–What is the fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats, and what can be done about it?

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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 ultimately 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.

=====================================================================

No one can be more stupid than a smart person.

When reputedly brilliant, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia decided money equals speech, he uttered one of the less intelligent defenses of the thoroughly unintelligent Citizens United decision, “the more speech, the better.”

(As an aside, he compounded his lack of wisdom by giving the example of not limiting newspaper editorials, an example that has nothing to do with political contributions.)

Our vote is the ultimate method by which we Americans speak to our political representatives, and their vote is the ultimate method by which politicians speak to us Americans. Giving the wealthiest Americans virtually unlimited political spending rights is tantamount to giving them virtually unlimited votes.

Admittedly, spending does not always buy enough votes to win an election. But even after elections, spending does buy the votes of politicians in office.

The upper .1% income group has bribed the President of the United States and the Congress (via campaign contributions and promises of lucrative employment), to pass laws widening the gap between the rich and the rest. Citizens United greatly facilitates this bribery, this magnification of speech.

Political bribery is bolstered by “The Big Lie,” the statement that the federal debt and deficit are too large, unaffordable, unsustainable and somehow similar to personal debt and deficits.

The Big Lie provides an easy excuse for ongoing efforts to cut spending on virtually everything that benefits the poor and middle classes: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, poverty aid, federal employment and aid to the states.

But how are Republicans and Democrats different?

While nearly all politicians are bribed by the upper .1%, what is the difference between Republicans and Democrats (i.e. between the ultra right wing and the right wing, there being no left wing in today’s political climate, )?

Republicans not only claim no empathy for the less fortunate, they despise the less fortunate. Republicans believe the poor reap their well-deserved rewards for indolence, ignorance and immorality, and if only “those people” worked harder and were less evil, they would not need to rely on “handouts” from the government.

The ultra right wing remains intentionally blind to the fact that the entire U.S. tax code, with its generous provisions for capital gains, interest, tax shelters and overseas financing, represents a gigantic “handout” to the rich.

The right wing (aka the Democrates) claims empathy for the less fortunate. But those same Democrats also spread The Big Lie, and also vote to reduce Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, poverty aid, federal employment and aid to the states.

Democrats joined the ultra right wing in voting for the sequester, the primary difference in philosophy being: Which benefits for the poor and middle class are to be cut most.

Both parties supported the increase in FICA, the worst tax in American history, falling almost exclusively on the backs of the middle and lower classes.

So, in answer to the headline question: There is no fundamental difference between the ultra right wing and the right wing. The difference is only of degree.

The right has won; the left has died.

Citizens United was only the latest nail in the left-wing coffin. There will be more, as the bribery continues. The chorus grows for “tax simplification,” i.e. a flat tax that will increase the amount paid by the least wealthy among us, while reducing taxes on the rich.

(Prediction: “Tax simplification” will contain many exceptions for the kinds of income most associated with the wealthy.)

Because Social Security, which benefits the poor and middle classes, supposedly is “unsustainable” (part of The Big Lie), it repeatedly has been cut via taxation and delayed benefits, and eventually will be privatized to benefit Wall Street investment firms.

Medicare also falsely is called “unsustainable.” The expansion of Medicare known as “Obamacare” (Romneycare”?), which covers millions more people, was not granted sufficient federal funds for this expansion, so the middle class will pay for the lower class – a device to push the middle down to the lower – thus widening the gap between the rich and the rest.

Federally funded Medicare for Everyone, a solution that would benefit the middle and lower classes, is not even under consideration – by either party – though it easily could be implemented and supported by the federal government, with no FICA at all, and with great benefit to America.

The Big Lie has weighed upon us for many years. Though Reagan’s “Government is not a solution to our problem. Government is the problem” probably set the stage for today’s extreme situation, the Tea Party can take credit for the utter demise of the left wing.

Among their “15 Non-negotiable Core Beliefs” are these two:
“10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must.
11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory.”

Actually, very they are very good beliefs, but not when combined with these three truly awful ideas:
“6. Government must be downsized.
7. The national budget must be balanced.
8. Deficit spending must end.”

They comprise the core of The Big Lie, and both the ultra right wing party and the right wing party subscribe to these beliefs.

Sadly, no political party in America speaks The Big Truth: Increased federal deficit spending not only is affordable and sustainable, but is necessary to grow the economy, reduce unemployment, solidify retirement benefits for our senior citizens, provide medical care for all Americans and narrow the too-wide gap between the rich and the rest.

I subscribe to the two-party, presidential system, as opposed to the multi-party, parliamentary system. But today, we have a one-party system. Though the Republican ultra right, fights fiercely with the Democrat right, it is more of a brother-on-brother battle. They fight over minutia. The fundamentals are the same.

The solution: America needs a truly left wing party, to balance the right wing, and to speak for the 99%. If it ever comes, it will begin with a charismatic liberal. Clinton could have been the one, but he caved.

