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.
=====================================================================
More agents, fencing may cut illegal immigration by half; Senate bill’s critics not satisfied
By Stephen Dinan-The Washington Times Wednesday, July 3, 2013Spending $35 billion on new Border Patrol agents and fencing would only stop between a third and half of future illegal immigration, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) latest analysis released Wednesday.
Wait! We plan to spend an additional $35 billion to add to the existing wall between Mexico and us?? Is Mexico about to attack us?
If not, what the heck are the cowardly right-wingers so frightened about?
Where else in the world does such a wall of shame exist? O.K., Israel has a wall. But Israel is a tiny country surrounded by big countries that have vowed to destroy it, and in fact repeatedly have tried to destroy it, and Israel daily is attacked by rockets.
But, we are the United States of America, the most powerful nation in the history of the world. And Mexico is militarily weak and makes no threats against our existence. In every sense, Mexico is one of our allies.
So, what the heck are the cowardly right-wingers so frightened about?
Are these the same cowardly right-wingers who feel they need to stockpile guns — semi-automatic, military weapons — to protect themselves against . . . against what?
But it gets worse.
The “CBO estimates that the net inflow would be reduced by between one-third and one-half compared with the projected net inflow under current law.
The CBO also said that the additional legal workers will boost the economy and lead to nearly $1 trillion in new tax revenue over the next 20 years.
Get it? The cowardly right-wingers want to stop the flow of immigrants, and absolutely do not want to provide immigrants a path to citizenship. But additional legal workers will boost the economy.
So, what the heck are the cowardly right-wingers so frightened about?
To win GOP votes, senators accepted an amendment from Republican Sens. Bob Corker of Tennessee and John Hoeven of North Dakota to add fencing and border agents, which will bring the total number of agents on the southwest border to more than 38,400.
The additional security spending will cost $38 billion, the CBO said.
Security experts on all sides of the immigration debate have cast doubt on the efficacy of doubling the size of the Border Patrol, saying the return on investment is rather low.
The cowardly right-wingers are firmly against addition government spending for frivolous things like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, other poverty programs, food & drug inspection and bank supervision.
But there is $38 billion available to protect us from that dangerous, implacable bully, Mexico.
Visualize us citizens of the United States of America, all carrying guns (Thanks, NRA) and cowering behind our wall, protected from attacks by Mexico. And visualize us protected from the immigrants who would boost our economy.
I feel so much safer now. But I have one question:
Who will protect us from the cowardly right-wingers?
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
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 
I agree with some of your comments and not with others but on July 4th I thought this blog might be of interest to you
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ed-crego/rights-patriotism-and-service_b_3542583.html
*Ed Crego and Frank Islam *
*Rights, Patriotism and Service: Fourth of July Reflections*
On this Fourth of July, we recognize and celebrate America’s birthday and the American Revolution — a revolution that began in 1775 and that continues today. It is a revolution based on the fact that America as a nation was not created “perfect” but in order to “form a more perfect union.”
In 2013, we continue to work on that union — not always perfectly, not always progressively, not always agreeably — but always in a manner in which Americans of all positions and persuasions can struggle to make their voices heard and opinions matter. As we consider the current context and recent events, we think that this is an appropriate time to reflect upon rights, patriotism and national service as they relate to that struggle.
Our country was not founded with equal rights but in the search for equal rights For many, those rights have had to be demanded and earned over time. For example, consider the suffragette movement and the civil rights protests.
The Supreme Court in its most recent decisions took rights two steps forward and one step back. Marriage rights were expanded, affirmative action rights were maintained but toughened, and voting rights were contracted.
The clear winner from the Court’s verdicts was states rights. States rights, however, were trumped — even if it is for just a brief period of time — by citizens’ rights in “the peoples’ filibuster” on abortion rights in the Texas State Senate on June 27, the last day the Senate was to be in session for this term.
The Senate was to consider and would have easily passed, given its overwhelmingly Republican majority, an anti-abortion law that would significantly reduce access to abortion in the state. Then, along came what may have been one of the most unusual moments in state legislative history — *the people’s filibuster.*
This filibuster was about abortion rights. It could have been about any “rights” issue on which there are significant differences of opinion and values.
We want to make it clear that in this instance it was not the issue that mattered — although it does greatly to those on both sides of the issue. What matters is that the people were given the right to speak about their “rights” and they seized it. As importantly, the State allowed them to do so and adhered to its own rules of engagement.
