Six examples of how the media brainwash you. Sunday, Apr 30 2017 

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

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

In just one, short article, the March 31 edition of THIS WEEK Magazine demonstrates how the media are complicit in the brainwashing of America.

First, it quotes Eugene Robinson of The Washington Post:

If the budget plan President Trump released is any guide, his new goal is to make the nation “dumber, dirtier, hungrier, and sicker.” Predictably titled “America First,” this brutal document calls for a 9 percent boost in annual defense spending, paid for with deep cuts to almost everything else.

Trump is proposing a stagggering 31% cut in funding to the Enviromental Protection Agency and would also deeply slash funding for foreign, aid, medical and scientific reserach and anti-poverty programs, eliminating funding for National Public Radio, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the National Endowment for the Arts.

Image result for children pollution

Pollution and climate change don’t create jobs

No, those deep cuts to programs that improve your life and the lives of middle and lower income people, will not “pay for” anything, nor will they “create jobs,” as Trump claims.

Unlike state and local governments, the federal government is Monetarily Sovereign, meaning it never can run short of its own sovereign currency.

Even if tax collections fell to $0, the federal government could continue spending, forever.

The article then quotes Ed Rogers of the Washington Post:

“Spending cuts are always painful, but what choice do we have when every man, woman, and child in the nation is currently on the hook for $166,000 of our $19 trillion national debt.

“The reality is that we just can’t afford to keep spending at the rate that we are.”

That was 100% BS.

Not only can the federal government afford to spend as it has been, it can afford to spend far more. We have documented this lie about unaffordability since 1940, and it never changes.

We always are told “can’t afford” to keep spending at our current rate, but somehow, though we spend even more, we keep affording it.

The people of America are not liable for any of the so-called federal “debt.” Have you noticed any bill collectors coming to your door, to ask you for your $166,000 share?

Then there was the quote from Stephen Moore in Spectator.org:

“He (Trump) wants to surgically remove trillions of dollars of wasteful spending. The pushback from those groups, the welfare state, and the liberal media has already begun.”

Note the words, “welfare state.” Those are code for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other aids to the middle and lower income groups. Trump, being rich, disdains those groups (despite his phony pandering to coal miners).

The “liberal media” refers to anyone who wants to help the non-rich, a crime in the eyes of the rich.

Trump knows that the only way to “surgically remove trillions of dollars from (so-called) wasteful spending” is to gut social programs — or gut the military, on which he wishes to lavish more billions.

And the next bit of brainwashing comes from Nick Gillespie, in Reason.com:

“Overall federal spending will still come in around $4 trillion, with nearly the same deficit: $559 billion. Worse, for those of us who actually care about our spiraling national debt, Trump’s  budget does nothing to curb spending on Medicare, Social Sercurity, and the other entitlement programs, which everyone knows are where the real money is.”

The so-called “spiraling national debt,” actually is the total of deposits in T-security accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank. These bank deposits are not a burden on the federal government or on taxpayers. Never have been; never will be. The federal debt scare is a fake.

Sure, we in of the upper 1% income group want to cut your Medicare, your Social Security, and your other entitlement benefits. Isn’t that what you want, too? 

And yes, that’s where the real money is, so how will the conservatives cut the budget without cutting your benefits?

Always remember, budget cuts (aka “austerity”) mean cuts to the private sector (aka “the economy.”) Always.

Now, we move on to the quote from the WashingtonExaminer.com editorial.

“The goal of the budget is not to wipe out the deficit. Nor is Trump saying that medical research is a bad thing, or that children should go hungry”

“Wipe out” the deficit? More weasel words. The goal of the right wing is to reduce the deficit, though yes, some of the more extremist would like to wipe it out altogether. But, deficit spending is the federal government’s method for growing the economy.

Cutting the deficit to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.

And, uh, excuse me, if Trump cuts medical research budgets and the budgets for providing food to children, what exactly does he expect to happen?

“He’s just establishing the conservative principle that some activities are better handled by the private sector, or by a level of government closer to the individual.”

The phrase “better handled by the private sector” means privatizing — the 1%’s method for reaping big profits.

We often have written about privatization, for instance: I smell the meat a’cookin’. The new privatization scam.”  Anytime you hear a politician recommend turning some job over to the private sector, you can be sure he is salivating over unregulated, risk-free profits.

And that “level of government closer to the individual” means state and local government, which being monetarily non-sovereign, usually are cash strapped and must pay for services with increased taxes.

