We have arrived at a tipping point in which one small event could turn America into a horrifying dictatorship. Friday, Sep 18 2020 

Question: Which is the greater danger to America and your freedoms: Protesters against bigotry and police brutality, or a dictator aided by a brutal military?

Lest you believe that for some unknown reason, America is immune to the horrors of a dictatorship, that also is what Chileans believed.

Here is what happened in Chile

The military dictatorship of Chile was a right-wing authoritarian military regime that ruled Chile for seventeen years, between September 11, 1973 and March 11, 1990.

The coup was the result of multiple forces, including pressure from conservative and women’s groups, certain political parties, union strikes and other domestic unrest.

The dictatorship was established after the democratically-elected socialist government of Salvador Allende was overthrown in a US-backed coup d’état on 11 September 1973.

During this time, the country was ruled by a military junta headed by General Augusto Pinochet. The military used the alleged breakdown of democracy and the economic crisis that took place during Allende’s presidency to justify its seizure of power.

The regime was characterized by the systematic suppression of political parties and the persecution of dissidents to an extent unprecedented in the history of Chile.

Overall, the regime left over 3,000 dead or missing, tortured tens of thousands of prisoners, and drove an estimated 200,000 Chileans into exile.

The Chilean dictatorship was at first supported by many Chileans — conservative groups, women’s groups, political parties, and domestic unrest. Only when they were trapped did they come to rue their support.

Keep all of the above in mind as you consider the situation in the U.S.:

Report: Barr suggested charging violent protesters with sedition
Attorney General William Barr last week urged federal prosecutors to consider filing sedition charges against people accused of violence at protests against racial injustice,

The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday, citing people familiar with the conference call. Some of the people on the call reportedly were alarmed by the unusual suggestion of charging rioters with insurrection.

Barr also reportedly asked the Justice Department’s civil rights division whether Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan could be criminally charged for letting people establish a police-free protest zone in the city this summer. Durkan, a Democrat President Trump has criticized, called the suggestion of criminal charges “chilling” and an abuse of power.

Trump and Barr are avid defenders of the Constitution, so long as their support is limited to the current translation of the 2nd Amendment.

As for other parts of the Constitution, not so much. They want to prosecute protesters as traitors to America. The purpose: To chill all protests.

This makes Attorney General Barr, the purported defender of the Constitution, America’s biggest legal threat to our Constitutional rights.

When law enforcement forcibly cleared protesters from Lafayette Square to make room for trump’s photo-op at St. John’s church, federal officials began to stockpile ammunition and seek devices that could emit deafening sounds and make anyone within range feel like their skin is on fire.Pax on both houses: Trump's Defeated Defenders Can Only Wimper

The Provost Marshal of Joint Force Headquarters National Capital Region looked for two things: a long-range acoustic device, a kind of sound cannon and a heat ray weapon).

There have been questions about whether the heat ray weapon worked, or should be deployed in the first place. It uses millimeter wave technology to essentially heat the skin of people targeted by its invisible ray.

The lead military police officer in the National Capital Region wrote the ADS device “can provide our troops a capacity they currently do not have, the ability to reach out and engage potential adversaries.”

Pentagon officials were reluctant to use the heat ray device in Iraq.

In late 2018, the Trump administration had weighed using the device on migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border — an idea shot down by Kirstjen Nielsen, then the Homeland Security secretary, citing humanitarian concerns.

Humanitarian concerns (i.e. political concerns) prevented Trump from using a cruel device on migrants, but then Trump’s administration considered using the same, inhumane device on American protesters.

Excessive Force Used Against Protesters Outside White House, Guard Commander Claims
Crowds were peaceful when Park Police began to aggressively clear them from the area ahead of President Donald Trump’s speech at St. John’s Episcopal Church, according to Maj. Adam DeMarco.

“From my observation, those demonstrators — our fellow American citizens — were engaged in the peaceful expression of their First Amendment rights,” DeMarco said in his statement. “Yet they were subjected to an unprovoked escalation and excessive use of force.”

DeMarco’s account runs counter to the way Attorney General William Barr described the protesters in a June 7 CBS News interview.

“The Park Police was facing what they considered to be a very rowdy and non-compliant crowd,” he said during the interview. “And there were projectiles being hurled at the police.”

DeMarco: “I asked my Park Police liaison if tear gas would be used because I had observed tear gas canisters affixed to Park Police officers’ vests, and I knew that tear gas had been used against demonstrators the previous evening,” he said in the statement. “The Park Police liaison told me that tear gas would not be employed.”

“General Milley told me to ensure that National Guard personnel remained calm, adding that we were there to respect the demonstrators’ First Amendment rights.”

Peaceful protesters were violently cleared so Trump could have his picture taken holding a bible.

