Mitchell’s laws:
●The more budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal 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.
==========================================================================================================================================
See if you can find the United States, the greatest nation on earth, in the list below:
List by the United Nations (2005–2010)
Life expectancy at birth (years)
Top 100 nations1 Japan 82.6, 2 Hong Kong 82.2, 3 Switzerland 82.1, 4 Israel 82.0, 5 Iceland 81.8, 6 Australia 81.2, 7 Singapore 81.0, 8 Spain 80.9,8 Sweden 80.9, 10 Macau 80.7, 10 France 80.7, 10 Canada 80.7, 13 Italy 80.5, 13 United Kingdom 80.5, 15 New Zealand 80.2, 15 Norway 80.2, 17 Austria 79.8, 17 Netherlands 79.8, 19 Martinique 79.5, 19 Greece 79.5, 21 Belgium 79.4, 21 Malta 79.4, 21 Germany 79.4, 21 U.S. Virgin Islands 79.4, 2 5 Finland 79.3, 26 Guadeloupe 79.2, 27 Channel Islands 79.0, 27 Cyprus 79.0, 29 Ireland 78.9, 30 Costa Rica 78.8. 31 Puerto Rico 78.7, 31 Luxembourg 78.7, 31 United Arab Emirates 78.7, 34 South Korea 78.6, 34 Chile 78.6, 36 Denmark 78.3, 36 Cuba 78.3, 38 United States 78.2, 39 Portugal 78.1, 40 Slovenia 77.9, 41 Kuwait 77.6, 42 Barbados 77.3, 43 Brunei 77.1, 44 Czech Republic 76.5, 45 Réunion 76.4, 45 Albania 76.4, 45 Uruguay 76.4, 48 Mexico 76.2, 49 Belize 76.1, 49 New Caledonia 76.1, 51 French Guiana 75.9, 52 Croatia 75.7, 53 Oman 75.6, 53 Bahrain 75.6, 53 Qatar 75.6, 53 Poland 75.6, 57 Panama 75.5, 58 Guam 75.5, 59 Argentina 75.3, 60 Netherlands Antilles 75.1, 61 Ecuador 75.0, 62 Bosnia and Herzegovina 74.9, 63 Slovakia 74.7, 64 Montenegro 74.5, 65 Vietnam 74.2, 65 Malaysia 74.2, 65 Aruba 74.2, 65 Macedonia 74.2, 69 Syria 74.1, 69 French Polynesia 74.1, 71 Serbia 74.0, 71 Libya 74.0, 73 Tunisia 73.9, 74 Venezuela 73.7, 74 Saint Lucia 73.7, 76 Bahamas 73.5, 77 Palestinian territories 73.4, 78 Hungary 73.3, 78 Tonga 73.3, 80 Bulgaria 73.0, 80 Lithuania 73.0, 80 People’s Republic of China 73.0, 83 Nicaragua 72.9, 83 Colombia 72.9, 85 Mauritius 72.8, 85 Saudi Arabia 72.8, 87 Latvia 72.7, 88 Jamaica 72.6, 89 Jordan 72.5, 89 Romania 72.5, 91 Sri Lanka 72.4, 91 Brazil 72.4, 93 Algeria 72.3, 94 Dominican Republic 72.2, 95 Lebanon 72.0, 95 Armenia 72.0, 97 El Salvador 71.9, 98 Turkey 71.8, 98 Paraguay 71.8, 100 Philippines 71.7
O.K., I made it easy for you. But, there we are, way down the list and trailing most of the “First World” nations.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says this is what kills us:
Number of deaths for leading causes of death
Heart disease: 599,413
Cancer: 567,628
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
Alzheimer’s disease: 79,003
Diabetes: 68,705
Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909
If you go to WorldLifeExpectancy you find many causes of death that are not common killers in America: Diarrhoeal diseases, HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, Malaria, Low Birth Weight, etc. We avoid all those “Third World” diseases. (Although with global warming, we might see malaria come to America.)
One reason for our truly terrible life expectancy may be our awful eating habits. (Thank you Mcdonalds, Taco Bell, Coca Cola et al). According to Huff Post these are the 10 fattest nations in the developed world (with #1 being the fattest):
1. United States
2. Mexico
3. New Zealand
4. Chile
5. Australia
6. Canada
7. United Kingdom
8. Ireland
9. Luxembourg
10. Finland
A second reason for our disgraceful life expectancy probably is lack of exercise, which is related to obesity.
And then there is the 3rd reason:
The green colored nations are “Nations with some type of universal health care system.”
While most of the First World nations have some form of universal health care, the most powerful nation on earth doesn’t, What a disgrace. And it is reflected in our miserable health statistics.
Obamacare is a tiny, convoluted, baby step in the right direction. But, the great United States of America should provide Medicare for all — for every man, woman and child in America.
There are only three reasons not to provide Medicare for all, and all are bogus:
“1. Universal health care doesn’t work. Look at [insert country name here].” Nonsense. Medicare works. Ask people who have Medicare, and they will tell you its a wonderful system. It’s not perfect, which is why many people buy Medicare supplemental insurance, but its damn good. We old folk have it much better than you youngsters.
“2. The U.S. can’t afford Medicare for all.” More nonsense. The U.S. is Monetarily Sovereign. It has the unlimited ability to create the dollars to pay for Medicare for all.
“3. Paying for Medicare for all would cause inflation.” Even more nonsense. No one knows this. It’s pure speculation based on zero data. But what do we know for sure:
A.–Since the U.S. became Monetarily Sovereign, in 1971, there has been zero relationship between federal deficits and inflation — this despite massive deficit spending during the Reagan and Obama years.
B.–The Fed successfully has prevented and cured inflation simply by raising interest rates (to make dollars more valuable), and especially with rates near zero, there is plenty of room for increases.
C.–There is no relationship between high rates and slow economic growth.
D.–Unnecessary illnesses cost our economy billions of dollars. This includes the cost of “free” treatments and hospital emergency rooms, lost work time and the costs involved in home care.
E.– Businesses must pay billions for health insurance, adding to the cost of employment, which causes both unemployment and inflation.
F.–Preventative health care, offered by Medicare, prevents more serious, more costly sicknesses, thus saving billions of dollars for patients, for the economy and for the government
Bottom line: The great United States of America must provide Medicare for All — every man, woman and child in America. It’s what a great nation should do, what a great nation must do. Don’t let the small-thinking, mean-thinking, shortsighted politicians talk you out of it with bogus reasoning.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
==========================================================================================================================================
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
#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 
I have a better idea than Medicare for all. How about the U.S. Government gives each and every American $10 BILLION in cash tomorrow!!! After all, the U.S. Government is a Monetary Sovereign, and if you don’t realize what that means, you don’t get economics!
LikeLike
After 15+ years of studying and writing about economics, I wish I had $1 for every boob who has made a similar, “clever” suggestion.
LikeLike
Rodger, there is such a large number of Americans that resist rational thought that it is frightening. Your frustration level must be about at the top of the scale. How can positive ideas have a chance against the persistence and rage of these naysayers? How can we get the message out there in order to reach the rational few?
LikeLike
Arlene duke,
Mostly, people have neither the time nor the inclination to think. They would much rather latch onto a slogan or easy generalization. So, we hear such criticisms of federal spending as: “There’s no such thing as a free lunch,” and, “What about the Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe.”
Never mind that the first objection is devoid of fact and the second objection is based on totally different circumstances. They are sufficient to prevent the need for thought.
And then we have the “Clever Sarcastics” like the boob who suggested giving $10 billion to everyone, as his “proof” that Monetary Sovereignty doesn’t work. His mind turned to cement long ago, so he is hopeless.
So yes, it is difficult to get people to think, and sometimes I wonder whether we ever will. I don’t know a better solution that to keep putting the facts out there, and hope that people like you will help spread them.
LikeLike
Since learning about the various siblings of Modern Money about a year ago, and in the past 6 months sharing my understanding with people, I’m finding a very consistent reaction: what we’re saying can’t be true. if it were that simple then everyone would understand it
I kind of sympathize with the feeling. The basic concept of monetary sovereignty is the hardest one to get people to think about. Its like on the surface the idea is accepted… but most of the people don’t deep down accept it, because where that deep down acceptance will take them is to a world where much of what they thought they knew doesn’t make sense.
And all of this confirms I think what RMM is getting at: “Mostly, people have neither the time nor the inclination to think. They would much rather latch onto a slogan of easy generalization.”
Or said another way, people are much more interested in having their beleifs confirmed, than whether or not their beliefs are correct.
LikeLike
Suggestion to RMM… Aim at the young. In general, human brains “freeze” by 25-30. Capability to change ideas then becomes restricted to the small fraction that maintains a general capability to learn.
Go to “the city of the young”. At least they will consider your words.
LikeLike
In many sciences, the young are more productive, partly because they look for new ideas and partly because they have energy. My own real interest in economics arose 17 years ago, when I was 60 years young. 🙂
LikeLike
Hi Rodger: I guess you decided to leave out GWB and his administration’s nearly 5 trillion $ contribution to the cause.
LikeLike
Great recent posts on healthcare. Thanks!
I just found this article on Forbes which I thought noteworthy: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/12/02/the-bomb-buried-in-obamacare-explodes-today-halleluja/2/
I still like Warren Mosler’s proposal best since it would largely do away with most perverse incentives currently driving costs higher. Yes, you can have that new drug you saw on TV last night but your check at the end of the year will be smaller.
Also, if I am free to choose naturopaths, chiropractors, acupuncturists, etc. with my medical debit card I will be much happier.
LikeLike
What happens if you have a particularly expensive disease? The daughter of one of my friends had a disease, for which her prescribed a medicine that costs more than $100K per year.
LikeLike
Perhaps you dis not see his proposal here http://moslereconomics.com/2009/03/02/mosler-health-care-proposal/
“Expenses beyond that ($5000) are covered by catastrophic insurance.”
LikeLike
Israel at No. 4 surprised me, but I guess that for all the publicity surrounding the ongoing conflict with it’s neighbors, it makes little difference to life expectancy. Another small example of reality being counter-intuitive.
Regards to weight, Australia is an example of the benefits of a good health system. We’re nearly as fat as Americans (No.5), but are No.6 on life expectancy.
LikeLike
I am glad I found your site. People think I am crazy when I explain to them that money is an idea and not a tangible ‘thing’. And they get more incensed when I explain to them that the US can do whatever it wants with its money: print less, take it back, make more, whatever… People forget that the money they use is the property of the USA. The government allows it to be used for financial transactions but it ultimately belongs to the government.
LikeLike
Digger, while I agree with the overall thrust of Warren’s proposal, I have trouble with the details:
A poor person must decide whether to spend on health care or receive $4,000. Counter-productive.
Wrongly assumes the doctor is the one who deals with insurance companies. Mostly, secretaries deal with insurance companies. The typical doctor will not have additional time for patient care.
LikeLike
Hi Rodger: “The orange colored nations are “Nations with some type of universal health care system” Didn’t you mean green?
LikeLike
Yes, you’re right. Thanks.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
LikeLike
How can health-care providers (doctors, hospitals, Big-pharma) be prevented from unrestrained price increases and looting the nation (and widening the 99%/1% gap) under a really-needed Medicare-for-all system?
LikeLike
Fortunately, we have many years of experience with Medicare, and virtually all questions long have been answered.
As for doctors and hospitals, Medicare for All would do it as Medicare already does it. It simply would set rates.
The same would be true for drugs.
LikeLike