By contrast, the federal government is Monetarily Sovereign, so never can be cash strapped, and never needs to increase taxes. It doesn’t need taxes at all; the federal government creates dollars, ad hoc, by paying bills.

The rich love it when the middle and the poor have to pay more state and local taxes, because that widens the Gap between the rich and the rest.

And finally, we come to a more subtle bit of brainwashing, courtesy of Doyle McManus in the LATimes.com:

“With Congress in Republican hands, Trump has a golden opportunity to downsize federal spending and make it more efficient.

No reason is given for why the word’s most powerful nation, a nation of 340 million people, needs a smaller government, while its underfunded cities, counties, and states should spend more.

And what is there in Trump’s suggestions that would make the government more efficient?

There, in just four paragraphs, THIS WEEK Magazine has used six quotes to brainwash you into believing federal finances are like state and local government finances, and like your finances.

If you want to know what federal finances really are like, read, Does the U.S. Treasury really destroy your tax dollars?

THIS WEEK wants you to believe the federal government can’t afford to pay for services that are valuable to you.

Meanwhile, know this: Anyone advocating federal deficit/debt reduction, or privatization, or shifting costs from the federal government to the states, is trying to scam you like a Nigerian prince.

Don’t believe them, and for heaven’s sake, don’t vote for them.

Or, you simply can send your money to that Nigerian prince.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

THE RULES

•All we have are partial solutions; the best we can do is try.

•Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.

•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money no matter how much it taxes its citizens.

•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes..

•No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.

•Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.

•A growing economy requires a growing supply of money (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)

•Deficit spending grows the supply of money

•The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.

•Progressives 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.

•The single most important problem in economics is the Gap between the rich and the rest.

•Austerity is the government’s method for widening the Gap between the rich and the rest.

•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

A parable: The little, fat guy with the BB gun Saturday, Apr 29 2017 

To help you understand today’s international political scene, we offer you this parable:

Once, there was a little, fat guy, with a goofy haircut, who walked through the neighborhood threatening everyone — men, women, and even children — with his tiny BB gun.

He caused a great fuss. The neighbors all hated the little, fat guy because no one likes to be threatened or to have their children threatened.  But no one knew what to do about the fuss he was causing.

Occasionally, the neighbors told him to be quiet, but the little, fat guy wouldn’t be quiet, and in fact, as time went on, he became louder and ever more threatening and belligerent.

And some of the children were afraid.

One fateful day, the little, fat guy walked into a biker bar and repeatedly threatened the men with his tiny BB gun. Again and again, in his squeaky voice, he said very bad things and made very bad gestures.

After a time, the biggest biker, a six-foot, eight-inch, mountain of muscle, bone, and sinew, turned slowly, and in a voice that echoed like a clap of thunder said to the little, fat guy, “BE QUIET.”

But the little, fat guy refused to listen and he refused to be quiet. Instead, he began to call the big biker bad names and to make even worse threats.

Finally, the little, fat guy took out his tiny BB gun and shot a BB at the big biker.

Having taken all he was willing to take from the little, fat guy, the big biker reared back, and swinging his giant fist of steel, he crushed the little, fat guy’s skull.

Then the big biker stomped the little, fat guy’s body flat, poured alcohol on it and set it on fire.

When the flames burned out, all that was left of the little, fat guy was a greasy smear on the floor, topped with a tiny pile of ashes.

Later, the neighbors wondered among themselves why they had paid any attention to the little, fat guy’s threats, and allowed him to become such a fuss in the neighborhood.

And that is the story of the little, fat guy with the goofy haircut, who made the fatal mistake of shooting a BB gun at the biggest biker in the bar.

Hey, whoever wrote “Trump’s” tax “plan” may be on to something. Friday, Apr 28 2017 

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

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

O.K., so it actually isn’t a “plan.” It’s a simplistic, one page, double-spaced, little note that purports to guide a replacement for our gigantic tax code. It is a little paper that essentially says “we should cut taxes, increase spending, and cut the debt, but you figure out how.”

It reminds one of the double-spaced, “print-in-large-letters” response that we pre-computer high schoolers created, when our teacher gave us the assignment to write about some subject, and we tried to stretch our ignorance over the greatest number of pages.

But at least, we wrote several pages; Trump delivered only one page. And it isn’t actually Trump’s; he had people to write it for him.

But what else could we expect from the best-selling author of “The Art of the Deal,” who never wrote a word of it?

That said, the people who wrote “Trump’s” teeny, weeny non-plan may actually be on to something.