At approximately 6:30 p.m., Park Police, led by Civil Disturbance Units and horse-mounted officers, were joined by Secret Service and other law enforcement personnel as they began the clearing operation, DeMarco said.

“I heard explosions and saw smoke being used to disperse the protesters,” he said in his statement. “I could feel irritation in my eyes and nose and, based on my previous exposure to tear gas in my training at West Point and later in my Army training, I recognized that irritation as effects consistent with CS or ‘tear gas.’ Later that evening, I found spent tear gas canisters on the street nearby.”

“From my vantage point, I saw demonstrators scattering and fleeing as the Civil Disturbance Unit charged toward them; I observed people fall to the ground as some Civil Disturbance Unit members used their shields offensively as weapons.

“As I walked behind the Civil Disturbance Units pushing westward on H Street, I also observed unidentified law enforcement personnel behind our National Guardsmen using ‘paintball-like’ weapons to discharge what I later learned to be ‘pepper balls’ into the crowd, as demonstrators continued to retreat.”

At around 7:05 p.m, DeMarco said he saw Trump walking onto H Street from Lafayette Square, near St. John’s Church, accompanied by his security detail.

“Having served in a combat zone, and understanding how to assess threat environments, at no time did I feel threatened by the protesters or assess them to be violent,” DeMarco said in the statement.

“In addition, considering the principles of proportionality of force and the fundamental strategy of graduated responses specific to civil disturbance operations, it was my observation that the use of force against demonstrators in the clearing operation was an unnecessary escalation of the use of force.”

And all this — the tear gas, the use of shields offensively, the consideration of a heat ray weapon and a deafening-sounds weapon — all this were used against peaceful demonstrators, just so Donald Trump could have a photo-op holding a bible.

Now imagine what horrors might have been committed had the demonstrators really been a threat to anyone or had Trump’s mission been more vital to American security than a photo-op.

In Barr, Trump has quasi-legal support for the notion that the President of the United States is a supreme, king-like figure whose power cannot be questioned, and whose crimes cannot be punished.

William Barr’s full-throated defense of the Unitary theory of executive power is built on a fictional reading of constitutional design

Attorney General William Barr’s November 15 speech before the Federalist Society, delivered at its annualNational Lawyers Convention,received considerable attention.Barr attackedwhat he views as progressives’ unscrupulous and relentless attacks on President Trump and Senate Democrats’ “abuse of the advice-and-consent process.”

Ironies notwithstanding, the core analysis of his speech is a full-throated defense of the Unitary theory of executive power, which purports to be an Originalist view of the Founders’ intent.

This defense, however, reveals the two fundamental flaws of the Unitary view: first, that it is built on a fictional reading of constitutional design; and second, that its precepts attack the fundamental tenets of the checks and balances system that the Founders did create.

Barr’s speech begins with his complaint that presidential power has been weakened in recent decades by the “steady encroachment” of executive powers by the other branches.

No sane analysis of the Reagan era forward could buttress Barr’s ahistorical claim.

Barr claims that the Founders’ chief antagonist during the Revolutionary period was not the British monarchy but an overbearing Parliament. Had Barr bothered to consult the Declaration of Independence, he would have found the document to direct virtually all of its ire against “the present King of Great Britain.”

Barr dismisses the idea of inter-branch power-sharing as “mushy thinking.” Yet the essence of checks and balances is power-sharing.

Americans fought and died in the Revolutionary War to free us from the overbearing power of a king, which Barr now wishes to re-install. A “King Trump” would be just fine in Barr’s “unitary President” world.

Donald Trump vs. The Media: Who Will Win the War? | Analysis
by NEWSWEEK STAFF

Since Donald Trump took office as President of the United State he has consistently portrayed the media as a force for evil against him.

It began in his first press conference and has continued throughout. “Bashing media organizations may be Donald Trump’s most consistent hobby,” wrote The Economist.

President Trump has defined “fake news” as any report he deems unfavorable, political- and media-watchers say, and he has intensified the attacks throughout his term.

“The Fake News hates me saying that they are the Enemy of the People only because they know it’s TRUE. I am providing a great service by explaining this to the American People. They purposely cause great division & distrust. They can also cause War! They are very dangerous & sick!”

Much to the surprise, the regret, and the agony of their citizens, many democratic nations have become dictatorships. The reasons always are the same”

  1. Dictators fear, then disparage, then discredit, then destroy the independent media. When the public sees and hears only the dictator’s side, public support is assured.
  2. All dictatorships use the same excuses: National security and law-and-order. Any protest or disagreement with the dictator is considered treason and sedition (as Barr has proposed), to be punished in the most brutal way. They are arrested and even tortured and murdered
  3. The dictator turns the military against the citizens. A military always does as ordered, even when the orders are immoral, unlawful and/or inhumane. Those few in the military who object are punished (See: Colonel Vindman)
  4. Dictators demand absolute power. Attorney General Barr procured his job by writing a paper supporting the Unitary vision of the Presidency — complete and exclusive control over the Executive branch, foreign policy preeminence, and no sharing of powers among the branches.
The fascinating mystery of Trump's approach to Putin - CNN

“Would you like a Trump Tower, Moscow?”

