As you all know, bad theories lead to misguided policies. Can mere persuasion change anything? Maybe not, but people are already looking for answers to what only seems to be a economic dilemma. We don't really have to choose between stimulus and price stability.
The creation of purchasing media of any kind can be inflationary or deflationary. It is misleading to talk about the government "printing money," since most money is created when banks makes loans. Loans to consumers and loans to producers both create money, but with opposite results on price inflation. Loans to producers increase supply and competition between suppliers, thus driving down prices. Loans to consumers increase demand, which tends to increase prices.
If stimulus was applied to match demand and supply then the money problems imagined by goldbugs and quantity theorists would be revealed as unfounded. Vast amounts of money could be created, and rapid growth could be attained without inflation, but only so long as the scale of the resulting global economy remained below levels at which further increases in capacity were not limited by other factors such as resource scarcity and mounting external costs.
The total purchasing power of the mark fell during the German hyperinflation, because the value of the money fell faster than the quantity rose. (< 5% of the former value) Too much money chasing too few goods is a fetching theory, but a rethink is needed. M. Friedman's book on the quantity theory has data on the confederate price inflation, which occurred during the same kind of shrinking aggregate purchasing power. War destroys supply. Whatever may be the causes of price inflation, shrinking the real money supply doesn't help.
Barry Brooks