–Will beat-down Greece become the leader of Europe? Sunday, Jan 25 2015 

Mitchell’s laws:
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the gap between rich and poor.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap.
==================================================================================================================================================================
“Because of the Euro, no euro nation can control its own money supply. The Euro is the worst economic idea since the recession-era, Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The economies of European nations are doomed by the euro.” (Rodger Malcolm Mitchell, speech at UMKC, June 5, 2005)

Will beat-down Greece become the leader of Europe? The opportunity is there. They have taken the first step.

Syriza Rides Anti-Austerity Wave to Decisive Victory in Greece
By Eleni Chrepa and Marcus Bensasson Jan 25, 2015

Alexis Tsipras’s Syriza brushed aside Prime Minister Antonis Samaras’s party to record a decisive victory in Greece’s elections, after riding a public backlash against years of budget cuts demanded by international creditors.

Even with a razor-thin majority or in a fragile coalition, the result still hands Tsipras, 40, a clear mandate to confront Greece’s program of austerity imposed in return for pledges of 240 billion euros ($269 billion) in aid since May 2010.

The challenge for him now is to strike a balance between keeping his election pledges including a writedown of Greek debt and avoiding what Samaras repeatedly warned was the risk of an accidental exit from the euro.

No, the risk is staying with the euro, which demands a continuing austerity — an austerity that has not worked and cannot work, simply because national deficit cuts never have, and never will, grow an economy.

Very simply, state deficits increase a nation’s money supply, and a growing economy requires a growing supply of money. Austerity “helps” an economy the same way applying leeches “helps” anemia. (This is a lesson America has yet to learn.)

“The Greek people punished New Democracy for governing in the petty manner of the old regime’s political parties,” Aristides Hatzis, an associate professor of law and economics at the University of Athens, said by phone.

“Most Greeks voting Syriza don’t expect a spectacular change but a marginal one. A marginal one would be significant for them.”

In other words, “We economists screwed up big time. Austerity has been a total disaster. But please don’t make any big changes.” That would be embarrassing for us.

“Overwhelmingly the Greek people voted against austerity policies,” the (Syriza)party said. “This result can be the first step for progressive developments throughout Europe.

The government will implement its political program addressing the humanitarian crisis and begin the real negotiation with our European partners.”

This is Greece’s opportunity to rid itself of the bloodsucking euro, a program that stole Greece’s Monetary Sovereignty and made Greece subject to the whims of Germany and the rest of Europe.

If Greece fails, whether by timidity or ignorance, to take advantage of this opportunity, the nation will continue to slide ever deeper into depression.

Then, their European masters will claim, “See? More and more austerity is necessary,” (i.e. more and more suffering is necessary).

Greece’s collapse is officially worse than the US Great Depression

The Greek economy has been through hell over the last few years. Unemployment is an atrocious 27%. And roughly 25% of the economy has been destroyed since the peak in late 2007.

That collapse in economic output puts the Greek recession right up there with the worst depressions in recent memory.

At its trough in the first quarter of 2014—which was revised lower in today’s report—the decline in Greek GDP was roughly 33% from the peak.

That’s actually worse than the US peak-to-trough GDP decline of 27% between 1929 and 1933, during the most acute phase of the Great Depression.

monetary sovereignty

A “marginal” change (whatever that means) is not what this disaster needs. A bit less of the austerity poison will not end the suffering.

A monetarily non-sovereign government can survive long term only if it has a positive balance of payments. Like a business or an individual (which are monetarily non-sovereign), more money must come in than goes out.

Net borrowing is not sustainable for an entity that does not have the unlimited power to create its own currency.
Greece must return to Monetary Sovereignty. It must re-adopt its own sovereign currency. Greece must regain control over its money supply.

Let us pray that Greece’s leaders have the knowledge, the honesty and the courage to throw off its leech creditors, give the finger to those who wish to keep it in bondage, and save the nation.

A prediction: Within two years of re-adopting its own sovereign currency, Greece will have a more viable economy than that of any euro nation.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

The Ten Steps will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.
——————————————————————————————————————————————

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

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.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

THE RECESSION CLOCK
Monetary Sovereignty

Monetary Sovereignty

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

–No greater disappointment than from those you love Friday, Jan 23 2015 

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Mitchell’s laws:
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the gap between rich and poor.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive,
and the motive is the Gap.
==================================================================================================================================================================

There is no greater disappointment than from those you love.