Now, American elections approach — elections that Russia is attempting to turn toward Trump (just as the U.S. supported dictator Pinochet against Chile’s democratically elected Allende).

Trump and his minions continue their attempts to disenfranchise Democratic voters all over the country by gerrymandering, interfering with postal operations, the closing of polling places in Democratic areas, and other methods.

Trump already has said that if he loses, as President he will consider the election illegally “rigged,” and he has considered not abiding by the results.

Trump has installed Barr, to give a legal veneer to a dictatorship (i.e. the unitary President), but to “legally” punish all who oppose Trump.

Trump does not even attempt to hide his admiration for dictators Putin, Kim, Duterte, et al.

The vast majority of protests against bigotry and police brutality are peaceful. You wouldn’t know that if you listen to Trump.

He already is playing the “law-and-order” card with regard to protests. Violent Trump supporters — QAnon and white supremacists — have begun to infiltrate the otherwise peaceful protests to give Trump an excuse for a military response to Constitutionally protected demonstrations.

The citizens of formerly democratic nations — Germany, Cuba, Chile for example — believed “it couldn’t happen here.” Yet, much to their dismay, it happened with the support of those who valued the siren song of harsh rule by a strongman over democratic rule and justice for all.

In a democracy, the injustice done to you is an injustice done to me. Sadly, the bigots among us don’t subscribe to that decency. They fear and despise the elements of our society who are in various ways “different,” and welcome Trumpian harshness.

That polls that show Trump with more than 45% support indicates the tenuous grip we Americans have on our democracy. Nearly half of America supports the dictatorship of a psychopath.

In summary:

We have arrived at a tipping point in which one small event could turn America into a horrifying dictatorship, that could inflame the entire world for decades.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

  1. Eliminate FICA
  2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone
  3. Social Security for all or a reverse income tax
  4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
  5. Salary for attending school
  6. Eliminate federal taxes on business
  7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 
  8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.
  9. Federal ownership of all banks
  10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

It’s all about the mask, stupid Wednesday, Sep 16 2020 

Way, way back, on May 5th, 2020, we published, “The surprisingly simple way to open America in 14 days and avoid a depression.” It said:

“COVID-19 transmits primarily through the air by droplets. Stop the droplets and you stop the transmission. The incubation period is 14 days. If everyone wore a mask, even just a simple cloth mask, the virus would cease to be transmitted in two weeks.

“We wouldn’t have to wait for a vaccine or a cure. We all could go back to work.”

The easily understood reasoning was:

  1. If you inhale just one viral particle, you won’t get sick. It takes a larger viral load to make you sick.
  2. If I wear a mask, most of my viral droplets won’t reach you, and
  3. If you also wear a mask, those few droplets that do travel all the way to you, will be intercepted by your mask. 
  4. Thus you’ll actually inhale so few, if any, of my virus-containing droplets (and vice-versa), and the viral load will be so low, our immune systems will be able to deal with them. 

This does not require a degree in rocket science or even in viral science, neither of which I have. It is clear, easy, simple common sense, most of which I have learned from my wife.

Wear a cloth over your face, and less of your spit won’t travel as far, nor will the other guy’s spit, and les of his spit won’t get to you.

Really, is that so hard?

But at the time, mask-wearing was derided as unnecessary, un-masculine, unproven, and un-American as it supposedly interfered with our God-given freedoms, i.e. freedoms to infect other people, freedoms to get sick, freedoms to overwhelm hospitals, and freedoms to die. (To conservatives, all freedoms are “God-given” — carrying guns, or shooting protesters — those sorts of freedoms.)

Subsequently, we have learned the President knew about the way COVID-19 is transmitted, and how serious it is, but he didn’t want to “panic” people. (He prefers to bigot-panic “white, suburban housewives” that given the right to vote, criminal blacks and Latinos will move into the suburbs, looting, burning, pillaging, and raping said housewives).

The President, who claims to have “done everything he could to stop the virus, sets a precedent for not wearing masks by not wearing one himself, and by holding mass ego-stroking rallies attended by future Darwin Award winners.

 

Trump, Nevada

Future Darwin Award Winners: Only supporters who would appear in TV footage of the event, had to wear masks

Now, it’s a long, long time from May to September, and incredibly, mask-wearing is still controversial, at least among Trump followers, who not only don’t wear masks, but demand that others not wear masks, either. (Presumably, these are the same people who don’t cover their mouths when they cough or sneeze, or who insist on smoking in restaurants and airplanes, or who lick other people’s spoons.)

