More money signifies more inflation, because there is no fix supply to it, which means the entire system can be manipulated when there's no cognate amount of this fiat currency that must be printed, bitcoin has come for the change we all needed regarding financial challenges, because it is limited in supply and has overcome the effect of inflation over the financial system, everything happens in an open and decentralized network, unlike the fiat.

OP, I understand where you are coming from, M2 measures the money supply of multiple countries and economic blocks, as banks increase the money supply, so increases the money flow into the financial system and drives up the prices but does that really matter? If the price of car is $1000 and you have Bitcoins that worth $1000, during the inflation the price of the car will grow, it will become $1100 but according to M2, the price of the asset increases and your Bitcoins might worth $1100 but what changed in the end? The purchasing value is almost always the same. The more money we print, the more money we need to buy things and nothing changes for better in the end. You also can't have everything in assets if you are not a multi millionaire, so this money printing negatively affects average people in any way.

Lol! I can see a very nice correlation between money printing and Bitcoin price. So yes, if Banks keep on printing money, we should be able to see higher Bitcoin price as the time goes.

The governments needed a way to keep on printing money, that's why they have moved to a debt based economy. The more loan it disburses, the more money is printed and the economy grows.

Bitcoin stands at the opposite end and smiling 😊

But somehow, politicians don't care about this. I can't understand it. Is it that they don't care, or they don't know, or they're just out of their depth?
In my country, they print it at will, but somehow keep accusing others of the reason for the currency taking a nose dive.
A person doesn't need a Harvard degree to know that if something is not scarce or if there is too much of a thing, it loses its value, so why do they keep printing money when they know it's hurting the currency and the people using it?

The lesson here is: don't hold large amounts of fiat currency for too long. Keep in fiat only the money you are going to need for you daily expenses and potential emergencies. All the rest must be exchanged into investments which will make your money value grow on long run.

I remember 10 years ago I was able to pay 1,26$ for a MC Donald's hamburguer. Now that same hamburguer is pricing 2,60$. Compared to 10 years ago, I need 100% extra fiat in order to acquire the same product. For me it looks insane!

That is actually a good exercise you can do as well. Think about how much you used to pay for certain goods 5 or 10 years ago and compare to how much you are paying right now.

What great advice, lol. I think this is one of the best ways to get people to see the value of Bitcoin and understand why it's an essential asset against inflationary fiat.

I think the way governments are doing things is just collapsing. With all the bonds being sold to other countries, it is not sustainable anymore, and keeping up with the rates.

With large corporations and institutions acquiring Bitcoin, and new corporate entities being established just to raise debt to buy Bitcoin, it very much does seem like the play right now is to accumulate as much Bitcoin as possible in preparation for even more excessive printing, and that inflation will hurt more and more normal people who just can't find the means to buy bitcoin, or refuse to understand it.

The government prints more money. A portion of it goes into Bitcoin. Bitcoin's price in fiat rises. The catch, however, is that money is devalued in the process. It loses its purchasing power. The devaluation of money balances out the increase of Bitcoin's fiat value. In the end, everything could be pointless.

Just like gold. Recently, gold bugs were celebrating because the price registered another ATH. They're bragging that it is indeed a store of value, a hedge against fiat devaluation. The truth, however, is that for many decades it has failed to keep pace with inflation. It indeed reached an ATH in April this year, but prior to that its inflation-adjusted ATH was in January of 1980.

So, don't be too happy when Bitcoin's price increases along with the increase of the supply of money. It naturally should. Otherwise, it's depreciating.

Banks don't print money , government mint does.

What does bank do then?
It borrows the money from Central bank and lends them to customers thereby circulating money.

We're continuing to inflate the money supply like always and this inflation compounds on the last 100 times we've done this same thing but at least the number we have made public is low. Anti debt, there are certainly good and bad debts. But state monopoly of the money supply obfuscates this. If rates which are really just the price of time and future resources are manipulated, then all debts can 'look' like good debts. The “value” of the dollar doesn’t fluctuate it is 1=1. Value is undefined jargon especially when real value can be set accordingly by man. Reckon it’s just part of the game of substitutions imperative to scale interest rates alongside the money supply. Not only is the risk-free rate zero, the cost of capital should be much higher since fixed-supply of money (all things being equal) create deflationary economies due to technology. Since things get cheaper over time, you will need a higher rate of return to justify lending money out vs today’s system where you’re forced to invest to preserve the purchasing power. It’s actually not important that the base layer is used by 8 billion self-sovereign people, it’s only important that it’s possible and that the sovereign states play by the same rules as their sovereign citizens. There is immense benefit for taking the money printer out of the government’s hands. The consensus will always be managed by the minority like all revolutions.

No LOL'ing though!!!

LOL - Loan on loan is a bad practice. Central banks themselves should loan out to its citizens thereby removing the need of such middlemen.