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.


If I told you I’ll give you $10 every year, for three years, and after that, I’ll keep giving you $10 every year, but you’ll have to use $1 to help poor people, what would be your answer?

The Republican answer is: To hell with the poor people; to hell with our state economies. All we care about is beating Obama.

Washington Post
More state leaders considering opting out of Medicaid expansion
By N.C. Aizenman and Sandhya Somashekhar, Published: July 3

A growing number of Republican state leaders are revolting against the major Medicaid expansion called for under President Obama’s health-care overhaul, threatening to undermine one of the law’s most fundamental goals: insuring millions of poor Americans.

The Republican governors of four states — Florida, Iowa, Louisiana and South Carolina — have declared that they want to opt out of the expansion. Leaders of half a dozen other states — including Texas, home to one of the largest concentrations of uninsured people — are considering following suit.

The governors argue that expanding their Medicaid programs, which are jointly funded with state and federal money, would crush state budgets. And they are turning the issue into a roiling election-year battle over the federal government’s role.

Translation: “‘Jointly funded’ means the federal government pays 100% for the first three years, pumping billions into the states’ economies. After that, the government pays 90%. For every dollar the federal government adds to each state’s economy, the state will spend one dime to help its own poor men, women and children.”

“The president . . . needs to understand what makes this country great in part is that we’re not dependent on government programs,” Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said Tuesday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox and Friends” program. “It seems to me like the president measures success by how many people are on food-stamp rolls and government-run health care. That’s not the American Dream.”

Translation: “I’m the same Republican Bobby Jindal who complained loudly, to all media, about insufficient government assistance following hurricane Katrina. I also am the Bobby Jindal who gave the media a phony story about my personal heroism following Katrina. My poor people don’t need health care, because doing without health care ‘makes this country great.’ And I’m the same Bobby, who begged the government to spend billions erecting huge barriers around New Orleans, to protect us from future hurricanes.”

Such a message has the potential to further fuel the Tea Party movement, which galvanized three years ago over the health-care legislation and could put enormous pressure on GOP leaders. Already, large tea party organizations such as Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks are urging their members to lobby states to reject the federal Medicaid money, with a particular focus on the 27 that challenged the law in court.

The ramifications could be far-reaching, because the law’s top ambition is to extend coverage to 30 million uninsured Americans. More than half of those people are slated to receive insurance through the Medicaid expansion.

Translation: “We of the Tea Party, would rather have our fellow Americans go without health care than to do anything that might help Obama.”

Republicans (say) that the state share of the tab could still prove crippling. And the argument offers a chance to hammer home a major GOP talking point: that the government cannot keep growing without fraying at the seams, said Rich Galen, a Republican strategist who served as press secretary for then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.).

“The issue is: If you keep expanding unemployment insurance and expanding Medicaid and expanding food stamps, then sooner or later the money runs out and you become Greece or Spain or Italy,” Galen said. “They’re not saying, ‘I want people dying in the streets.’ They’re saying they want to fix the economic infrastructure.”

Translation: “We know that the U.S., unlike Greece, Spain or Italy, is Monetarily Sovereign, so never can run out of dollars, but the voters are stupid, so we’ll just keep feeding them the Big Lie. They never will figure it out. We’re against unemployment insurance, Medicaid and food stamps, because those things help the poor.”

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) is one of several who said they are waiting for the November presidential election in hopes that a victory by Mitt Romney could empower the GOP to repeal the overhaul.

Translation: “We reject Obamacare, because we want to elect Romney, the Republican who invented Obamacare. As Republican Senator Mitch McConnell said, ‘The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term President.’ That’s our one goal in life.”

Of course, all this would have been unnecessary, if the federal government merely would provide Medicare to every many, woman and child in America. But the Tea/Republican Party wouldn’t want that, either.

The question is: Are American voters really as stupid, selfish and hard-hearted as the right wing says they are?

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