I love MMT (Modern Monetary Theory). It is the only, absolutely factual, description of federal financing, i.e., Monetary Sovereignty.

So it is particularly painful to read articles in which MMTers depart from fact and begin to theorize, falsely. For example, their “Jobs Guarantee” (JG), formerly named “Employer of Last Resort (ELR),” demonstrates how otherwise clear-thinking people can go wrong.

The name change only hints at the confusion. (At first, the federal government was the ELR. When that idea proved flawed, they thought up a fix, in which private industry would be the ELR, and changed the name to JG.)

I’ve read many descriptions of JG, all different (Ask any 10 MMTers, “Exactly how does JG work?” and you’ll get eleven different answers.)

Perhaps it is the simplicity of the words “Jobs Guarantee” that MMTers find so enticing. Hey, “if people lack jobs, just give ‘em jobs.”

But to be truthful, they should call it the “Low-Pay; Crappy-Jobs Guarantee,” for if you dig under the surface, you learn that by necessity, the jobs must be at or below the lowest legal pay, and almost surely will be the dregs of jobs.

MacDonald’s would be thrilled.

Then there is the ongoing MMT theory that federal taxes are necessary to give value to dollars. Once, I mentioned to Professor Randy Wray that not only was there no proof than any taxes were necessary for that purpose, but there already were plenty of local taxes. No federal taxes needed.

At the time he agreed. But since then I’ve not seen a correction to the “federal-taxes-are-necessary” theory. Perhaps I missed it.

And now the latest, painful disappointment comes from that solid MMTer, Yves Smith (actually Susan Webber), who authors the excellent blog, Naked Capitalism, where she published “Removing the Social Security Tax Cap Would Benefit Most Workers”.

Lord save the middle class folks from well-meaning, but economically ignorant, souls who wish to help them. Susan writes:

As Nicole Woo discusses in this Real News Network interview, one simple fix, that of eliminating the cap on who is subject to the tax, would solve most of the gap that is anticipated in long-term projections.

The Social Security tax, as now constituted, is regressive and thus promotes inequality, so lifting the cap also moves the tax system toward being more progressive.

That’s before we get to the MMT issue that “taxing” to fund any government activity is a political mechanism that is a holdover from the gold standard days, and not how government functions are funded operationally.

Eliminating the cap would “solve” virtually none of the gap (i.e. the gap between taxes collected and benefits paid), because the wealthiest of us collect very little in salaries. And for the same reason, lifting the cap would give only the illusion of progressivity.

And anyway, that gap does not need to be “solved.” Only problems need solutions, and that so-called gap is not a problem.

Susan even says it: “. . . taxing to fund any government activity is a political mechanism that is a holdover from the gold standard days, and not how government functions are funded operationally.”

She says it, then completely forgets is, because the rest of the article pretends that FICA funds Social Security.

. . . with more and more promised pensions being slashed, and investment returns flagging thanks to QE and ZIRP, the notion that ordinary people can save enough for their retirement is a chimera.

Thus preserving and strengthening Social Security is more important than ever.

Yes, QE and ZIRP have been an economic negative, but with the stock market up about 15% annually for the past 5 years (plus dividends), investment returns are far from “flagging.”

Her point, that Social Security needs to be strengthened is true, but raising taxes won’t strengthen Social Security one iota. That kind of belief has done nothing but punish the middle class.

The rest of the article contains Jessica Desvarieux of The Real News Network interviewing Nicole Woo, the director of domestic policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. “Her new paper is titled Who Would Pay More If the Social Security Payroll Tax Cap Were Raised or Scrapped?

DESVARIEUX: So, Nicole, who would actually pay more if this tax cap were raised or scrapped?

WOO: . . . the top 6 percent. So the people who are at the very top of the income scale are the only folks who would have to pay more if this payroll tax cap were raised or eliminated.

DESVARIEUX: And how high would that payroll tax cap have to be raised?

WOO: There are some proposals to eventually slowly phase the cap out entirely. And that would mean that the wealthiest people among us would pay the same rate as the rest of us, which seems kind of fair.

If Congress were to pass a bill like that, the Social Security shortfall that we’ve seen in the future would be reduced by about 70 to 80 percent.

A pants-on-fire lie. Even if Congress raised FICA to 100% of all salaries, the wealthiest among us never would pay the same rate as the rest of us — and Woo knows it. The highest income people have only a tiny fraction of their incomes in salaries.