But belatedly, science is beginning to catch up with common sense, and overcome Trumpian nut-case politics:

CDC director says masks are ‘more guaranteed’ to protect against COVID-19 than a vaccine

The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is once again stressing the importance of masks in the coronavirus pandemic, calling them “more guaranteed” to protect against COVID-19 than a vaccine.

CDC Director Robert Redfield testified before Congress on Wednesday and emphasized to lawmakers that face masks are the “most important, powerful public health tool we have,” urging “all Americans” to “embrace” them because doing so could bring the COVID-19 pandemic “under control.”

“I might even go so far as to say that this face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine,” Redfield said. “Because the immunogenicity may be 70 percent, and if I don’t get an immune response, the vaccine is not going to protect me. This face mask will.”

Well, wearing masks may, or may not prove to be more protective than vaccination, but this much I absolutely, positively can say: Wearing masks is more protective than any non-existent vaccine.

So, until a safe, proven vaccine is developed and given to everyone, there is only one, sensible alternative — the one Trump advises against.

These comments from Redfield come after President Trump, who for months resisted wearing a face mask in public, claimed during an ABC town hall on Tuesday that despite what public health experts have said, “a lot of people,” such as “waiters,” think masks are “not good.”

Well, there you have it: Trump’s oft-spoken “a lot of people:” In this case, waiters. (“A lot of people said (Russian bounties) are a fake issue.” “A lot of people think Edward Snowden is not being treated fairly.” “A Lot of people say George Soros is funding the migrant caravan.” “A lot of people’ say there were spies in my campaign”)

By the way, I ate at a restaurant today. Though we were outdoors, our mask-wearing waiter — smarter than Trump –took our orders while standing several feet away. We also work masks.

Redfield told Congress on Wednesday, “We have clear scientific evidence: [masks] work, and they are our best defense.”

During the hearing, after Trump earlier this week claimeda COVID-19 vaccine could be ready in just three or four weeks, Redfield predicted that one could be “initially” available in “very limited supply” in November or December. But in terms of when a vaccine could be “generally available to the American public,” Redfield said this could come in “late second quarter, third quarter 2021.” Brendan Morrow

In summary, we told you in May what Redfield is telling you in September. There are four takeaways from this post:

  1. Dummies don’t wear masks.
  2. Dummies tell other people not to wear masks.
  3. Dummies believe anything Donald Trump says.
  4. Dummies will vote for Trump.

How do I know this? A lot of people say so.

Wear the damn mask.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve: Ten Steps To Prosperity:

  1. Eliminate FICA
  2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone
  3. Social Security for all or a reverse income tax
  4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
  5. Salary for attending school
  6. Eliminate federal taxes on business
  7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 
  8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.
  9. Federal ownership of all banks
  10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest. MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

COVID-19 is the most important event in 80 years, but this is far more important yet. Tuesday, Sep 15 2020 

COVID-19 may kill at least a half-million Americans and five-million worldwide, just in the next two or three years, unless we are able to develop a vaccine and unless people will be encouraged to take it.

That is an awful lot of deaths, but it pales in comparison to the people who will suffer and die because of global warming.

More Than 250,000 People May Die Each Year Due to Climate Change
By Rachael Rettner January 17, 2019

In the coming decades, more than a quarter-million people may die each year as a result of climate change, according to a new review study.

In 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that climate change would lead to about 250,000 additional deaths each year between 2030 and 2050, from factors such as malnutrition, heat stress and malaria.

But the new review, published Jan. 17 in The New England Journal of Medicine, said this is a “conservative estimate.” That’s because it fails to take into account other climate-related factors that could affect death rates — such as population displacement and reductions in labor productivity from farmers due to increased heat, study co-author Dr. Andrew Haines, epidemiologist and former director of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, told CNN.

In addition, the WHO estimate didn’t take into account illnesses and deaths tied to disruptions in health services caused by extreme weather and climate events, the review said.

Climate change is the single, most important, species-survival event to take place since humans began to walk the earth. Yet it doesn’t receive the media attention of COVID-19, or police brutality, or the stock markets, or sports.

While an entire, multi-page section of your daily newspaper is devoted to sports, the looming extinction of our species garners only the occasional article.

Yet, climate change is actively denied by Donald Trump and his science-illiterate followers.

One might hope that the potential suffering and eradication of a substantial portion of our children and grandchildren, and their children and grandchildren, would merit a bit more seriousness. Sadly, we must endure “present bias,” in which future lives are discounted vs. current comfort.

Even those who wish to address the threat to the survival of the human species are blocked by ignorance and myths.

Joe Biden sets out aggressive plan to tackle climate change
By Evan Halper, Staff, writer, July 14, 2020

WASHINGTON — Joe Biden unveiled a proposal for rebuilding the economy Tuesday that focuses heavily on restoring American leadership in the fight against global warming, directing government recovery efforts toward expanding clean energy and rapidly reversing the Trump administration’s abandonment of climate efforts.