Here is what my favorite voice of the rich had to say:

CRFB President: Trump’s Tax Plan Will Add $5.5 Trillion to the Debt
Maya MacGuineas, Apr 27, 2017

President Trump is on the right track by turning focus toward fixing our nation’s broken tax code.

See how low the bar has become, that when Trump says our tax code is bad, it’s as though he has become a brilliant observer of something no one knew.

Tax rate cuts are important and a driver of growth, but do not be hoodwinked: no way will they pay for themselves.

Actual tax collection cuts (not just tax rate cuts) drive growth in one key way: They add dollars to the private sector.  

Adding dollars to the private sector takes place when the federal government runs domestic deficits. It is the domestic deficit spending that drives economic growth. This is the absolute economic fact that MacGuineas and her CRFB always pretend not to understand.

Growth is sluggish; our 35% corporate tax rate is the highest in the developed world; our strategy for international taxation is a mess; and the income tax seems to get more complicated and opaque every year.

Her comment about the 35% shows why it is not tax rate cuts, but rather, actual tax collection cuts, that are important. Very few corporations pay that 35% rate.

But these problems cannot be solved by simply lowering all business taxes to 15% while cutting taxes for individuals. In fact, the President’s current proposal is likely to worsen our country’s growth prospects by ballooning our record high national debt.

The President’s plan could add over $5 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.

And this is why we say, the people who wrote “Trump’s” non-plan may actually be on to something.  Anything that stresses MacGuineas about future deficits is good news for America.

Under current law, the primary way to “add over $5 trillion to the national debt” is for the federal government to run multi-billion dollar deficits.

No deficits, no economic growth. (See here [Point 3.])

As a result, debt would rise to a higher share of the economy than any time in history.

If her $5 trillion dollar figure is correct, the federal “debt” will not rise enough.

Last year the debt increase was $875 Billion.   It got us where we are today. But the deficit growth has been declining.

Red line is the increase in the Federal Debt

A mere $5 Trillion increase in federal debt, over the next decade, actually implies a decrease in federal debt growth — the debt growth that cured the Great Recession.

And history shows that when debt growth declines, we have recessions.

Vertical gray lines are recessions, which come when debt growth declines and are cured when debt growth rises.

Continuing with MacGuineas’s comments:

When it comes to tax cuts, there is always the free lunch crowd claiming if we cut taxes, they will pay for themselves through growth. Here in the real world, smart, pro-growth tax cuts can at best cover a fraction of their costs.

“Pay for themselves” means that tax rate cuts supposedly will result in more tax collections. Thankfully, this never has happened.

In fact, large tax cuts can actually harm economic growth by creating a massive debt load.

Federal debt is nothing more than the total to deposits in T-security accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank.

My local bank advertises and gives rewards — even pays interest — to obtain deposits.  So why deposits should be a burden on the world’s safest, most powerful bank, is anyone’s guess. But it is a common whine among debt worriers.

MacGuineas then offered up her 4-step plan. Steps #1 and #2 are the usual right-wing juggling act that involves taking a lot from lower and middle-class individuals and giving some to rich people and some to rich corporations, and the rest to the government (the latter having no use for tax money)  — resulting in a net loss for the private sector, aka “the economy.”.

But Step #3 is the real goal of the very rich: Cut benefits to the middle classes and the poor:

Step three is to reform our entitlement programs.

Social Security, health, and interest spending are responsible for 82 percent of projected spending growth over the next decade; and both Social Security and Medicare are headed toward insolvency.

The usual “Big Lie.” The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, cannot become insolvent, even if federal taxes were $0. For that reason, no federal agency can become insolvent unless Congress wishes it.

Thoughtful reforms can improve health outcomes, encourage work, strengthen retirement security, and reduce the long-term debt all while protecting the most vulnerable.

And so, that is MacGuineas’s wonderful solution: “Thoughtful reforms” (aka “Cut benefits” for the people). Ah, those thoughtful reforms.

And so we trudge to MacGuineas’s final step:

The final step is to do everything else we can to encourage economic growth.

Faster economic growth needs to be broadly shared so it lifts all incomes, improves everyone’s wealth, and helps our fiscal situation.

Policymakers need to fire on all cylinders — pursuing reforms to taxes and entitlements but also regulations, immigration, federal investment, trade, and energy.

A critical component of the growth agenda is to get our debt under control.

Yep, to encourage economic growth we must “fire on all cylinders” and encourage economic growth.  Wow! Why didn’t anyone think of that?

