The entire monetary scheme (economy, trade, finance) contradicts itself.

Hi! I will respond as best I can to what you have already presented; to be honest, I"m not clear on the link between your title of the "entire monetary scheme contradicting itself" and your arguments thus far; hopefully you can expand on that, as well as defining the "entire monetary scheme" and the contradiction. However, I do have a couple of arguments. I"m not going to disagree that there is something wrong with celebrities and sports stars making more than soldiers; this problem expands into various fields (including teachers). However, you seem to make the assumption (please excuse me if you aren"t) that these people who make a lot of money (sports stars and celebrities included) haven"t worked for their money; this is invalid. While they certainly may make more than most of us for what appears to many to be an easy job, they are working for their pay, regardless of whether we feel they deserve it. It is also important to consider that many people who make such large salaries pay the salaries of many members of the economy to keep their businesses running. One of the things you have to realize about inflation is that a lot of people actually WANT it. What inflation essentially does is adjust the dynamics of who wins and loses within the economy. The US federal government (one of the world"s largest debtors) itself wants to increase inflation, if at controlled levels, because inflation and negative real interest aids it in accomplishing its promises to voters. Retailers want inflation because they can then increase prices for goods; employers want inflation because it reduces the actual cost of wages paid. In fact, the New York Times published the following sentences, which actually tout inflation: "There is growing concern inside and outside the Fed that inflation is not rising fast enough. Some economists say more inflation is just what the American economy needs to escape from a half-decade of sluggish growth and high unemployment...Janet Yellen has long argued that a little inflation is particularly valuable when the economy is weak. Rising prices help companies increase profits; rising wages help borrowers repay debts. Inflation also encourages people and businesses to borrow money and spend it more quickly. The school board in Anchorage, Alaska, for example, is counting on inflation to keep a lid on teachers' wages. Retailers including Costco and Wal-Mart are hoping for higher inflation to increase profits. The federal government expects inflation to ease the burden of its debts." Regardless of the truth of whether controlled inflation will actually aid the economy in the long run, it is undeniable that many members of our economy want and actively strive for inflation. It is true that the members of the lower and middle classes often suffer the most from inflation; this is because during inflation, those whose wealth is tied directly to their labor and wages become poorer, often by a lot. On the other hand, those whose wealth is tied to their asset base (upper and middle class members, typically) usually make vast profits. One of the major problems with inflation is that it benefits debtors at the expense of creditors. Also, people hoarding money doesn"t cause inflation; when individuals reduce spending in an attempt to increase their overall monetary holdings, it causes prices to fall. If we think about this, if a large group of people all want to save money and as such reduce their overall spending, then they will collectively be hurting each other. This is because their collective spending is equal to their collective income. Thus, the recipients of their money (businesses) will see a fall in spending, and react by cutting prices (or by laying off workers). This is not going to increase or decrease the net value of the dollar, simply the amount of currency in circulation. A net reduction in spending can result in a recession, but only in situations where sellers don"t react quickly enough by cutting prices. In terms of it being the "bottom class that"s holding everything up," I have to disagree on several points. First, if we are going to blame somebody for inflation and rising costs of living, the lower class has as much blame as anyone. The amount of borrowing, debt, and dependency on the government through welfare that can be seen in the lower class contributes as much to the inherent problem of inflation as anything. Regardless of what causes this, the American culture of borrowing leads to inflation. Granted, as the lower class takes the hardest hit from inflation, this may simply be a circle of debt that won"t be broken save an economic miracle. However, I don"t believe that we can credit the lower class with "holding everything up"; you would need significantly expanded arguments with convincing arguments to persuade me of that stance. Thus far I believe the biggest obstacle to this debate is a lack of a definition for the contradiction you reference in your title. Hopefully you can expand on this in your response.