In a speech in Wilmington, Del., the former vice president called for a massive green jobs and environmental justice program that would invest $2 trillion in his first term on building new renewable energy infrastructure.

“Climate change is a challenge that’s going to define our American future,” Biden said. “I know meeting the challenge will be a once in a lifetime opportunity to jolt new life into our economy, strengthen our global leadership, protect our planet … We’re not just going to tinker around the edges. We’re going to make historic investments that will seize the opportunity to meet this moment in history.”

The spending would go toward expansion of high-speed rail, building electric cars and greatly increasing the use of wind, solar and other renewable technologies to generate power, among other goals. Under Biden’s plan, the U.S. would fully end the use of oil, coal and other fossil fuels to generate electricity by 2035. He would bring the nation to net zero emissions of greenhouse gases no later than 2050.

The plan is notably more aggressive than the one Biden campaigned on during his party’s primaries, part of an overall move in which he has embraced some of the proposals of his more progressive rivals in an effort to unify the party for the general election.

This is the “aggressive” plan — 30 more years of global warming?? Thirty more years of increasing death rates as the world gets warmer and warmer?

We won’t get into the non-science or pseudo-science of global warming deniers. If you want to see the claims, go here. I’ll go along with the scientific majority on this.

If the scientific majority is wrong, and we take action, we’ll only have devoted a lot of time and money to controlling CO2, while creating millions of jobs. If the scientific majority is right, and we take action, we’ll save humanity. 

Compared with Biden’s earlier proposals, the current one would spend more, do it faster and aim more investment toward disadvantaged communities.

“The science tells us there is no time for delay on climate change,” the plan says. “Biden will make a $2 trillion accelerated investment, with a plan to deploy those resources over his first term, setting us on an irreversible course to meet the ambitious climate progress that science demands.”

Why only $2 trillion? That’s less than the U.S is spending to remediate COVID 19 — i.e. to deal not only with the disease itself, but also dealing with its current and future effects on people and the economy.

Consider the current an future effects of global warming:

Arctic ‘transitioning’ to a new climate
Extremes are becoming routine, study suggests.

The Arctic has started to transition from predominantly frozen to an entirely different climate, according to a new report.

Writing in the journal Nature Climate Change, scientists from the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) say the planet’s north has warmed so significantly that its year-to-year variability is moving outside the bounds of any past fluctuations, signalling the move to a new normal.

Sea ice has melted to the extent that even an unusually cold year will no longer have the amount of summer sea ice that existed as recently as the mid-20th century.

“The rate of change is remarkable,” says lead author Laura Landrum. “It’s a period of such rapid change that observations of past weather patterns no longer show what you can expect next year.”

And this:

CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE

  • Ice is melting worldwide, especially at the Earth’s poles. Global sea levels are rising 0.13 inches (3.2 millimeters) a year, and the rise is occurring at a faster rate in recent years.

  • Vanishing ice has challenged species such as the Adélie penguin in Antarctica, where some populations on the western peninsula have collapsed by 90 percent or more.

  • Precipitation (rain and snowfall) with severe floods has increased across the globe, on average.

  • Yet, some regions are experiencing more severe drought, increasing the risk of wildfires, lost crops, and drinking water shortages.

  • Ticks, jellyfish, and crop pests—are thriving. Booming populations of bark beetles that feed on spruce and pine trees, for example, have devastated millions of forested acres in the U.S.

  • Hurricanes and other storms are likely to become stronger.

  • Large parts of the U.S., for example, face a higher risk of decades-long “megadroughts” by 2100.

  • Less freshwater will be available, since glaciers store about three-quarters of the world’s freshwater.

  • Some diseases will spread, such as mosquito-borne malaria (and the 2016 resurgence of the Zika virus).

  • Ecosystems will continue to change: Some species will move farther north or become more successful; others, such as polar bears, won’t be able to adapt and could become extinct.

And we as a species, may not be able to tolerate the heat in many parts of the globe. Much of the world will become unlivable:

Unsuitable for ‘human life to flourish’: Up to 3B will live in extreme heat by 2070, study warns
Doyle Rice, USA TODAY

Temperatures over the next few decades are projected to increase rapidly as a result of human greenhouse gas emissions. 

Without climate mitigation or migration, by 2070 a substantial part of humanity will be exposed to average annual temperatures warmer than nearly anywhere today, the study said. These brutally hot climate conditions are currently experienced by just 0.8% of the global land surface, mostly in the hottest parts of the Sahara Desert, but by 2070 the conditions could spread to 19% of the Earth’s land area.

These are projections. They may be high or low. Yes, the situation could even be much worse than projected. Are we willing to take that chance with the future of our grandchildren and their grandchildren? Is this the legacy we wish to leave for future generations?

