Your analysis as I have praised you before is excellent, no doubt about that, and you deserve every acclamation for the iconclastic de-construction of DSGE/neo-liberal economics despite the incredibly suave and deceptive mental overlay of orthodoxy. However, if the system is dynamically cost inflationary on the lower bound of price then that also needs to be factored in and modeled as well. Please consider the example I gave in your prior video. The costs of replacing capital equipment, facilities and also a host of other incidental costs over and above all financial costs MUST be ADDITIONALLY included in the prices businesses charge the consumer, and yet the consumer is not credited with any additional income with which to liquidate these ADDITIONAL COSTS/PRICES.  This is the case with every enterprise in the economy by enforcement of the cost accounting convention that ALL costs MUST go into price…and so it is not just a statistical happenstance, but a dynamic systemic factor being overlooked by virtually every economist. Consider also that Keynesian stimulus, while it may somewhat (and indirectly) deal with the diminutions of money/income from the circular flow of the economy, is thus actually an obscuration of the underlying cost inflationary nature of the normal and unfettered operations of the economy described above and again, enforced by cost accounting’s rule that all costs must go into price. Actually looking at data is the essence of the scientific method, and doing the calculus regarding the datums of individual incomes and costs simultaneously created will reveal the mathematical expression of Douglas’s A + B theorem.  Please consider it…..and also the accelerating disruptive and diminishing effects on aggregate individual income that innovation and AI are also having which militate direct and immediate individual income supplementation for the individual and price discounts to equilibrate the system.