The Fifth Power: When Purchasing Power Limits the State

Purchasing power as a measure of individual freedom, institutional discipline, and a constraint on monetary and fiscal expansion.

THE FIFTH POWER
A Silent, Omnipresent, and Implacable Power
By Dr. Nelson Jorge Mosco Castellano

From a Liberal Perspective
In modern democracies, it is customary to speak of a classical division of powers—executive, legislative, and judicial—to which the press was later added as the fourth power and, in the contemporary era, technology and social networks as unavoidable factors of influence.
However, there is a silent, omnipresent, and implacable power that acts as the true arbiter of political coexistence.
Far from being a mere statistical indicator or the passive result of labor negotiations, citizens’ purchasing power constitutes a de facto fifth power with an oversight role.
It is the ultimate thermometer by which society evaluates the supposed social contract.
No parliamentary majority, no rhetorical narrative, and no apparatus of state propaganda can, in the long run, evade the verdict issued by the currency when it loses its value or when the fruits of labor are confiscated by fiscal voracity.
To understand the nature of this power, its genuine growth, and the structural reasons for its tragic deterioration, it is imperative to turn to the giants of the Austrian School of Economics and classical Monetarism: Carl Menger, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich A. von Hayek, and Milton Friedman.
Their contributions dismantle the myths of interventionism and expose how purchasing power is, ultimately, a measure of individual freedom.
To understand why purchasing power exerts such pressure on the political order, we must begin with its origin.
Classical economics and socialist visions seek the value of things in the cost of production or in the hours of labor invested. This fallacy historically opened the door to governments’ attempts to set wages, working hours, prices, and returns by decree, assuming that value was an objective magnitude that could be administered by the bureaucracy.
The great intellectual revolution initiated by Carl Menger—founder of the Austrian School—demonstrated exactly the opposite.
In Principles of Economics (1871), Menger established the theory of subjective value: a good or service has no intrinsic value; rather, its value arises from the marginal utility assigned to it by an individual—the one who pays for it—in a specific context.
The wage a worker receives is not valuable because of the physical effort expended, but because of that income’s ability to satisfy concrete needs in the market. If no one is interested in buying the product of that labor, it is worth 0.
When purchasing power deteriorates, what is really being broken is the subjective correspondence between the sacrifice of saving/labor and the satisfaction of the individual’s ends.
Citizens immediately perceive that their freedom of choice is being reduced: where they could once choose among a range of goods in order to plan their life project, they now find themselves confined to mere survival.
Purchasing power is the quantitative translation of human autonomy in relation to the surrounding environment.
How does purchasing power genuinely grow?
One of the most persistent dogmas of state intervention is the belief that the purchasing power of wages can be increased through “general increase” laws or mandatory wage decrees.
Against this illusion, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk brought clarity by analyzing the temporal structure of production.
He demonstrated that productivity and real wages do not grow through political magic, but through the prior accumulation of capital and the lengthening of production processes.
For a worker to earn more in purchasing-power terms, more efficient tools, more advanced machinery, and technology capable of multiplying the value generated per hour of labor are required.
This is only possible through the employer’s prior saving: postponing present consumption in order to invest in capital goods.
When a government suffocates saving through confiscatory taxes, suffocating regulations, or artificially depressed interest rates, it destroys the process of capital accumulation.
Without capital, productivity stagnates. And in an economy with stagnant productivity, any attempt to artificially raise nominal wages runs into an insurmountable wall: because no additional goods or services are being produced, the inevitable result is inflation—the money buys less—shortages, and unemployment.
Therefore, the genuine growth of purchasing power is the exclusive fruit of voluntary social cooperation, respect for private property, and market-oriented investment, never of political voluntarism.