But it gets even worse:

Climate change will reduce food production which is predicted to lead to a net increase of 529,000 adult deaths worldwide by 2050, according to a 2016 study.

Climate change could also force more than 100 million people into extreme poverty by 2030, according to World Bank estimates, which in turn, would make them more vulnerable to the health effects of the changing climate.

This planet is our only home, and will be our only home for the foreseeable future. We are like a tiny lifeboat in a giant ocean. The lifeboat is leaking but still, we argue about whether to fix the leaks. It’s madness.

Republicans warned the plan would further sink the economy and trigger the loss of millions more jobs.

“Today, Joe Biden gave a speech in which he said the core of his economic agenda is a hard-left crusade against American energy,” President Trump said during an hourlong Rose Garden polemic against Biden.

“He wants to kill American energy. This would do nothing for the environment but would cripple the American economy.”

Trump doesn’t want you to know that Biden wants to add stimulus dollars to the economy. This will create far more jobs than did Trump’s tax cuts for the rich.

Some key details, however, were absent from (Biden’s) proposal. Most notably, it does not specify how it would be paid for.

Senior campaign officials said a rollback of the Trump tax cuts, as well an increase in corporate taxes would be part of the payment plan, which the campaign vowed to release in the coming months.

The best part of Biden’s plan is that it would add $2 trillion to the economy. A rollback of tax cuts and an increase in corporate taxes would be unnecessary and counter-productive.

The U.S. federal government is Monetarily Sovereign., Unlike state and local governments, and unlike euro nation governments, the U.S. federal government neither needs nor uses tax dollars. It creates new dollars, ad hoc, to pay for all its spending.

The whole question of “How will this be paid for” is obsolete. The federal government pays for everything by creating new dollars. Anyone who asks how a federal program will be paid for demonstrates abject ignorance about federal financing. The federal government never can run short of dollars.

Think of those tax dollars you work so hard to earn and then are forced to send to the U.S. Treasury. Those dollars are destroyed upon receipt, never to be used or seen again.  Rolling back tax cuts and/or increasing corporate taxes would take growth dollars from the economy and not help pay for anything.

Biden has also said he supports a carbon tax — a policy many environmental economists say is crucial to effectively curbing climate change — but there is no mention of that in the current proposal.

The only purpose of a carbon tax would not be to raise funds for the government, but rather to penalize and discourage the use of carbon-based fuel and products.

Far better, however, would be to reward and encourage the use of alternative eco-friendly, non-carbon-based products, just as the government now does to encourage the use of solar panels. The carrot is better than the stick, especially when the carrot will stimulate jobs and economic growth.

The audacity of the spending plan reflects the increased appetite among voters for taking action to curb global warming, as scientists warn time is running short and Trump administration rollbacks have left America isolated from the global effort.

“When Donald Trump thinks about climate change, the only word he can muster is ‘hoax,’” Biden said. “The word I think of is ‘jobs.’”

He aims to create 1 million new auto industry jobs by pushing the industry to take the lead in electric-vehicle manufacturing. High-speed rail is a focal point of the plan, as is a big investment in zero-emission public transit.

“Pushing” these industries should not mean “forcing” these industries; it should mean “rewarding” these industries. The federal government should use its unlimited power-of-the-purse to encourage carbon-zero business activities.

The goal for quickly decarbonizing the power sector would require new subsidies such as tax credits and grants to accelerate production of solar and wind energy technologies.

The federal government would also help subsidize the retrofitting of 4 million buildings to make them more energy efficient and aim to create 250,000 jobs “plugging abandoned oil and natural gas wells and reclaiming abandoned coal, hardrock, and uranium mines.”

And far better than more tax cuts for the rich or eliminating consumer protection laws would be this:

Much of the money would be aimed at disadvantaged communities.

“We have to make sure that the first people who benefit from this are the people who were most hurt historically,“ Biden said.

His plan sets a goal that low-income communities that have traditionally suffered disproportionately from pollution would receive 40% of “overall benefits of spending” by the federal government in areas such as clean energy and energy efficiency, green transportation and sustainable housing.

Trump has crippled our consumer protection agencies, not only by cutting regulations but also by removing experienced and competent leaders and installing incompetent, crooked, and/or inexperienced lackeys to run these agencies: Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, HUD Secretary Ben Carson are but a few examples.

Underpinning the plan is a restructuring of key agencies in the federal government, restoring the climate-forward focus put in place by the Obama administration but then abandoned by Trump.

The Justice Department, for example, would launch a new Environmental and Climate Justice Division “to hold polluters accountable.”

“We’re going to hold accountable those CEOs of corporations that benefit from decades of subsidies that just walked away from their responsibilities to these communities, leaving the wells to leak,” Biden said.

Such an agency was championed by Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington, an early rival of Biden’s in the presidential primary who ran on a platform dominated by confronting climate change. Biden adopted several of the ideas pushed by Inslee in his plan.

