Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity breeds austerity and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.

The Rodger Malcolm Mitchell you know is buried in his Monetary Sovereignty explanation of economics, and probably doesn’t have much of a life, otherwise. And mostly you’re right, except for my wife, and my daughters, and my grandsons, and my friends, and my tennis and — short stories.

Recently I’ve had to amuse myself reading stories by such noted fiction writers as: The editors of the Chicago Tribune, Wall Street Journal and the N.Y. Times, many Senators and Representatives, President Obama, many columnists, the “big-three” rating services, John Mauldin, Barry Ritholz, and others too numerous to mention.

Well, I too, have written stories, and unlike the above authors, I intended them as fiction. Some day I even may try to publish them, though I’m not sure why.

Meanwhile, if you’d like to read fiction that was meant to be fiction in an economics blog, you might enjoy for a change of pace, these.

O.K., O.K., I’ll get back to work.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
b>Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment + Private Consumption + Net exports