Many of the upper 1% receive $0 in salary.

And there is no Social Security shortfall. Repeat, THERE IS NO SOCIAL SECURITY SHORTFALL. An honest and knowledgeable interviewer would have screamed “Bullsh*t Nicole. FICA does not pay for Social Security”

DESVARIEUX: But should we really be concerned about Social Security, since it’s solvent and currently has close to $3 trillion in its trust fund?

More bullsh*t. There is no trust fund and there is no money in that non-existent trust fund. It’s an accounting fiction, and the federal government controls the accounting.

WOO: Right now the Social Security trust fund does have a lot of money in it. And that’s because back in the ’80s Congress . . . decided to sort of pre-fund Social Security.

So since 1983, workers, American workers, have been putting more into Social Security than has been coming out. It’s their money that’s in the trust fund.

More bullsh*t. FICA dollars, like all federal taxes, disappear from the economy. When the government wishes to spend, it creates brand new dollars, ad hoc.

WOO: What has happened since the ’80s is actually inequality has increased. So more and more of the wages in this country are above the payroll tax cap–they’re above what’s right now $118,500.

That cap has been moving up with inflation every year. But as the income gaps have gotten wider, more and more of the wealthy’s income has been shielded, which is part of why the trust fund isn’t quite as big as we needed it to be.

Social Security will be fine until about 2033. After that point, Social Security will be able to pay about three quarters of the benefits promised, and nobody wants to see a cut of 25 percent. But that’s still significant money.

More scare-mongering bullsh*t. It means, “If you suckers don’t pay more FICA the federal government will run short of dollars to pay Social Security benefits.”

Do you believe the U.S. federal government, which creates from thin air, millions of dollars every day, somehow can run short of dollars? It’s part of the BIG LIE, funded by the upper .1%.

DESVARIEUX: So, Nicole, are you saying that if we were to do away with this cap, then we wouldn’t run into that issue?

WOO: Some of the bills out there that were in the last Congress would slowly eliminate the cap entirely, and that would take care of 70 to 80 percent of the shortfall. [I.e. the non-existent shortfall]

There are some other bills that raise the cap, like, from 118,000 to 250,000 or to 400,000, and that would mean people would pay the payroll tax, but not on all of their income for the wealthiest,.

And, of course, those bills would take care of less of the shortfall. As people talk about ways to shore up Social Security, this is one of the most effective ways to take care of it.

Even more bullsh*t. Raising taxes does nothing to “shore up” Social Security.

Unlike the state, county and city governments, which are monetarily non-sovereign, and do use tax dollars, the federal government neither needs nor uses tax dollars for any purpose whatsoever.

Even if all federal taxes fell to $0, the federal government could continue spending, forever. (See Step #1 in the Ten Steps to Prosperity.)

And, again, it’s about fairness. It’s about making sure that all workers pay the same rate in their Social Security taxes.

What’s really depressing is not that someone like Woo, who is paid to slather the bullsh*t wide and deep, earns her ill-gotten gains.

No, what’s depressing is that someone like Susan Webber, who knows and supports the facts, chooses to provide a forum for these harmful lies.

There is no greater disappointment. This truly is painful.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

The Ten Steps will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.
——————————————————————————————————————————————

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

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.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

THE RECESSION CLOCK
Monetary Sovereignty

Monetary Sovereignty

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

–What is America’s goal? A “tri-focus” approach. Shrink, grow, maintain. Sunday, Jan 18 2015 

Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Mitchell’s laws:
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the gap between rich and poor.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive,
and the motive is the Gap.
==================================================================================================================================================================

Before retirement, I specialized in small business turnarounds. I entered troubled small businesses, and brought them back to life.

The first step: Analyze their problems – and really the word should be “problem” (singular), because inevitably they all had the same problem: Lack of focus.

Usually, they had a core business, and they had side businesses. They seemed to feel they could “do that at the same time they did this,” and get extra income.

Unfortunately, the side businesses took time, attention and money away from the core business. They diluted the core business functionality and identity in the eyes of existing and potential customers.

The first goal: Focus on a core business narrow enough that you could be the biggest among any competitors in that core business.

Example: An educational software company had created one excellent program – a business simulation program – that they sold to college students, who used it to experience running a simulated business.

