Let's kick the can.
Aluminum mining production becomes more profitable because, in deflation, the manufacturing energy costs are lower. If the profits of operation are larger than there would be no need to raise prices to consumers of the raw aluminum. AlCo's stocks hold or do better because of the profit margin, and subsequent distribution, although companies can devalue stocks by splitting them, multiplying like lecherous bureaucrats.
Convenience, lowered costs, help the intermediary business interests, a cannery for instance now has cheaper or at least can comfortably predict near upcoming operation costs within a maintained valuation, has if any stocks that do well or stay still, not to mention a profit margin increase that allows them to fill those cans with cheaper 'beer' or better 'tuna' etc. Passing these benefits to the consumer base, who just as others, despite your belief in trickle-up, or trickle-down, bureaucracy, now can afford more things. The simple key to this argument lies in the reality that physics provides, and we wouldn't want to argue with science, less is not more.
Here is where asceticism works best, doing more with less, it's also known as efficiency, ascetics in surreal and emotional senses works better to do less with more to defer attachment to things, and if I may touch on such in religious regard, to do without materialism and commercialism, (and any -ism) makes swift use of judgement so that we can avoid a dualistic perspective, so that we can leave karma to the gods, but more so to avoid always trying to defeat strangers. Though, in the world of the honorable, there must be at least a respect to gaining measures to operate business, to grow our responsibility to where it is demanded, to provide jobs to people who find meaning in work or are transient in youth or memory.
Work, it's what people do. I'm always confused that the 'left' cadre can tax the rich for programs that incentivise people to not contribute, remember duality here, some people need help, but if there are those that do there are respectively more that don't, lest we would be in utopia. That is the philosophical debate of my time, in observance ironically, which if everything is perfect, do we have free will, if we are hellbent on fascism or enforcers of bad laws, if safe choices can be made without laws that apply to property or by protection of liberty. There are those among us that want the chance to use democracy as their weapon seeing election as a mere formality, and there are those who seek election to use democracy to protect us from those who would rule us instead of guide us. The bureaucrats, the first of those two, see errors as an issue of shortage, whereas the second in that list sees error as a mistake.
So economically the owners of international banking corporations begin to lose their patience, which a business makes more profit from lower purchasing costs and consumers able to buy more due to having more/stronger money, can pay higher interest rates for loans (usually used to expand business venture), the monetary institution (or owner thereof) loses patience and wants to see the profit margin of itself grow faster and more immediate. The printing of money forces people to pay more with devalued money. Be it an electricity bill, the energy company now sees more units of currency, pays its loans quicker or pays a larger tax debt to its government, which makes banks very happy because governments without a central bank pay great deals of interest dues. Even neighboring currencies suffer from poor/poverty banking. Some of you disagree and you would be retarded.
Banks usually don't care if inflation, typical of communist environments, floods currency into its accounts or if the balance naturally shifts back to a capitalist, socially expanding and uplifting, mode. They just want their asset, which is cash/credit, but it gets worse. As inflation hurts the consumer who is paying debts in an increasingly impossible situation, the "middle-sized" businesses begin to cease profiting, their commodity suppliers begin to cease profiting, and that's really when layoffs are mandatory.
Governments that use inflation for this tactic, and the 'left'ists that support it always trouble me. I don't understand how they can hate the wealthy and raise taxes, then the companies raise the costs to the consumer, a double edged sword of higher costs and lower money. With higher costs, the ignorant (and sometimes unknowledgeable) consumers demand higher taxes on the wealthy, which compounds the disastrous cycle. Bad is the acolyte, worse is the bureaucracy. As the business and wealthy that hoist tax revenue above water begin to sink, bureaucrats began/begin administering subsidies to their local companies, "bail outs", not funded by the government, administered by the government at the expense of the tax payer. So not only higher costs and lower funds, but thirdly new taxes, be it by higher tax rates simultaneously, or a future of debt for the failure of base idealism.
Soon lobbying becomes legal, I've said before that I don't understand why we live in a place that it's illegal to bribe a judge, but somehow legal to bribe a lawmaker. As inflation grows, shelves become empty. In an island near Florida you have to bring your own medicine to the hospital, it can only be bought illegally and administered in secrecy. The enforcement of bureaucracy there has come to unapologetic slavery, which in truth is an autocracy.
Autocracy has a better definition in French, but I never learned, which apparently some of the French never learned it either, I say only because they raised the tax rate so high that it didn't work, one sentence paragraph.
An autocracy is basically government of hypocrisy, thru inherent desires aspires to be or join the aristocracy, commonly ignorant of proper grammatical definitions, which solely exacerbates the problem. These places have what is called 'gunpoint diplomacy' and do not end social experiments, despite failures, until the wrath of the gods that they do not respect/believe. Foremost, wants equality, but only demands equality of outcome, particularly by the inequity of perception and defiance of logic. Some of you disagree, and such is allowed, think for yourselves.
