The issue arises from a disconnect between the goals of the principal, which ideally would be price and wage stability, and the actions of the agent, in this case, the central bank, which may prioritize self-enrichment over its targets. The existing technology does not support the creation of a model with perfect moral alignment that focuses solely on stable prices. Furthermore, the Cantillon effect, often overlooked in discussions of inflationary minting, plays a crucial role in the distribution of monetary policy's impacts.

An illustrative example of the Cantillon effect can be seen during the COVID pandemic when the United States increased its money supply to fund subsidies for American citizens. This action devalued the USD globally, affecting third-world citizens whose salaries were pegged to the USD but who did not receive any subsidies. Consequently, these individuals experienced an effective pay cut without any direct benefit from the subsidies. The printing of additional currency by economic powerhouses like the USA has broader implications beyond employee wages, as it impacts all transactions where goods are priced in USD. By inflating its currency, the USA can reduce the cost of purchasing goods internationally, thus imposing what is effectively a form of taxation on other nations without their consent.

Inflationary minting presents a moral hazard that extends beyond the pursuit of stable prices. The adverse effects, particularly those related to the Cantillon effect, are subtle yet significant forms of wealth redistribution that should not be underestimated or ignored. The argument against the acceptance of inflationary money is grounded in the hidden and unethical consequences that outweigh any potential benefits it may offer. Stable prices alone do not justify the moral risks associated with inflationary monetary policies.