The core of this viewpoint is to shift the economic issue from "market efficiency" back to "currency credibility." If wage growth does not keep up with rigid expenses like housing, education, and healthcare, which have long outpaced inflation, ordinary people will feel that it is not that they earn too little, but that money itself has lost value.

From a capital perspective, this narrative typically leads to two things: first, embracing hard assets like real estate, gold, and Bitcoin; second, questioning the government's ability to manage the monetary system. It is not saying that the market has no issues, but rather that when the premise of market prices—stable currency—is destroyed, many "market outcomes" are no longer purely market outcomes.

Historically, currency devaluation easily creates an illusion: it appears that assets are rising, but in reality, it is just the unit purchasing power that is falling. Thus, capital market prosperity and the deterioration of people's experiences can occur simultaneously, which is why this viewpoint is very provocative, as it explains "why macro data looks good, yet personal lives are harder."

Essentially, it belongs to regulatory changes: when monetary policy, fiscal discipline, and asset prices collectively shape the cost of living, what truly determines the wealth gap is not just market competition, but also how the government manages currency as the most fundamental institutional variable.

ABAB News · Law of Cognition

When currency is distorted, the market will take the blame.
Price increases do not necessarily mean wealth; it could also mean money has depreciated.
The pain of ordinary people often comes from purchasing power rather than nominal income.