Yes, because the ECB will not come across with sufficient Euros and prevents member states from creating them themselves such a round about path is necessary. However, if the EU and its central bank (or a separate monetary authority) was to simply implement a relatively high percentage discount/rebate policy in the places I suggest, particularly at the point of retail sale which is both the terminal ending point of the entire legitimate economic/productive process and also the terminal expression point for any and all price inflation…a high enough percentage discount and rebate would not only end any inflation, but actually be able to integrate price deflation painlessly and beneficially into profit making systems for both the individual and commercial agents. It’s the difference between
1) palliating a problem and resolving it,
2) using a deeper understanding of double entry bookkeeping’s digital nature, the economic and temporal universe significances of the point of sale and of retail sale and so
3) seeing how it is able to integrate factors to the point of direct and immediate effect and also accomplish inversion and transformation of the problem…all of which are primary signatures of paradigm changes.
You see the problem with macro-economists is they look through a glass darkly. Steve Keen correctly observed several years ago that economists could get their PhDs in economics without so much as taking an elementary course in accounting. I complimented him on that insight and directed him to look at the subset of double entry bookkeeping, cost accounting, and also at the digital natures of the debt, money, and accounting systems, but apparently he neglected to do so. Hence I see that he is still trying to solve the real monetary problem of the economy (scarcity of aggregate individual income) by referencing the velocity of money on his patreon site. Of course the velocity of money is a circuit of money whose relevance to adding aggregate individual income is zero to nil. Why? Because:
1) the classical illustration of the velocity of money is false because it shows businessmen treating business revenue as if it were their individual income which a) it is not b) it is accounting fraud to treat it as such and c) if you do it only a little bit you end up having to stiff your vendors which both wrecks your business and also ultimately bankrupts you.
2) no matter how much money is circulating/re-circulating within the economy is again by definition business revenue….it doesn’t create any additional individual purchasing power…because increased business revenue doesn’t one for one or even at all translate into the vast majority of labor’s income going up.
So if economists would instead look at the facts/realities in my post above this one, they’d be able to discover policies that indeed WOULD increase aggregate individual incomes directly and business revenue reciprocally….and poof! A large component of macro-economic figure-figure would dissipate and the new paradigm would become apparent to them.