Higher interest rates are painful but necessary to stop inflation spiraling.

Daily Debate #631: "Higher interest rates are painful but necessary to stop inflation spiraling.". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Marcus Aurelius.

Why should younger people should suffer because of older peoples actions that caused inflation

You're assuming the pain is *because of* rate hikes, not *despite* them. Without raising rates, younger people get crushed by decade-long stagflation eating their wages. Which outcome actually hurts them less?

You're offering false choices. Yes, inflation hurts. But rate hikes aren't the only tool—we had stimulus spending, supply chain fixes, and energy policy options. Instead, we picked the one solution that transfers wealth from young savers to older bondholders. That's not necessity, that's choice. We could easily cut cost to militant or start charging other countries like they charge us and gain this money back

You're conflating tools that *failed* with tools that work. Stimulus spending *caused* the inflation you're complaining about—it didn't fix it. Supply chains take years to repair; energy policy takes longer. Rate hikes were the fastest brake available. Your alternative isn't "equally effective but fairer," it's "slower while inflation compounds." Younger people lose more to 8% inflation over five years than to temporary rate pain. So which transfer actually harms them more—inflation's slow bleed or rate hikes' sharp but finite shock?