>>60849105
>who bears the losses for the misallocation of resources
The losers in the market competition. Some of the capital stock might be salvageable and be acquired by competitors, but the original investors will likely be wiped out. To some extent, the taxpayer will also have pumped money into some economic sectors and some of that will go to waste. That's how market competition works and is supposed to work. There is waste but the winners will be highly competitive due to having survived the natural selection process. The waste is the price you pay to end up with strong highly competitive well managed industries.
Also, as companies innovate, old technologies become obsolete and the associated capital stock also goes to "waste". That's how "creative destruction" works. The "waste" of obsoleting your current capital stock is the price you pay for adopting new technology. And adopting new technology is necessary for economic growth to be sustained in the long run.
>When the choice is japanification or the Great Depression you know what everyone will choose.
Do you mean that those are the only two choices?
I don't think China really need inflation right now because they have widespread high productivity growth and real wage growth, meaning companies aren't very dependent on inflation to press down real wages.
>Right now the rest of the world is inflating away the debt
That trick only works when (a) all the debt is denominated in your own currency, which is not true for many countries, and (b) you can convince investors to buy your bonds at a yield that is low compared to inflation, which isn't true either for many countries
>they have deflation and a stable exchange rate. So the purchasing power is getting slowly eroded.
What do you mean? For whom, China? Deflation is the opposite of an erosion of purchasing power