Most importantly, we must give to the rich, while taking from the middle and the poor. That is the real message.

As for Trump’s one-page, double-spaced, magnum opus, it’s both too much and too little. It’s too much for the debt harpies, who would delight in sending America into a depression, as federal surpluses always do.

And it’s too little if the goal is to grow the economy.

The progressives (are there any?) will hate his one-page paper because it widens the Gap between the rich and the rest. The conservatives will hate it because it doesn’t widen the Gap enough (Is there ever enough?)

The middle will hate it because it doesn’t allow deductions for state and local taxes, and doesn’t make the corporations “pay their fair share,” whatever that may be. And Trump will hate everyone who criticizes

And Trump will hate everyone who criticizes it, because he loathes any sort of criticism.

But the .01%, the truly rich, will love it. Trump’s businesses will love it. Ivanka, the walking, talking conflict of interest will love it. And Jared, the inexperienced, all-purpose expert about everything,  will love it.  

So yes, the people who wrote Trump’s one-page tax “plan” for him are on to something.

And it’s something bad for you and me.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

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 The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE A MONTHLY ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA (similar to Social Security for All) (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Economic Bonus)) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONE Five reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefitting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE FEDERAL TAXES ON BUSINESS
Businesses are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the federal government (the later having no use for those dollars). Any tax on businesses reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all business taxes reduce your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and business taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Do you accept our Constitution as the law of our land? Thursday, Apr 27 2017 

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

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

America is special.

We are special because every 4-8 years, we peacefully change our leadership.  We do not suffer coups or other forms of violent resistance.Image result for constitution

Even when a majority votes for one candidate, but our Constitution dictates that the other candidate has won, we accept the decision.

That is why Donald Trump, and not Hillary Clinton, is our President.

Many feel this violates the spirit of a democratic government, but we respect our Constitution. We respect it even above the word of any of our gods, which is why we accept the separation of Church from State.

On specific issues, many of us may not like what it tells us, but our mutual acceptance of those words makes America special.

We are a diverse, multiethnic nation, but our Constitution gives us the strength of unity. We are strong because we are one.

We are one because of our Constitution.

Our government is divided into three branches, and one branch — the judiciary — is tasked with the responsibility to defend our Constitution. Sometimes it must stand alone and strong against the other two branches, that often feel free to ignore Constitutional restraints.

If the judiciary ever were to yield that strength to the Congress or to the Presidency, America would cease to exist as we know it.

If Congress ruled, America would be a system of feifdoms.

If the President ruled, America would be a dictatorship.

That is why it always is disturbing when a President displays contempt for the Judicial branch.

Donald Trump’s racial comments about Hispanic judge in Trump University case
By Tom Kertscher on Wednesday, June 8th, 2016, Politfact

This was the exchange about the judge between Trump and host John Dickerson on CBS’ Face the Nation. The interview was recorded on June 3, 2016.

Dickerson: Let me ask you about, what does the Mexican heritage of the judge in the Trump University case have to do with anything?

Trump: First of all, I’ve had terrible rulings, forever.

I had a judge previous to him and it would have been a very quick case. This is a case I should’ve won on summary judgment. This is a case — the plaintiff in the case was a woman.  She was so bad that under deposition it was over. I mean, she couldn’t have been the — it was a disaster.

Dickerson: But Mr. Trump, what does this have to do with his parents being from Mexico, how does that —

Trump: Excuse me, excuse me, I’m just saying. We’re getting terrible rulings. We go to the judge, we say to the judge, “Hey, you can’t let her out of the case.” He let her out of the case. We said, “Well, if you’re going to let her out of the case, she’s the plaintiff. If you’re going to let her out of the case, the case is over.” No, the case isn’t over. OK? Now —

He is a member of a club or society, very strongly pro-Mexican, which is all fine. But I say he’s got bias. I want to build a wall. I’m going to build a wall. But just so you understand, this judge has treated me very unfairly, he’s treated me in a hostile manner. And there’s something going on.

Dickerson: And you think it’s not because — you think it’s because of where his parents came from?

Trump: Look, I have a case where thousands of people have said it was a great school. They’ve written reviews where they say it’s a great school. Not a good school, like great. They gave it the highest marks.

I have thousands of these papers. It should’ve been a summary judgment case, meaning the case should’ve been dismissed.

Dickerson: Yeah, I guess I’m just still confused how — what his Mexican parents have to do with that. Let me —

Trump: Excuse me. I want to build a wall. I mean, I don’t think it’s very confusing. Has nothing to do with anything except common sense. You know, we have to stop being so politically correct in this country. And we need a little more common sense, John. And I’m not blaming. I’m proud of my heritage, we’re all proud of our heritage. But I want to build a wall.