Additionally, the company created ad hoc specialty programs for anyone who wanted one. The ad hoc programs usually were “one offs” – programs that were sold once. The business simulation was sold year after year to college students – an ongoing income stream.

I focused them on one goal: Making their business simulation for colleges the most popular in the world. We eliminated the ad hoc simulations. The result of that focus: The business simulation, in fact, became the world’s most popular for college students.

The income lost by eliminating ad hoc simulations was made up a hundred fold by the increase in core business sales. The reason: There are many important marketing advantages to being the #1 in any business.

Another example: A company used telemarketing to sell used lawbooks to attorneys, and also had a retail store that sold office nicknacks to attorneys (scales of justice, pen sets, etc).

We closed the store and focused all our efforts on selling used lawbooks. We became the world’s largest, and importantly, became well known among lawyers. Any lawyer who wanted books thought of us.

This is what these companies learned: You will succeed by focusing on the goal of being #1. There is a great temptation to reach in many directions, but by doing so, you will fail in all.

One benefit of focus is that you get every employee on the same page. All can visualize where you want to go. Their suggestions will tend to be on point. Their decisions will be appropriate. They will understand the question: “Will this help get us to where we want to go?”

That brings us to the title question: What is America’s goal? Where do we want to go? What is our focus?

Do we wish to:

–Increase national economic growth?
–Prevent global warming?
–Save our ecology?
–Improve fairness in the legal system?
–Increase the physical and psychological well-being of all Americans?
–Reduce abortions?
–Improve mass transportation?
–Reduce air and water pollution?
–Increase the prosperity of all Americans?
–Narrow the Gap between the rich and the rest?
–Reduce illegal drug use?
–Reduce bigotry?
–Reduce poverty?
–Reduce crime?
–Reduce unemployment?
–Foster democracy?
–Increase domestic freedom?
–Make voting fairer?
–Increase privacy?
–Reduce illegal immigration?
–Improve our education?
–Increase exports?
–Bring democracy to other nations?
–Foster domestic freedom?
–Win the Olympics?
–Bring freedom to other nations?
–Make us safer from foreign powers?
–All of the above?

There probably are many other goals you can imagine, and that is the point. Ask any ten people, “What is America’s goal,” and you may receive ten different answers.

What is your answer?

When I first asked small business owners what they felt were their most important goals, they had many different answers. But, there only was one correct answer: “Identify and focus on a core business that I can make the #1 in my world.

It was another way of asking, “How can I be the best?” It forces one to ask, “The best at what?” And that is the beginning of focus.

If we ask, “How can America be the best?” the next question is, “The best at what?”

Those are the two questions every Presidential candidate, every CEO, every leader should ask and answer: “How can we be the best? The best at what?” It’s what’s known as leadership.

Yet few Presidents or candidates do it.

Our national leaders seldom seem to articulate a national goal. Rather, each Presidential speech, and each economist’s paper, offers a partial solution to the problem du jour.

Too many unemployed? Try some form of “jobs guarantee.” (Which form? We have no idea.)
Taxes too high? Add a few more deductions. (Which deductions? We have no idea.)
Poverty? Food stamps. (Or public housing. Or Medicaid. Or school vouchers. Which? All? We have no idea.)

Now in truth, the federal government is not the same as a small business. Far from it. For a “company” as big as the U.S. government, focusing on one core goal might not be appropriate. Still, the nation needs focus.

Offering a focus allows the citizens to understand what our nation and our leaders wish to accomplish, and to evaluate ideas based on accomplishing that goal.

So, I suggest this “tri-focus”:

1. Shrink the Gap between the rich and the rest
2. Grow the real (inflation adjusted) per-capita economy
3. Maintain national security

And that’s it. Shrink, grow and maintain. Focus on those three goals and everything good will follow.

That focus also allows us not only to evaluate ideas and plans, but also allows us to evaluate our progress.

Has the Gap between the rich and the rest narrowed? Has the real per-capita economy grown? Have we maintained national security?

(Based on our progress toward those specific goals, how successful has the current Presidency and Congress been?)

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

The Ten Steps will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.
——————————————————————————————————————————————

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

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.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

THE RECESSION CLOCK
Monetary Sovereignty

Monetary Sovereignty

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

–The mystery of right-wing election victories. The answer and the question. Wednesday, Jan 14 2015 

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Mitchell’s laws:
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the gap between rich and poor.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive,
and the motive is the Gap.
==================================================================================================================================================================

Many factors account for election victories — organization, charisma, gerrymandering, scandal, money, media support — even on rare occasion, actual issues.

