the top this weekend regarding true inflation estimated to 19-20% which I am here to explain why this is wildly incorrect. TADR: The math to arrive at the 19-20% true inflation is wrong. OP from Post 1 incorrectly used current velocity of M2 rather than the growth (rate of change) in the velocity of M2. OP from Post 2 straight up used the wrong equation. The equation he used was for nominal GDP, and NOT inflation.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o2dw45/thoughts_on_the_feds_balance_sheet_after _todays/ When asked about the source of the equation for the first post, OP links us to here: https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_macroeconomics-theory-through-applications/s15-01-the- quantity-theory-of-money.html Long-Run Inflation We now use the quantity equation to provide us with a theory of long-run inflation. To do so, we use the rules of growth rates. One of these rules is as follows: if you have two variables, x and y, then the growth rate of the product (x × y) is the sum of the growth rate of x and the growth rate of y. We can apply this to the quantity equation: money supply × velocity of money = price level × real GDP. The left side of this equation is the product of two variables, the money supply and the velocity of money. The right side is likewise the product of two variables. So we obtain growth rate of the money supply + growth rate of the velocity of money = inflation rate + growth rate of output. We have used the fact that the growth rate of the price level is, by definition, the inflation rate. The equation is growth rate of the money supply + growth rate of the velocity of money = inflation rate + growth rate of output. Let growth rate of the money supply be M, growth rate of the velocity of money be P, inflation rate be I, and growth rate of output (growth in GDP) be Q. Rearranging for I, we get: I = M + P - Q From OP's news article source on projected M2 growth, M = 25%, however OP mistakenly used the

static Q1 2021 velocity of money instead of the growth rate of the velocity of money. Unless someone can find a reliable article on velocity of M2 forecast, I will use the growth from the past year which would be the % change from Q1 2020 to Q1 2021 which is -18.6%, NOT 1.122%. From OP's news article source on projected GDP growth, Q = 6.5% Now plugging everything back into the equation: I = 25% + (-18.6%) - 6.5% = -0.1% I know this result is kind of odd as surely inflation should not be this low, but just by using the sources for the equations provided by OP, this is the correct conclusion.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o42ftz/theres_been_a_lot_of_talk_about_inflation_w hat/ I'm fairly certain OP wrote this DD based on the DD from post 1 but when asked about the source of their equation, OP provides us with a new link (it's in edit 2 of OP's post): https://thismatter.com/money/banking/money-growth-money-velocity-inflation.htm

Nominal GDP = Quantity of Money × Velocity of Money But yet, the equation OP used in their DD is: What follows is a sort of explainer into the basics of inflation. Are you ready? Here we go: Inflation= (money supply) * (money velocity). ...which as you can see is completely different from the equation of his source. Nominal GDP = Quantity of Money (aka money supply) * Velocity of Money (aka money velocity) NOMINAL GDP DOES NOT EQUAL INFLATION If we look deeper in OP's source, it actually shows the correct equation to find inflation: If money velocity is constant, then: Money Growth = Real GDP Growth + Inflation or, rearranged: Inflation = Money Growth – Real GDP Growth or Inflation = ΔP = ΔM – ΔY The key phrase here is if money velocity is constant which we know is not. Now if we include the growth of money velocity, we end up with the equation from the source of post 1's OP. growth rate of the money supply + growth rate of the velocity of money = inflation rate + growth rate of output. Again, rearranged for inflation rate: Inflation rate = Money Growth + Money Velocity Growth – Real GDP Growth which is the same equation as above (I = M + P - Q)

I understand we wants our tits jacked but it's important to fact check DDs, especially if they contain hugely absurd claims. I know many apes might upvote posts without checking the math for themselves especially if OP makes these huge claims sound convincing. I find it ironic how OP from Post 2 titles his DD. Theres been a lot of talk about inflation. What you don't realise is that you can calculate it and view it on Trading View. Do it for yourself and see. The Math Doesn't Lie. 20% + inflation this year. but is incapable of explaining his numbers when challenged in the comments (turns out the math DOES lie when done incorrectly). I do believe both OP's wrote their DDs in good faith but again, it is crucial that DDs (especially ones that reach the top) have been reviewed and fact checked to avoid spreading misinformation whether or not they please Jacques Tits, especially if OPs are non-receptive when clearly debunked or given valid criticism. Also, I think we really need a DEBUNKED (or Counter-DD) flair which will encourage wrinkled apes to debunk or atleast challenge top DDs ultimately increasing their reliability and quality. 🚀🚀🚀 Edit: For those asking if the -0.1% inflation is accurate based on this equation, I would be very skeptical. Personally, I don't think this equation is an accurate way to find inflation because although Q2 2021 M2V data has yet to be released, if we were to use the growth of M2V from Q2 2020 to Q2 2021 (variable P) I am quite confident P would be much closer to 0% because there was a very steep drop in M2V from

Q1 and Q2 of 2020.