If the growth of purchasing power depends on productivity and saving, its systematic destruction has a historical culprit perfectly identified by Ludwig von Mises.
In his work The Theory of Money and Credit (1912), Mises integrated monetary theory with the theory of subjective value.
He demonstrated that money is not a neutral veil, and that the artificial expansion of the money supply by the State—seigniorage—does not generate wealth, but rather a brutal and arbitrary redistribution of wealth.
When the Central Bank issues currency without backing in the real demand of economic agents, it alters relative prices.
Those who receive the new money first—the State, its contractors, and financial sectors connected to political power—benefit by buying at the old prices; meanwhile, fixed-income groups, retirees, and salaried workers—the last to receive the devalued money—bear the full impact of the generalized rise in prices.
Inflation is, in the words of Mises and later liberal thinkers, the cruelest, most silent, and most regressive “tax” that exists.
It is imposed by arbitrary political decision, has no parliamentary approval, and acts directly on citizens’ pockets by pulverizing their purchasing power.
The destruction of the currency disrupts economic calculation.
In a chronically inflationary environment, prices cease to transmit reliable information about the relative scarcity of goods.
Companies cannot calculate medium-term costs, long-term contracts become impossible, and savings evaporate.
The fifth power—purchasing power—is technically nullified, plunging society into a short-term survival logic in which the time horizon for investment disappears.

Governments invariably abuse the monopoly over monetary issuance to finance their fiscal deficits and their excesses in public spending.
Friedrich A. von Hayek, in his celebrated essay The Denationalisation of Money (1976), argued that leaving the monopoly over currency in the hands of the State is as absurd as leaving the production of food or technology in the hands of a single government entity.
Hayek proposed dissolving state monetary monopolies and allowing free competition among currencies.
If citizens are free to choose which monetary unit to use for their transactions, governments will lose the ability to liquidate the purchasing power of their populations through the machinery of printing banknotes and thereby deteriorating their value.
A sound currency operating in competition is nothing other than insurance against state voracity; it automatically disciplines the political class, forcing it to maintain fiscal prudence and budgetary balance under the threat that citizens will abandon the local currency in favor of more stable alternatives.
The Hayekian thesis connects directly with the defense of the fifth power: a citizen equipped with an incorruptible currency regains economic sovereignty in relation to the state apparatus.
This theoretical architecture finds its most forceful empirical confirmation in the formulations of Milton Friedman. With his celebrated maxim, “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon,” Friedman demonstrated through rigorous historical studies that fluctuations in purchasing power are never the fault of “corporate greed,” “monopolistic profit margins,” or international price conspiracies, but of a single cause: the creation of money in excess of the production of goods.
Every time a government resorts to chronic fiscal deficits and finances its structural overexpansion by printing banknotes, it is directly attacking families’ purchasing power.
Price-control laws, freezes, restrictions on the free use of different currencies, and threats against productive sectors are nothing more than futile attempts to “kill the messenger” (the price), while ignoring the real cause of the problem (uncontrolled money issuance).
The economic history of the stagnation of nations eternally “developing” and of so many developed nations flirting with fiscal populism is a graveyard of monetary illusions in which purchasing power has always ended up paying the bill for state profligacy.

Conclusion: Purchasing Power as the Last Line of Institutional Defense
Purchasing power is not an isolated economic variable; it is the ultimate thermometer of a nation’s institutional health.
When a country respects the rules of the free market, encourages capital accumulation, defends the stability of its currency, and limits the suffocating weight of public spending and public regulation, the purchasing power of its citizens grows organically.
Work is rewarded, savings flourish, and individual freedom expands.
Conversely, when fiscal demagoguery, statism, mafia-like unionism seeking to impose artificial wage increases, and corrosive monetary issuance destroy that purchasing power, confidence in institutions collapses.
Citizens impoverished in their capacity for economic decision-making cease to be free agents and become dependent on the most degrading subsidies and the self-interested tutelage of political power, completing the vicious circle of servitude.
Recognizing purchasing power as the fifth power means understanding that no republic can call itself truly free if its currency is an institutional lie and if the fruits of citizens’ efforts can be confiscated with impunity by the arbitrariness of the State.
Defending purchasing power is, ultimately, defending the dignity and inalienable sovereignty of the human person.

Purchasing power and freedom
Monetary discipline
Limits on state power

Continue reading in Global Order and Geopolitics