By Jeremiah Josey, Chairman of MECi Group International

Governments borrow money today and leave the bill to someone else. Inflation is how they shrink that bill in real terms: the debt remains on the books, but the money used to repay it buys less. That is not fiscal competence. It is a hidden tax on savers, workers and future taxpayers.

Japan may be the clearest test yet of whether a government can use sustained inflation to grind down a crushing debt burden without destroying the productive economy beneath it.

At today’s 6.8 per cent, Japan’s producer-price inflation is still a powerful rate of monetary erosion. Hold price inflation near that level and the purchasing power of a fixed yen debt is cut in half in roughly ten years. After about twenty years, only a quarter of its original purchasing power remains.

Apply that same compounding to a debt burden of roughly 205 per cent of GDP, assuming the nominal debt stock does not grow: it falls towards 100 per cent in about eleven years and 50 per cent in about twenty-two. That is the scale of the opportunity for a government willing to let inflation do the work.

Call it debt management. Call it monetary policy. To the saver whose cash and fixed income buy less every year, it is theft by dilution. A hidden, unspoken tax on future generations.

A small group of government officials borrows money they do not have, spends it now, and leaves the consequences to people who had no vote in the transaction—their children. The bill arrives through higher prices and diminished purchasing power, not as a line item labelled “tax”. That makes it easier to impose, not less real.

In The Ascent of Money, Niall Ferguson shows exactly how inflation punishes the people who lend to governments. Writing about Britain after the First World War, he says investors who held government war loans “would have suffered inflation-adjusted losses of 46 per cent by 1920”. In Germany, holders of securities lost everything by 1923. The state can repay its debt in full on paper while handing back money worth far less. The bond is honoured; the creditor is stripped of purchasing power. That is the mechanism Japan is putting to the test: reduce the real burden of public debt by making the yen—and the claims held by savers—worthless.

China learned the dangers of paper money through centuries of experiments. The Song (1023–1279 AD), Yuan (1310–1368 AD), and Ming (1375–1455 AD)* governments issued fiat currencies using mulberry bark, bamboo, hemp, or wheat straw. Repeated over-issuance caused depreciation, loss of confidence, and at least 20 million deaths at each collapse—a total of at least 80 million people. People’s savings were wiped out, leaving them stranded, starving, and defenseless. Under the Song, inflation left the government without money to defend itself against the Mongols. Under the Yuan, military expansion drove money creation, and inflation surged as the dynasty collapsed. Under the Ming, the currency’s value fell to zero by 1455; famine, epidemics, rebellion, and conquest followed 94 years later. The lesson was clear: governments that use the printing press to escape fiscal limits can wreck the value of the money people rely on.

* fiat period, not dynasty.

Fast-forward to today: the massive fiat-financed assistance that began in 1948 helped build the foundation for Japan to become home to one of the strongest manufacturing bases on Earth. Japan has mastered speed, quality, and price. Toyota, the world’s No. 1 carmaker, is a global benchmark. Hitachi represents the kind of industrial and nulcear engineering depth that cannot be manufactured by monetary policy. That productive base makes Japan a more credible test case than a state with weak institutions and little capacity to produce tradable goods.

From an Austrian economics perspective, cash flow is king. Real products and services reflect reality; fiscal paper games do not. Such games shift wealth away from savers, encourage borrowing, and make ordinary people more dependent on debt. Those at the top may have assets that rise with inflation. Most households do not have that advantage.

The arithmetic says that Japan’s debt can be inflated down. But who pays for the reduction—and can Japan’s social cohesion and productive economy can survive the transfer.

This will take years, perhaps decades. Nation states can wait that long. So can families and organisations thinking beyond the next quarter: about their children, their communities and their legacy.

Japan is a remarkable society, with a depth of organisation and industrial discipline few countries can copy. Can the same strategy work in a less organised country?

Is Japan proving that inflation can rescue a state—or showing how governments make the public pay for their own fiscal failures? Where do you stand?

Links

LinkedIn

Jeremiah’s Blog