Mitchell’s laws: To survive, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Reduced money growth cannot increase economic growth. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================

Excerpts from a Washington Post story, by Ed O’Keefe, dated 9/6/11:

The White House will include a financial rescue plan for the U.S. Postal Service as part of a broader $1.5 trillion deficit reduction package due to Congress in the coming weeks, it said Tuesday.

The White House will rescue the Postal Service, while reducing the deficit? How will they do that?

In advance of those recommendations, the Obama administration is asking lawmakers to give the Postal Service a 90-day extension to pay billons of dollars in mandatory annual retirement payments that are due at the end of its fiscal year Sept. 30.

Ah, you see, they will delay payments to retirees. As you know, these retired workers have more money than does the federal government, so they can support the Postal Service, while the federal government cannot.

The U.S. Postal Service wants to cut 120,000 jobs as it reports another loss in revenue.

And not just the retired workers. We need to save the federal government and help the nation’s unemployment problem by cutting 120,000 jobs.

The White House declined to detail what a postal rescue package might include, but one senior administration official said the plan would be “consistent with the Postal Service’s mission and its obligations to all of its stakeholders, including its workers.”

Let’s see: Its stakeholders are:
Users: But the plan is to cut service
Employees: But the plan is to cut employees.

Any other stakeholders you can think of? (Don’t say, “taxpayers.” Taxes don’t pay for federal spending.)

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), who chaired Tuesday’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on the issue, said his panel would draft legislation to address the concerns.

Two of the panel’s members, Sens. Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), are pushing competing proposals, but both signaled Tuesday that they are willing to collaborate on a plan. Carper’s bill would give the Postal Service the flexibility to cut Saturday mail deliveries, close thousands of post offices and give USPS access to money it has overpaid for decades to federal retirement funds. Collins, who opposes curtailing mail deliveries because of potentially adverse effects on rural and far-flung areas, wants to overhaul the Postal Service’s payments to pre-fund future retiree benefits, which cost USPS about $5.5 billion annually.

Got it. Cut service; cut employees; cut pensions. Cut, cut, cut: The Tea Party mantra, via Obama.

The Postal Service is a self-funding entity drawing revenue from the sale of stamps and shipments . . .

Why is the U.S. Postal Service self-funding? The army isn’t. The Congress isn’t. The White House isn’t. The Department of Homeland Security isn’t. In fact, none of the thousand federal agencies are self funding. Why the Postal Service? Anyone?

In addition to structural reforms, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) suggested that USPS should mount a national advertising campaign promoting the value of printed mail.

“You cannot get money by text message,” McCaskill said. “I really think that there is a longing out there right now, especially in these uncertain times, for some of the things that have provided stability over the years.”

Donahoe said such a campaign is in the works. Aides said it will debut for the holiday shopping season.

Lieberman voiced his support, suggesting, “We should be writing more passionate letters to those we love.”

O.K., problem solved. Spend advertising money the Postal Service doesn’t have, to encourage people to write passionate letters.

Now let’s get real. Cutting service will beget reduced usage, which will force more service cuts, which will beget further reduced usage, until over time, we will be left with one letter carrier, working out of one post office, carrying one letter – a passionate love letter from Sen. Lieberman.

If America wishes to have a postal service, the federal government must support it, the same way the federal government supports every other vital service. This self-funding nonsense – a relic of the pony express – is a ticket to mail oblivion.

But then, how can a Monetarily Sovereign government, with the unlimited ability to pay any bills of any size at any time – a government that has no problem supporting troops all over the world, from South Korea to Germany and points in between, all without raising taxes – how can such a government not afford to support the U.S. Postal Service?

It’s just another “Obama compromise.”

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com


==========================================================================================================================================
No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY