[...] pulls resources (employees, production, etc) from other parts of the economy, increasing the costs of the remaining resources since there's less available.
That is why I specified that there needed to be excess productive capacity for whatever they are buying. As long as the economy is not at full employment, the government isn't bidding up the prices with its spending.
At full employment though, you are absolutely right.
Both Weimar and Zimbabwe, and all other examples of hyperinflationary economies (many Latin American countries come to mind), had large debts denominated in foreign currencies, or had fixed exchange rates with such. This makes the government depenent on aquireing these forein currencies which they themselves cannot issue. Printing your own currency to pay these debts is definately inflationary, but doing so to pay for goods priced in your own domestic currency, when there is excess productive capacity, is not.
Fiat currencies are actually backed by the tax liabilities denominated in them. If you are liable for one of my business cards, else a guy with a gun shows up at your door, you suddenly have demand for my business cards.
Then, imagine if the comic printing company had a guy with a gun going around demanding everyone give him an amount of comic books each year. Now suddenly everyone is looking to get the comic books, driving their values up.
This is how taxes are driving the value of modern money.
All government spending is done by "printing money", at least in monetary sovereign countries like the US, UK, and other countries issuing their own cureencies. The government is the monopoly issuer of the currency and cannot run out of it, just like the scorekeeper of a baseball match cannot run out of points. Taxes are also not for funding the government, but for removing momey from circulation, precisely to curb inflation. (Also to drive the value of the currency by making people demand it to be able to pay their taxes).
Thus "printing money" isn't in itself inflationary, as long as the newly created money is spent on something where there is excess production capacity.
The question for the government is never "can we afford it", but rather "are the real resources there to achieve it".
Oh, I hadn't noticed there was a difference. I re-insatlled, and Bitwarden now has the newer more modern look and all. In the meantime I have switched to Fennec, but might give IronFox another try now.
My Bitwarden autofill does not work with IronFox even though it did with Mull. When asking to autofill it always looks for login info for org.ironfoxoss.ironfox instead of the actual page. Any ideas?
Yeah, totally agree with that. But as a commenter above mentioned, the difference in lifespan is probably mostly social anyway, so the whole biology aspect isn't really relevant.
But isn't their point that the life expectancy of "biological men" also apply to trans women, and vice verca? That wouldn't be conveyed if they used the prefix cis.
This would of course only be relevant if life expectancy is a purely biological phenomenon, which I am not so sure it is.
That is why I specified that there needed to be excess productive capacity for whatever they are buying. As long as the economy is not at full employment, the government isn't bidding up the prices with its spending.
At full employment though, you are absolutely right.