Now, the Hispanics, many of them like what I’m saying. They’re here legally. They don’t want people coming and taking their jobs and taking their house and everything else. They don’t want that.

Trump’s position: Because he wants to build a border wall, a judge who was born in America, but whose parents came from Mexico, can’t be fair with regard to Trump University.

Get it?

(Trump University was so “great,” Trump paid a gigantic $25,000,000 penalty for the scam.)  But the real point is not that Trump is a crook, but that he repeatedly disparages the foundation of our American government — the protector of our Constitution, the judiciary — whenever he doesn’t get his way.

Trump is like the petulant child who is angry at the parents who feed, clothe, and send him to college but they won’t let him misbehave.

Chicago Tribune
Federal judge in Hawaii extends order halting Trump’s travel ban

U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson: “The entirety of (Trump’s) Executive Order runs afoul of the Establishment Clause, where ‘openly available data support a commonsense conclusion that a religious objective permeated the government’s action.”

Trump called Watson’s ruling an example of “unprecedented judicial overreach.”

And then, after Trump had lashed out at the judiciary about his Trump University scam, and his Muslim ban, apparently he wasn’t finished, when he tried for a third, unconstitutional Executive Order:

Judge cites Trump’s comment in ‘sanctuary city’ ruling
By SUDHIN THANAWALA, Associated Press
Published: April 26, 2017, 11:33 AM

In a ruling on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge William Orrick quoted Trump to support his decision to block the president’s order to withhold funding from “sanctuary cities” that do not cooperate with U.S. immigration officials.

Trump called the sanctuary cities order a “weapon” against communities that disagree with his preferred immigration policy, Orrick said. The judge also cited a February interview in which he said the president threatened to cut off funding to California, saying the state “in many ways is out of control.”

The first comment was evidence that the administration intended the executive order to apply broadly to all sorts of federal funding, and not a relatively small pot of grant money as the Department of Justice had argued, the judge said.

The second statement showed the two California governments that sued to block the order — San Francisco and Santa Clara County — had good reason to believe they would be targeted, Orrick said.

Trump reacted to the decision on Twitter on Wednesday morning, calling the decision “ridiculous” and saying he would take his fight to the highest court, tweeting: “See you in the Supreme Court.”

Trump tweeted: “First the Ninth Circuit rules against the ban & now it hits again on sanctuary cities-both ridiculous rulings.” Trump tweeted that the 9th circuit has “a terrible record of being overturned (close to 80 percent).” He said, “They used to call this ‘judge shopping!’ Messy system.” 

Among the many, many things Trump doesn’t understand is that the Supreme Court generally takes certain types of appeals — those where there is a high probability of an overturn. It doesn’t take appeals of decisions with which it agrees.

Thus all Circuit Courts experience a high percentage of overturns — 80% is near average  — and the Ninth has not been the highest.

Among Trump’s comments was this one: “(The ruling is) an “egregious overreach by a single, unelected district judge.” Does it get any worse than that? District judges, appeals judges and Supreme Court judges are appointed, not elected. Trump seemingly is ignorant of that fact.

Orrick wrote that the jurisdictions successfully showed they “are currently suffering irreparable harm” because the order violates rights granted to states by the Constitution . . . ”

Presidents are Constitutionally precluded from coercing cities, counties,  and states in that way.

Bottom line: Every time Trump doesn’t get a favorable court ruling, he stomps his feet and criticizes the judge.

This is his long-standing pattern, which demonstrates the importance of an independent judiciary.  For instance, there was this tweet with regard to Judge James Robart, “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” (The next day, White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump had “no regrets” about his criticism of judges.)

Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, described Trump’s criticism of the judiciary as “demoralizing and disheartening.” But Trump has “no regrets.”

He wishes to learn nothing about our Constitution and indeed has learned nothing.

Imagine the arbitrary havoc this Congress and Trump could cause without the leash held by our judges and our Constitution. 

This is why America even can survive President Donald Trump. We have a judiciary and a Constitution, and we are people who believe in both.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

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 The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE A MONTHLY ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA (similar to Social Security for All) (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Economic Bonus)) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONE Five reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefitting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE FEDERAL TAXES ON BUSINESS
Businesses are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the federal government (the later having no use for those dollars). Any tax on businesses reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all business taxes reduce your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and business taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Next Page »