I'm a bit confused by what you're trying to say here. It seems non sequitur if you are trying to say "borrowers of higher interest rate benefit less from inflation".
Nah, I've said all I wanted to say have a good day
Your maths is not right. Inflation, in absolute terms, is a larger benefit to people with higher interest rates.
Let's consider the scenario where inflation is 10% for simplicity, and two borrowers who each borrow $100, but Borrower A at 5% annual simple interest and Borrower B at 25% annual simple interest. Both borrowers borrow the money at the beginning of Year 0.
Borrower A owes $105 in Year 1 dollars at the beginning of Year 1. This is equivalent to $95.45 in Year 0 dollars.
Borrower B owes $125 in Year 1 dollars at the beginning of Year 1. This is equivalent to $113.64 in Year 0 dollars.
Compared to a 0% inflation rate, Borrower A saved 9.55 Year 0 dollars and Borrower B saved 11.36 Year 0 dollars. Borrower B saved 1.81 more Year 0 dollars than Borrower B due to inflation (but paid 17.55 Year 0 dollars more overall because of interest).
Inflation reduces the real buying power of the money used to repay the loan by the inflation rate each year, regardless of your loan interest.
In absolute terms, inflation is better the higher your interest rate is, because the number of dollars it saves you goes up.
Pack it up, fellas. Not wanting to start Internet arguments is now "intellectual cowardice".
Someone tried this with a dating app for right-wingers only called "The Right Stuff", which has faced significant criticism for lacking female users.
Is it unfathomable that someone could see something they think is wrong but doesn't think starting a long-winded Internet argument wherein neither party will in any scenario whatsoever convince the other of anything is worth their time?
The Republicans tried doing a similar thing to the Democratic Party by calling it the "Democrat Party", but members of the Democratic Party basically just ignored this and treated those who used it as stupid, or offered "helpful corrections" to the user's "inadvertent mistake". Eventually, it lost currency because it failed in its goal of upsetting people.
In the US, what's more likely is that they find some random accusation to pin on you Abrego Garcia-style and then just keep you in the legal system gauntlet by adding new charges as soon as the timer runs out for trial on the old ones.
The "some registry" they put you in is probably made up. Credit reporting agencies don't just accept claims of debt or delinquent accounts from any random person who claims to be a debt collector. In many cases, if it isn't coming from a financial institution, they will need to see a court judgement before entering it on your credit report.
I remember watching a 60 Minutes episode from the mid-2000s about government corruption and embezzlement of oil wealth by the ruling family of Equatorial Guinea, and how American oil companies facilitated this corruption. They interviewed a representative of an American oil industry group and confronted him about whether it was ethical to keep doing business with a dictator knowing that the billions in oil money was going straight into the pocket of a corrupt autocrat and his family to fund lavish spending sprees in Paris and mansions in America while the people of Equatorial Guinea starved in some of the poorest and worst living standards in the world. Of course, the industry rep claimed that it was ethical, and the reporters got kicked out of Equatorial Guinea and harassed by local security forces.
But that's the kind of fearless reporting that just doesn't get done any more. It's cheaper to just have people in the newsroom write clickbait articles about what local political figures are yapping about on Bluesky than to send people to create that sort of high-quality journalism. And there's no chance that any oil industry representative would ever agree to that sort of interview now. At most, they would just have their PR division write a two-paragraph statement.
Washington Post opinion article: Musk’s defeat in Wisconsin is a flashing warning for Republicans in 2026
^.?$|^(..+?)\1+$
Matches strings of any character repeated a non-prime number of times
So what did you mean when you began your comment with "actually it's the inverse"? Inverse of what?