Mitchell’s laws:
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor,
which leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The penalty for ignorance is slavery.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive.


When politicians speak of deficit reduction (austerity), they make it sound like a prudent financial policy. After all, doesn’t everyone want their deficits and debt reduced?

Never mind that the federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, never can run short of dollars, and never can be unable to pay its bills. President Obama pretends not to understand the difference between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, so why should we care about the difference?

The same politicians neglect to mention what deficit reduction really means in terms of human hardship. This blog has run numerous posts describing these individual negative effects of federal deficit reduction — the destruction of the middle- and lower-classes, the starvation, the homelessness, the untreated illness.

Whenever such a post runs, we usually receive one or more comments from debt hysterics about our favoring “socialism” and “if socialism were so good, why is the economy struggling.”

This has been happening for years, and I despair of ever teaching the debt hysterics that socialism is NOT government spending (It’s government ownership). And while every nation is at least partly government owned, (i.e. partly socialist), our nation is mostly capitalist. So, I suppose their question should be, “If capitalism were so good, why is the economy struggling?”

(One debt hysteric even suggested that benefits to the poor should be cut, because those people simply will give the dollars to the rich, anyway. Yikes!)

And, of course, the answer is: Deficit reduction always, always, always reduces economic growth, leading to recessions and depressions.

Anyway, here is yet another negative consequence of deficit reduction, as described in the following excerpts:

Chicago Tribune
Wildfire risk runs high, but budget cuts mean fewer firefighters
By Wes Venteicher, Washington Bureau, May 13, 2013

WASHINGTON — The drought that caused record wildfires in California and other Western states last year is expected to persist through the summer, but fewer firefighters will battle this year’s blazes in other regions because of federal budget cuts, top federal officials said Monday.

The U.S. Forest Service will hire 500 fewer firefighters this year, the result of “line by line” budget reductions required by Congress, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said. The reduced staffing also means 50 fewer fire engines will be available, Vilsack said.

So if your house burns down, or your dog, cat or human loved ones die in a fire, at least you’ll have the satisfaction of knowing the politicians say they are being prudent.

Vilsack and Interior Secretary Sally Jewel said much of the West would face severe fire danger this summer.

California is expected to be the most imperiled of the dry Western states. The state this year has received only 25% of the rainfall that it received in the same period for 2012, National Interagency Fire Center fire analyst Jeremy Sullens said. Other states expected to be hit hard are Arizona, New Mexico, Oregon and Idaho, along with portions of other states.

Because of the danger California is in, the Forest Service does not plan to reduce hiring there, Harbour said. The reductions will more likely affect Eastern states, where the danger is less serious this year.

Translation: Although last year was a record fire year, and the danger to the Western states is even worse this year, there will be no increase in firefighter hiring. So the outcome will be much worse.

Things also will be worse out East, where we’ll see personnel reductions.

The Forest Service cut $50 million from a fire preparedness fund. When more firefighters have been needed, the Forest Service has shifted money out of accounts for things such as road maintenance, campgrounds, wildlife and range management programs.

I feel better already. Less fire preparedness, less maintenance of roads, campgrounds, wildlife and ranges, fewer fire fighters and fire engines. We don’t need those, anyway.

So add death-by-fire to the long, long list of austerity’s negative effects. You can put this right next to the list of deficit cutting benefits, which are . . . uh . . . well, exactly none.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty


Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Medicare — parts A, B & D — for everyone
3. Send every American citizen an annual check for $5,000 or give every state $5,000 per capita (Click here)
4. Long-term nursing care for everyone
5. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
6. Salary for attending school (Click here)
7. Eliminate corporate taxes
8. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
9. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99%

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:
1. Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
2. Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports