The second stressor is unemployment, but unemployment can be managed using the same structures and strategies as those that would be used to apply to combating/preventing hyperinflation.  The propensity for unemployment can only exist when the demand schedule owing to capital investment is no longer being stimulated.  The implications of the switchover from using the liability expansion method of currency inflation to the equity expansion method intrinsically creates the exact outcome the policymaker is seeking to sustain without having to give any further consideration to the issue of unemployment due to the following macroeconomic outcomes that are being allowed to play out in the private-sector economy as a result of Lovellian Economics (at all levels):

	The demand schedule for capital investment is stimulated each time the central bank authority increases the currency supply due to the impact of the capital matching requirement.  As long as the central bank authority enforces the capital matching requirement, the outcome will always be the same: the result will be an increase in the demand schedule for capital investment and that will create a corresponding stimulus that will apply to the demand schedule for labor.  Unemployment will naturally cycle back from any level of sustained hyper-unemployment as a result of adopting the equity inflation method of creating currency.
	The burden of unproductive households and business are reduced on the state - as if by magic, but really as part of the design of the equity-expansion method of currency inflation.
	The reliance of the federal state upon deficit spending (as it is most often used - see below) is eliminated in its entirety and this means the immediate near-term impact will be an easing of interest rates in the capital markets that carries an intrinsic reduction of the pressures owing to price increases and unemployment.

The third stressor that is (wrongly) believed to contribute to hyperinflation is the relative size of the national debt and federal budget deficits, as Lovellian Economics eliminates this issue in its entirety.  The reality has already been demonstrated that deficits themselves are not the issue if these are dealt with in the current cycle and not allowed to float "naked" as is the practice today.  This results in a loss of capital market confidence that manifests itself in the form of increased costs of borrowing that cycle through the private-sector economy and serve to create inflationary pressures on private-sector companies that are heavily-leveraged with debt capital.  The solution for these economies is to apply an immediate "economic poultice" by adopting reforms that can immediately change the nature of the stressor's impact, to wit:

	Create and capitalize a licensed TREX capital market platform.
	Adopt the necessary reforms for limited company ownership that conform to the implementation manual requirements of Capitalism Version 2.0 (The Fix).
	Adopt the necessary protocols to allow for bankruptcy reform to take place in accordance with the implementation manual requirements of Capitalism Version 2.0 (i.e.: force all business bankruptcy petitioners to convert their companies into RLPs or release all creditor stays owing to the filing by the petitioner or creditors - in the case of involuntary petitions).
	Adopt the necessary framework to allow for the use of a defined schedule of defeasance for all federal budget deficits.  This would not necessarily require that federal expenditures be reduced or held in stasis; in point of fact, the outcome of adopting the reforms is to make all federal expenditures a stimulus to the private-sector economy, so near-term deficit spending can be part of the policymaker's playbook of options to deal with the more deleterious effects of a recessionary business cycle while dealing with the underlying causal issues at the same time.