This article summarizes it best:

Climate change is causing injuries, illnesses and deaths, with the risks projected to increase substantially with additional climate change, threatening the health of many millions of people,” the report said. “The pervasive threats to health posed by climate change demand decisive actions from health professionals and governments to protect the health of current and future generations.”

The world is dying right before our eyes. Donald Trump is lying, denying, hampering, and hindering. The sand is running down the hourglass. The time to save the planet for our species rapidly is disappearing.

While Biden’s recommended $2 trillion is a notable start in saving the world, it is far too little and may be too late. How much is the future of humankind worth, especially when the money is free?

Efforts to save the planet not only will help assure our grandchildren’s futures, but money spent today will grow our economy today, providing jobs and money to those who need it, while narrowing the Gap between the rich and the rest.

Act now, or too soon there will come a tipping point, when having squandered all our opportunities, we watch helplessly as our little lifeboat in this vast ocean, sinks.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

  1. Eliminate FICA
  2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone
  3. Social Security for all or a reverse income tax
  4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
  5. Salary for attending school
  6. Eliminate federal taxes on business
  7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 
  8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.
  9. Federal ownership of all banks
  10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The real reason why the GOP rescue package is so skimpy. Wednesday, Sep 9 2020 

The U.S. economy is in deep trouble. President Trump’s re-election chances would improve greatly if the economy were healthy. But the GOP(!) is reluctant to provide enough stimulus.

Why?

Let’s begin with the basics:

  1. Millions of Americans suffer because they lack money. Many are jobless and many slave in low-paying jobs. Children go hungry. Families lose their homes. Millions more can’t afford adequate health care.
    homeless usa - | Help homeless people, Homeless people, Homeless person
  2. Millions of American businesses suffer because they lack customers, i.e. money. Many have closed, some permanently.
  3. The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, has infinite money. It never can run short of dollars. Even if zero federal taxes were collected, the government could continue spending forever.
  4. The federal deficit spending and “debt” are no burden on anyone — not on the government, not on taxpayers, not on future taxpayers’ grandchildren.

Given that background, why is it the GOP that doesn’t want to pump sufficient dollars into the economy to rescue us from recession or depression?

Coronavirus stimulus: What’s in Senate Republicans’ pared-down relief bill
Jessica Smith, Reporter, Yahoo FinanceSeptember 8, 2020

Senate Republicans unveiled a pared-down coronavirus relief on Tuesday. Negotiations over the next round of aid have been stalled for weeks on Capitol Hill and there is still little evidence of bipartisan progress.

Republicans aim to put pressure on Democrats with their so-called “skinny” relief bill.

The legislation is expected to cost roughly $500 billion, around half of what the GOP proposed in the HEALS Act earlier this summer. McConnell has struggled to unite his party and many of his own members rejected the first Republican proposal.

In an attempt to keep costs down and satisfy Republicans who don’t want to spend additional money, the slimmed-down bill would repurpose hundreds of billions of dollars in unspent CARES Act funding.

“Pared down coronavirus relief”? “Skinny relief” “Keep costs down” “Republicans don’t want to spend additional money”? “Repurpose hundreds of billions”? “Unspend CARES Act funding”? What the heck is going on with the GOP?

Here we have a government with infinite money, and there we have a populace in desperate need for money, and Congress doesn’t know what to do? I have a suggestion for them:

SPEND THE DAMN MONEY! Get money into the hands of the people. Do it now.

Why do they hesitate to do the obvious?

Then there’s this article:

Republicans Push Scaled-Back Stimulus Plan as Impasse on Virus Aid Persists
The economic recovery measure Republicans presented on Tuesday is a fraction of the size of their original offer and was immediately dismissed by Democrats as inadequate.
New York Times, By Emily Cochrane, Sept. 8, 2020

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Tuesday proposed a substantially scaled-back stimulus plan to provide federal aid to unemployed workers, schools, farmers, the Postal Service and small businesses, announcing a vote this week whose primary purpose was to try to foist blame on Democrats for a continuing stalemate.

The legislation — immediately rejected by Democrats as an inadequate response to the crisis — slashes by hundreds of billions of dollars the $1 trillion proposal Republicans had initially offered in negotiations, and is a fraction of the $2.2 trillion Democrats have said is necessary.

Not only is the Republican proposal too little, too late, but it is even less than they originally proposed. Seemingly, they are doing everything possible to avoid an agreement. This is a negotiation??

But Mr. McConnell, said he would force action on the doomed package, to accept a much smaller plan than they have been willing to agree to.

While Americans starve, the Republicans play political games. What exactly is the game? Keep reading.

Since lawmakers left Washington in early August, millions of Americans have filed new unemployment claims, wildfires and devastating storms have ravaged the country, schools have struggled to safely reopen and states have begun carrying out a series of budget cuts to remain solvent.

