Original sentence: However, modern economists have struggled to deduce such a drastically negative level of “misery” from inflation using the mechanisms of inflation’s negative impact described above.In fact, many economists believe that the prejudice against moderate inflation in the public is an association effect, in which the public simply remember that difficult economic conditions are correlated with periods of high inflation.In opposition to the deadweight loss argument against the redistributive nature of inflation it has been argued that (because capital gains taxes are on nominal amounts) it acts as an important “wealth tax”, and that low inflation societies will tend to see wealth condensation.In the 1970s a “misery index” was proposed which equated economic unhappiness as a weighted sum of inflation and unemployment.In this view, a moderate level of inflation is a relatively insignificant economic problem, which has been blown out of proportion by the fight against stagflation (possibly encouraged by monetarist ideology).Inflation, however, above relatively low levels is generally considered as having increasingly negative effects on the economy.Many economists have advocated higher rates of inflation (especially for Japan) as a solution to recession.Surveys on inflation consistently show a divergence of opinion between mainstream economists and the public on the damage caused by moderate inflation: While the public continue to treat the harm as severe, most monetary economists tend to see it as slight, with many saying it does no harm at all.This formula: misery = inflation % + unemployment % implied that the general population would be as unhappy about a 1% rise in monetary inflation as they would by a 1% increase in unemployment
Edited sentence: Inflation, however, above these relatively low amounts is recognized as having increasingly negative effects on the economy