Obama too, could have been the one, but he too yielded to the siren song of Scalia’s “free speech,”bribe money. Like Clinton, Obama will leave office to become very rich; his wife will become very rich; his children will become very rich and he will have a fine presidential library.

And the gap between the super rich and us will continue to grow.

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. Click here
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%

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

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

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

11 thoughts on “–What is the fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats, and what can be done about it?

      1. Sorry dave, the green party won’t cut it.

        Go to their web site and look at the very last item in their platform: National Debt. Here’s what they say:

        Greens will reduce our national debt.

        Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have irresponsibly expanded our national debt by trillions of dollars to finance tax cuts for savings of our workers are wealthiest citizens [sic], war, corporate welfare and bailouts of Wall Street and the automotive industry. This debt and the interest that must be paid on it is not sustainable.

        In short, they are 100% clueless about the economy. (Also, seemingly clueless about writing a coherent sentence.)

        –Expanding the national debt via deficit spending is not irresponsible
        –Deficits do not finance tax cuts for anyone
        –Nor do deficits finance wars, corporate welfare and bailouts
        –The debt and interest are sustainable, forever.

        If only the green party understood Monetary Sovereignty . . . ah, if only.

        Like

  1. As a follow up to my previous post, the problem is that people do not have an understanding, or care how our monetary system works. It takes all of ten seconds for their eyes to glaze over when I begin to discuss the topic.

    Like

  2. Lest anyone doubt that campaign contributions and promises of lucrative employment have bribed the President and Congress, read this article, of which the following excerpts are a part:

    Bill Clinton’s Big Israeli Payday
    Jonathan S. Tobin, 6/04/2013

    We are constantly reminded of the fact that there’s no better gig in the world than being an ex-president.

    With lucrative book contracts (for books that don’t always get read but for which publishers feel obligated to shell out big bucks in advances), highly paid speaking engagements and uncounted perks as well as lifetime security, our former commanders-in-chief live the rest of their lives high on the proverbial hog.

    And when they’re done repairing their personal finances, they can start foundations and shake down everyone who wants their ear or to link their names with a former president.

    That’s pretty much the story of the last 12 years of Bill Clinton’s life, as he has become a wealthy man as well as one with a personal foundation to which he can funnel almost unlimited amounts of contributions from those who wish to earn his good will or that of his wife, who has her own eye on the White House in 2016.

    It’s the unwritten rule of politics: “Take care of the rich now, and the rich will take care of you later.”

    Now, tell me again why Barack Obama wants to cut Social Security and raised FICA, approved the sequester, cuts federal employment, demands that the middle class pay for the poor’s Medicare and promulgates the Big Lie that federal finances are like personal finances.

    The common name is “Bribery.” (If only I could get my friends at MMT to say it.)

    Like

  3. Canada has a better setup in many ways: single payer healthcare, sustainable old age pensions and a real multi-party system. Unfortunately the two largest parties subscribe to the balanced budget myth and try to achieve it with regressive value added taxes and higher personal income taxes. I had a business there for 5 years; corporate taxes are actually lower than in the US.

    Like

  4. The worst part of your apt description is that the Dems could easily dominate elections if they would just accept the truth about our national currency….or stop lying if the already know the deal……sorry Rodger, but as an atheist, it is not at all inconceivable for me that a large portion of society can easily be deluded about our basic reality. The country supports continued and even expanded social welfare programs by large margins and would love the full employment and rising wages that come commensurate with implementing MS\MMT. This combined with the country’s recent trend to the left on social issues and evolving demographics would virtually guarantee the Dems would continue to win overwhelmingly, making room for a resurgent left wing of a finally centered Dem party.

    Like

    1. In the end it comes down to the citizens themselves. They must cooperate, get independent candidates on ballots – it only takes the required number of signatures – that pledge to support the big truth, support the candidate with all of your heart and vote in numbers for him. There are areas of the country to start and possibly as things worsen it might be possible to turn around some of those that vote for their own destruction. The .1% with the real influence want to erase all of the gains achieved toward individual rights made since the Enlightenment. The want a return to conditions as far as personal rights as they were in the medieval period. Maybe wishful thinking, likely? However, I do possess faith in our youth to do something similar as conditions worsen for the many.

      Like

  5. RMM, can you link me to the information supporting this?…

    “The expansion of Medicare known as “Obamacare” (Romneycare”?), which covers millions more people, was not granted sufficient federal funds for this expansion, so the middle class will pay for the lower class – a device to push the middle down to the lower – thus widening the gap between the rich and the rest.”

    Thanks, JK

    Like

  6. “The upper .1% income group has bribed the President of the United States and the Congress (via campaign contributions and promises of lucrative employment)”

    right, but some say it’s even smaller than the .1%–more like .000042% (132 people). more on that here:

    even though things are already pretty bad, it’s actually a lot worse than you think…

    Like

Leave a reply to Yuu Kim Cancel reply