Mitchell’s laws: The more budgets are cut and taxes inceased, the weaker an economy becomes. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity = poverty and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

As readers of this blog know, I’d tended to vote Republican. I’d felt they had a better handle on the economy than the Democrats. However with the election of G.W. Bush, and the takeover by the Tea Party, I now feel the Republican Party has lost its way. What do you think?

Washington Post
GOP budget plan cuts deeply into domestic programs, reshapes Medicare, Medicaid
By Rosalind S. Helderman and Lori Montgomery, Updated: Tuesday, March 20, 2012

House Republicans laid down a bold but risky election-year marker Tuesday, unveiling a budget proposal that aims to tame the national debt by reshaping Medicare and cutting deeply into Medicaid, food stamps and other programs for the poor, while reshuffling the tax code to sharply lower rates.

Translation: Cut the money supply to stimulate the economy, i.e. apply leeches to cure anemia. Cut benefits for the poor and middle classes. “Sharply lower rates” to the rich.

Congressional Republicans argue that restraining future borrowing is a moral imperative and that entitlement programs for the elderly and the poor must be redrawn both to reduce red ink and to ensure that federal benefits continue to be available.

Translation: It is a “moral” imperative to screw the elderly, the poor and the middle classes, so the government can do what it could do anyway without the screwing: i.e. pay its bills.

But the document — which pairs deep spending cuts with a reduction in the top tax rate paid by the wealthy — quickly provided new fodder for Democrats, who argued that Republicans would slash the social safety net while protecting the rich.

Translation: We call screwing the elderly, the poor and the middle class, “broadening the tax base and making taxes fairer.” We’ll use those words often in the future.

The proposal, authored by Budget Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), calls for spending cuts and tax changes that would put the nation on course to wipe out deficits and balance the budget by 2040.

Translation: We want to wipe out federal money creation and make sure we enter a depression that will make the Great Depression look like Disney World. The rich, of course, will remain rich, but the middle class will disappear. Anyone want to buy an apple?

Ryan calls for turning over to the states responsibility for the major federal programs for the poor, including Medicaid and food stamps, and giving recipients a deadline to find work and get off the government dole — much as welfare reform did to cash benefits in the late 1990s.

Translation: The federal government never can run out of dollars, but most states are financially destitute. So let’s pile it on the states. Regarding the poor, if those lazy bums don’t find work, let them and their children starve (or eat cake).

All told, Ryan proposes to slash federal spending by $5.3 trillion over the next decade compared with President Obama’s latest budget blueprint, with the biggest savings taken from health programs — including the repeal of Obama’s initiative to expand health coverage to the uninsured — and entitlements for the poor.

If the poor can’t afford health insurance, let them die. Or, let them go to hospital emergency rooms, which are twice as expensive, and will be paid for by the 1% anyway (but the 1% doesn’t know it, so don’t tell them.) As for the middle class, this will bankrupt them. So??

But it might not be enough for many tea party conservatives, who are demanding that Republicans balance the budget within the next 10 years.

Translation: We realize the Tea Party is composed of economic idiots, but they along with the Christian Taliban are our base, so we’re stuck with them.

Ryan argued that the plan offers “real spending discipline. It does this not through indiscriminate cuts that endanger our military . . . ”

Translation: We, of the right wing love guns, so we’ll protect the military.

Ryan said, adding that he has spoken with the major GOP candidates, who have all told him he is “on the right track. Each of these people running for president have all given their various ideas and reforms that perfectly jive with and are consistent with what we’re proposing.”

Translation: Our fools are so greedy for power, they would kill their own grandmothers for one vote. So, of course they agree with the party line.

In reaction to Democratic criticism that the plan “ends Medicare,” Ryan has tweaked that proposal: He now aims to preserve traditional Medicare as an option, though seniors could be required to pay significantly more for Medicare coverage if the program proved to be more expensive than the private plans.

Translation: Sure, you can keep Medicare; just pay more.

But though Ryan crafted the new variation with Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), Democrats have made clear that the veneer of bipartisanship will not inoculate him from a fresh round of political attack.

Translation: We found ourselves a Judas. Hey, we’re the religious right. What did you expect?

“The Republican proposal would end the Medicare guarantee, shift costs to seniors, and let Medicare wither on the vine, while providing billions in tax breaks for Big Oil and special interests, and destroying American jobs,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a statement.

Translation: Yes, Nancy is correct. But nobody listens to her. They’re more concerned with her face job.

On taxes, Ryan offers a bit more detail than he did last year about how Republicans would reshape the tax code. The proposal calls for replacing the current tax structure’s six brackets with just two: a 10 percent rate for lower-income earners and a 25 percent rate for upper-income earners.

Translation: You poor people who pay less than 10% (not counting that regressive FICA you pay) will now be additionally screwed, but don’t worry. It will help the rich. Feel better?

To pay for those changes, Ryan proposes to wipe out a vast array of deductions, credits and other tax breaks benefiting people and companies at virtually every income level. Neither he nor House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) on Tuesday spelled out specifics, but tax experts said their proposal would almost certainly have to take a whack at expensive tax breaks such as those for home mortgage interest, employer-provided health insurance and retirement savings.

Translation: We just ran this by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. They say it sounds good to them.

Ryan proposes $1.028 trillion in total agency spending — $19 billion less than the cap set during last summer’s bitter showdown over raising the legal limit on government borrowing, known as the debt ceiling. Ryan also proposes to instruct six House committees to come up with proposals by May for generating additional savings and averting across-the-board cuts set to hit in January.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said, “By desperately attempting to appease their extreme conservative base, House Republicans are reneging on a deal their own speaker shook on less than eight months ago,” she said. “They have shown that a deal with them isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on and they are threatening families across America yet again with the prospect of a government shutdown.”

House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) countered that the $1.047 trillion cap represents an upper limit, not an agreement. “People have limits on credit cards. That doesn’t mean that you’re required to spend up to the limit, it just says you can’t spend anymore than that,” Boehner told reporters. “We all know that we’ve got a real fiscal problem here in Washington. And, frankly, we think we can do better.

Translation: I am extremely religious, and my word means nothing. So, what’s wrong with that?
====================================================================================================================
Overall translation: If you make less than $300K per year, or truly are religious rather than mouthing piety, you’d be a fool to vote Tea/Republican. But if you are wealthy, and/or don’t give a damn about people less fortunate than you, and/or claim to be a patriot, but really don’t care about Americans, by all means vote for the Tea/Republicans.

I award the Tea/Republican Party five traitor images for trying to do more damage to America than Osama bin Laden ever dreamed of — just to win power.

Unpatriotic flagUnpatriotic flagUnpatriotic flagUnpatriotic flagUnpatriotic flag

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. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption + Net exports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY