Mitchell’s laws: The more budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. Until the 99% understand the need for deficits, the 1% will rule. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity = poverty and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
Yikes! No sooner did I publish my most recent posts, Why does the 1% upper income FIGHT the war against the 99%? and Why does the 1% upper income WIN the war against the 99%?, but the New York Times publishes an article demonstrating the gist of those posts.
Here are some excerpts:
Distaste for Health Care Law Reflects Spending on Ads
By Abby Goodnough, Published: June 20, 2012
DOYLESTOWN, Pa. — Erika Losse is precisely the kind of person President Obama’s signature health care law is intended to help. She has no health insurance. She relies on her mother to buy her a yearly checkup as a Christmas gift, and she pays out of her own pocket for the rest of her medical care, including $1,250 for a recent ultrasound.
But Ms. Losse, 33, a part-time worker at a bagel shop, is no fan of the law, which will require millions of uninsured Americans like herself to get health coverage by 2014. Never mind that Ms. Losse, who makes less than $35,000 a year, would probably qualify for subsidized insurance under the law.
“I’m positive I can’t afford it,” she said.
Why is she positive she can’t afford it? Because the Republicans told her so and the Democrats don’t deny it.
A Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of the health care law is expected any day now, but even if the Obama administration wins in the nation’s highest court, most evidence suggests it has lost miserably in the court of public opinion. National polls have consistently found the health care law has far more enemies than friends, including a recent New York Times/CBS News poll that found more than two-thirds of Americans hope the court will overturn some or all of it.
“The Democrats have done a very poor job of selling the program,” said Gary Schiff, 65, a retired teacher and businessman here. “All you hear about it now is the Republicans saying what’s wrong with it: that it’s socialism, that it’s going to bankrupt the country. I’ll give them credit; they’re great at framing the debate.”
That success may stem in large part from more than $200 million in advertising spending by an array of conservative groups, from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ($27 million) to Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS ($18 million), which includes the billionaire Sheldon Adelson among its donors, and the American Action Network ($9 million), founded by Fred V. Malek, an investor and prominent Republican fund-raiser.
In all, about $235 million has been spent on ads attacking the law since its passage in March 2010, according to a recent survey by Kantar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Group. Only $69 million has been spent on advertising supporting it.
On the other side, the 60 Plus Association, a conservative lobbying group for older Americans, has targeted Democratic senators up for re-election with about $10 million in ads warning that under the law, “unaccountable bureaucrats” will be able to “ration care.”
In contrast, most advertising spending in support of the law has come from the Department of Health and Human Services. Appearing mostly on national and cable networks, the agency’s ads are bland, explaining aspects of the law.
“Did you know with your health insurance, you may now have some preventive benefits with no co-pays or out-of-pocket costs?” one asks.
Nearly everyone said the nation could not afford the law’s goal of insuring about 30 million Americans, mostly through a vast expansion of the Medicaid program and federal subsidies to help others who cannot afford to buy coverage on their own. A striking number of people also said the law would limit patient choices and lead to rationing of care — a fear that has been stoked by conservative lawmakers, talk-radio hosts and commentators on networks like Fox, in addition to the political action committees that have run ads attacking the law.
These commentators know they are telling the Big Lie, but they do it anyway. They are obedient soldiers for the 1%.
Thus, the upper income 1% brainwashes the 99% with its Divide and Conquer strategy, urging the 99% to vote against their best interests. A cynical observer might say the 99% deserve the loss of benefits they seem to want. I, for one, am sad for these people, who have been so brainwashed by the Big Lie that “the government can’t afford it,” they do not understand what is good for them and what is bad.
Today, the health care law, tomorrow Social Security, the next day, Medicaid, food stamps, aid to education, tax reductions, housing — going, going gone.
And the 99% will wonder how it all could have happened to them.
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
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption + Net exports