I think you’re splitting hairs. Consumption is not a fiat phenomenon. Fiat does incentivize greater consumption in the short term.

“They” can also incentivize consumption in a hard money standard. Maybe what you’re getting at is subsidized consumption? I fail to see how someone working for money and then buying a good with that money in order to consume it is not objectively better for the economy.

I don’t see how that example reflects the reality of consumption between free economic actors. Sounds like you’re talking about governments either forcing or printing money so producers make goods and then giving people vouchers so they can consume those goods and calling it growth.