Moderate lawmakers in both chambers, particularly those facing difficult re-election challenges, are growing increasingly anxious over the gridlock and eager to persuade voters that Congress is addressing the toll of the pandemic, a dynamic that Republicans hope will help pressure Democrats to lower their spending demands.

Does America understand that the Democrats wish to give more money to those devastated economically, and the Republicans wish to give less — and this is supposed to pressure the Democrats??

While House Democrats approved a $3.4 trillion measure in May, Ms. Pelosi in recent days has told Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary, that Democrats would be willing to accept a package of $2.2 trillion. (Mr. Mnuchin, for his part, has signaled that the administration may be willing to accept up to a $1.5 trillion package.)

The $3.4 trillion probably would not be enough to bring America out of the recession, but in the name of political cooperation, Pelosi reduced the Democrats’ proposal to $2.2 trillion.

Then Mnuchin cut that to $1.5 trillion, not for any financial reasons, not for any affordability reasons, but just to please the Republicans.

And even that cut wasn’t deep enough to satisfy the GOP, which clearly is more interested in tax cuts for the rich than helping the impoverished.

Fiscal hawks are deeply reluctant to embrace more spending after an infusion of nearly $3 trillion this spring, and the Congressional Budget Office said on Wednesday that government debt had ballooned in the 2020 fiscal year and nearly outpaced the size of the economy.

The measure presented on Tuesday, crafted after weeks of daily conference calls with senators and top administration officials, would provide up to $700 billion, Republican aides said, although about half of that money would come from repurposing funding already approved by Congress in the stimulus law enacted in March.

The “$700 billion” really was just “$350” billion to stimulate a $27 trillion economy from the depths of despair. Why so cheap?

The Republican-written legislation would provide a $300-per-week federal unemployment benefit, and provide that relief through Dec. 27. Democrats have pushed to revive the full $600-per-week payment established in the March stimulus law, at least through January.

The bill does not provide funds for another round of $1,200 stimulus checks for Americans, which both chambers had included in their opening offers, or offer any additional funding to state and local governments.

Democrats called the measure “emaciated” and doing little to address the long-term impact of the pandemic on the nation’s economy. “What they have is so meager that it insults the intelligence of the American people,” Ms. Pelosi . “We know we have to negotiate in order to reach an agreement. We all want an agreement, make no mistake about that. But get serious.”

If you didn’t understand the politics, you would think the Republicans not only would want a greater benefit than “$300-per-week” (How many families can live on that?) but would be the ones pushing for $600 or even $1,000 per week.

And why did the $1,200 stimulus checks, which the Republicans first included, suddenly disappear from the latest GOP proposal? Here is why:

Big business wants desperate workers.

The GOP, the party of the rich, does what the rich want it to do. Do you remember the tax cut that was supposed to save you money? The vast majority went to the rich.

Do you remember all the GOP efforts to eliminate Obamacare, the insurance that covered pre-existing conditions? Those efforts continue. The GOP hates that kind of insurance because it allows workers to be independent of company-provided insurance. Without Obamacare, leaving your employer or demanding a raise would be easier.

And now, when the U.S. government has the power to pull everyone out of this virus-induced poverty, big businesses are telling their GOP friends, “We need workers who will work long hours for short pay.”

And what about Trump’s re-election chances?

No one cares about Trump. Certainly not the Democrats, and not even the Republicans. He may be the most despised President in history, perhaps the most despised man in all of America, today.

The Republicans know he is a threat to American democracy and more importantly, he will do nothing for them. He is a “me-first, me-only” fool, who himself shows no loyalty to anyone.

By contrast, the rich provide the GOP Congresspeople with their election money. Long after Trump is gone, the rich will remain loyal, checkbooks in hand.

And the rich have good memories. They will remember who helped them and who didn’t.

If you helped them acquire cheap, hard-working labor for your business, you will be thanked. If you don’t help them, they will help your next opponent.

That is why the rich want to cut Medicare benefits, Social Security benefits, and indeed all benefits to the not-rich. They want a big supply of desperate people.

Pay no attention to the fake concerns about the federal debt being “unsustainable,” or the U.S. becoming “insolvent.” The rich know that cannot happen. They understand Monetary Sovereignty.

The purpose of those fraudulent rationales is to give a “logical” gloss to the illogical idea that the federal government could run short of its own sovereign currency.

After all, the politicians can’t admit they are doing it to keep you in slavery, can they?

The federal government has all the financial power it needs to pull America out of this recession and to help the states, counties, and cities return to solvency.

To do the bidding of the rich, the politicians rely on the ignorance of the public. That is why the GOP rescue package is so skimpy. Big business wants desperate workers.

Now, you know.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics. Implementation of Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Social Security for all or a reverse income tax

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10.Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Next Page »

%d bloggers like this: