you mean bitcoin supply increases by 44% a year. It's only 44% inflation if bitcoin economy does not grow, but chances are, bitcoin economy is growing faster than 44%, so it's actually a deflation of a x%.

yep. around 40% for the next 1.5 years.
and around 20% each year (->exponential) if you take the average over the next 5 years.

you mean the bitcoin economy, which is now maybe at 100 k$ a year, grows by 40% to 140k$ a year and therefore offsets monetary inflation in bitcoins valued at 53 million $ (margin price)?

IF this kind of monetary inflation is offset, it is by speculation. either by new money coming in, or by miners speculating on even higher selling prices.


IF.

YES entirely true - if there is no bitcoin price appreciation/depreciation.  Bitcoin price appreciation/depreciation will give you an indication of how many new goods/services/other are added/subtracted for trade with bitcoin (if you also account for your calculated inflation by first subtracting that from bitcoin price appreciation/depreciation).

Bitcoin price appreciation/depreciation was not 0% for the past year - so you would need to account for that - unless you expect a 0% appreciation/depreciation in price for the next year.  But then you would have to use the average number of bitcoins that will be in existence for the year to come - and that will be a higher number, bringing your 44% slightly down (again if there is no bitcoin price appreciation/depreciation).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation

In economics, inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time. When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services.

I didn't go through the best K-12 school in the world, but I think in 6th grade I learned what inflation was for the first time.  For there to be a 44% inflation rate, the general cost of goods and services would have to decrease by 44%, relative to the bitcoin.  ....

Move this thread to the econ. section or delete it pls

The OP's definition is consistent with the Austrian view:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetary_inflation

Inflation, properly defined, is not a "change in the price level." Rather, it is an increase in the money supply. The fact that government schools have taught generations of people differently does not change the proper definition of the term.

People get these things confused because inflation (ie - an increase in the money supply) tends to cause prices to increase. But the price increases themselves are not "inflation." One is the disease, the other the symptom. Changing the term "inflation" to refer to the symptom instead of the disease has led to widespread misunderstandings regarding why prices increase in an economy.  

So to you, I would say, to avoid future embarrassments, DON'T look up definitions of economic terms on wikipedia.

And yes, Bitcoin's inflation is 44% this year, but it will fall as we know to zero percent over time. Comparatively, USD inflation will continue without end - and no, it should not be measured by the price changes in the economy, for the reasons mentioned above. When the government says "inflation is only 1%," they are deceiving people because they're measuring price changes, not money supply changes.

people are again painfully mixing up 'price inflation/deflation' and 'monetary inflation/deflation'

Bitcoin is in strong price deflation (things are getting cheaper in relative terms to bitcoin).
Bitcoin is also in strong monetary inflation (bitcoins are getting less rare, or the monetary supply is getting diluted by the issuing of new currency).

How can one have a rational discussion with out defining what they are talking about?

Lets not argue over silly semantics. The issue is that "inflation" has two widely accepted definitions - a generic one - it means growth in general, and has a specific one for economics. The OP was correct - the supply of bitcoins is inflating. The demand is also inflating, but more rapidly. Then the price goes up which means that bitcoin is undergoing deflation.

My point: that the value of Bitcoins would have to scale massively for bitcoins to be widely accepted globally.