You seem to have this almost perfectly wrong. The problem is not too much money chasing too little product. This is not the time of the Weimar, we are now something like 30% solar powered. That means the economy is no longer a closed box. It can no longer be quantified as a fixed number.
A lot of economic product is now being added to the economy, every day, by solar power, actually about a third of what the grid used to supply, so the grid has shrunk, whilst population in most places has gone up, not least due to immigration.
How much of that do you think is monetised?
I will tell you - zero, because it can't be monetised by money for which any kind of return is demanded.
This is because the sun demanded nothing for the Joules it provided.
Sounds radical, but it shouldn't be, it was well known in the days of Nikola Tesla. This is why Tesla was defunded, the banks didn't like the idea of free money, so they stopped him from delivering free power.
But now the free power is happening anyway, driven more or less by nature, it is scaling up relentlessly, like a tree growing leaves.
The result has to have an impact on money which is not being issued to represent the actual growing product.
So it isn't that less money needs to be around, it is that an awful lot more needs to be around, for it to truly represent the product, which has the capability of near infinite growth, whilst actually reversing the heating effect on the planet, that we caused by all the energy extraction to date.
Extracted energy is on the way out, donated energy is on the way in.
Money has to change to adapt to that, not the other way round.
Remember the dollar actually went up in value when it was issued as massive stimulus during covid, it didn't go down. It is going down now because it stopped being issued.
Here is some data backed numerical proof:
