![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0943eca5-c4c2-4d65-acc2-7e220598f99e.png)
I guess it depends on how you define inflation. To me inflation is the ratio between goods and services and the money supply. Inflation isn’t rising prices. Price rising is a symptom of inflation. I just don’t think it’s beneficial to use inflation interchangeably with supply and demand and price rises, it just creates confusion. I very much favor the macroeconomics view of inflation because through that lens a lot things start making sense.
Since this is your field, obviously you’d know that if you have more goods, you get deflation. And funnily enough when you look up the definition of deflation it’s very strongly tied to that ratio between goods and services and the money supply.
I just feel that over time people have changed the definition of inflation. It’s no surprise that the term Greedflation has popped up because the topic surrounding it has been convoluted, confusing a lot of people.
I would also like to point out. It’s not always so one dimensional. Don’t forget fossil fuels is not only energy. Ammonia derived from gas is heavily used as fertiliser, which is incredibly important for food production.
A lot of manufacturing requires fossils fuels to heat, melt and process materials.
Oil is also used in manufacturing, lubrication, transportation. It’s also converted into plastics, lotions, medicine, electronics, you name it.
Fossils fuels plays a very important part in everyday life. I feel people think it’s easily replaceable but it’s interwoven so deeply in everyone’s lives. Advocating to drop funding and fossile projects could have some serious knock on effects.