But there is one factor that seems to explain the Republican Congressional victories of late.

Before we reveal it, let’s look at some seeming logic.

As a generality, Republicans wish to:
–Reduce Social Security benefits
–Eliminate federal support for health care insurance
–Eliminate or reduce social programs for the poor
–Cut taxes on the rich while broadening the tax base
–Reduce the power of the Environmental Protection Agency
–Increase the ability of the rich to buy politicians and elections
–Eliminate same-sex marriage
–Eliminate all abortions, regardless of circumstance
–Give private corporations the right to impose religious beliefs on employees
–Give everyone the legal right to carry a hidden weapon, and to buy or sell weapons without a background check
–Make immigration more difficult, and deport undocumented immigrants

Polls seem to indicate various majorities of Americans disagree with those positions.

Additionally:

Forty-two percent of Americans, on average, identified as political independents in 2013, the highest Gallup has measured since it began conducting interviews by telephone 25 years ago.

Meanwhile, Republican identification fell to 25%, the lowest over that time span. At 31%, Democratic identification is unchanged from the last four years but down from 36% in 2008.

Americans’ increasing shift to independent status has come more at the expense of the Republican Party than the Democratic Party. Republican identification peaked at 34% in 2004, the year George W. Bush won a second term in office.

Since then, it has fallen nine percentage points, with most of that decline coming during Bush’s troubled second term. When he left office, Republican identification was down to 28%. It has declined or stagnated since then, improving only slightly to 29% in 2010, the year Republicans “shellacked” Democrats in the midterm elections.

Given only these factors, one might suppose that Democrats have won most recent elections. But that hasn’t been the case. Why?

The financially stressed favor Democrats, don’t vote much, study finds

About half of American adults have no retirement account beyond Social Security, 4 in 10 don’t have a credit card, and 1 in 5 lack a checking account.

Statistics like that paint a picture of the widespread nature of financial insecurity in the U.S. Americans who are most financially secure were, by a large margin, the most likely to have voted this last fall, the study found. They were also the most likely to favor Republicans.

Americans whose finances are precarious tended to reject the GOP, but were also much more likely to have dropped out of the political process, either not registering to vote or not planning to cast a ballot.

Among the most well-off, about half favored the GOP. That support dropped to fewer than 1 in 5 among the least well-off, the study found.

And, don’t think it’s just a matter of race:

Support for the two parties was very similar whether they looked at the overall electorate or just at white Americans. Democrats got less support among whites than among the electorate as a whole, but the level of backing was fairly consistent at all levels of financial security.

Support for Republicans dropped sharply among whites in the least financially stable groups.

Those who are better off are more conservative on issues involving government spending and help for the poor. The wealthy are much more likely than the poor to believe that government benefits are overly generous. The poor are also more skeptical of business than are the well off.

On only one issue in the survey, immigration, were less economically secure Americans more likely than the well off to take a conservative stand.

Well-off Americans said, by more than 2-1, that they agreed with a statement that immigrants “strengthen our country” rather than one that said that immigrants are a “burden … because they take our jobs.”

Among the least financially secure, that pro-immigration position still commanded a majority, but the division was much tighter, 51%-44%.

Why do the less-financially-secure not vote their own self interest? Their best hope for a more compassionate government, is to elect Democrats. Yet they don’t take that simple, no-cost step.

I suspect that not having money induces feelings of weakness and hopelessness, while having money gives one a sense of power and control.

Perhaps the poor and middle-income-groups have become so accustomed to being treated unfairly (compared with the rich), that they no longer even see the unfairness. Perhaps, they merely accept that “It’s just the way life is?” “Why bother to fight it?”

I also suspect that only a charismatic, populist leader — for instance a Roosevelt or a Kennedy — can arouse the people from their torpor, and get them to the polls.

President Obama could have been the one, but he proved either to be weak or fiscally in league with the right wing.

Until a true liberal emerges — a liberal who understands Monetary Sovereignty — the 99% will continue to lose what they currently have and see their futures diminished.

The sole question: Will the people even bother to vote for that liberal?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

The Ten Steps will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.
——————————————————————————————————————————————

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

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.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

THE RECESSION CLOCK
Monetary Sovereignty

Monetary Sovereignty

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 618 other followers