The official filibusterer in Texas was Democratic State Senator Wendy Davis from Fort Worth who took the floor at 11:18 a.m. to try to stop consideration of this new law before the clock struck 12 midnight — at which time the Senate would have to adjourn taking no action. This meant that Ms Davis would have to filibuster for almost 13 hours.
This would have been a difficult feat for any one at any time. But, the Texas State Senate rules made it even more so stating that any one who engaged in a filibuster would have to stand the entire time never leaning on anything, not leave the floor for bathroom breaks, drink nothing, and always stay on topic.
For more than 11 hours, Ms. Davis complied with these rules. Nonetheless, twice during her presentation she was called for violations of other obscure rules and then around 10 p.m., she was called for a third violation. Under normal circumstances, this would have been three strikes and you are out and the filibuster would have ended unsuccessfully. This was not to be a normal time, however. It was to be a transcendent one.
Almost immediately after the third infraction was called on Ms. Davis, her Senate colleagues took the floor and began using a set of parliamentary maneuvers to try to run the clock out till midnight. They did this until about 11:45 p.m. when it looked as if their stalling and delaying tactics were going to fail.
Then came the completely unanticipated and unexpected. The hundreds of abortion rights supporters who had jammed into the upstairs gallery to watch Ms. Davis spontaneously began to applaud and cheer wildly and would not be quieted. By doing so, they extended and became part of the filibuster process. They transformed this into* the people’s filibuster.*
And, believe it or not — at least for this night in this state house — the people prevailed. In spite of the efforts of Senate leadership to gavel things to order and get a vote cast, they could not do so.
Ms. Davis, her Democratic colleagues, and those “average citizens” who stood with them acted as patriots. So, too, we should add, are the Republicans who in support of their own beliefs and principles opposed them. This was an example of the democractic process at work and contesting patriots in a peaceful confrontation.
Patriotism is not anyone’s exclusive province. It belongs to no individual or group. It can frequently be characterized by complex, contradictory and competing perspectives and positions.
That’s the point that Kathy Silverberg, former publisher of the *Sarasota Herald Tribune*makes in an op-ed piece in which she writes,
“The Fourth of July might be a good time to take a step back, to consider that patriotism is an inclusive term, that it represents a tent big enough to hold divergent opinions, people from a wide variety of backgrounds and traditions, some who wear flag lapels, who fly the American flag from their porch, and some who don’t.”
A hundred and fifty years ago on July 1 to 3, 1863, the bloodiest battle of the Civil War was fought at Gettysburg. At least 46,000 and maybe more than 51,000 union and confederate soldiers were killed.
Those Americans were all patriots. They paid the ultimate price for our not being able to reconcile differing views of what was right or wrong for this nation in a peaceful manner. They died in service to their country but on different sides. They died fighting for what they thought was right.
On this Fourth of July, we should remember them and understand that our perspectives on what is right, who is a patriot, and what constitutes service may differ but that our cause should not. That must be to work together as citizens to “form a more perfect union.”
In doing so, we must heed this famous admonition from Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address:
“It is for us, the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us – that from these honored dead we take increased devotion – that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and the government of the people, by the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
There is still much “unfinished work” remaining on this July 4, 2013. The struggle and the revolution continue. And, “we the people” will not always agree on how to proceed. Just as was the case in 1776, however, we are certain that it is a struggle and revolution that we as Americans can win as long as we remember our shared commitment to each other and this nation.
LikeLike
First, they buy guns to protect themselves and their families from government. As you wrote yourself not long ago, first they collect your phone calls, then …
Second, the wall will not reduce the number of illegal immigrants, and that is not its purpose. It is very easy to come across our borders legally, and that is how nearly all of the illegals got here. Their only crime is that they did not leave when they promised to leave.
The wall is to stop the people who would not be allowed to enter at a border crossing: People who are known criminals, people who have been previously deported, people who are known to be terrorists or have ties to terrorist organizations.
The bill attempts to reduce illegal immigration by keeping better track of those who enter legally, and making it harder for immigrants without work visas to find work. Nearly all countries do this. Tourists and students are not allowed to have jobs, and if they don’t exit in time, and turn in their immigration document, the government starts looking for them to find out why.
Or were your questions rhetorical?
LikeLike
Oh, really? Which ones have built a giant wall, policed by armed guards and drones, between themselves and their peaceful neighbors?
All these years, and suddenly America needs a wall, and armed guards and drones to protect itself against immigrants? (Send me your poor, your huddled masses . . . )
Absolutely, 100% false. The above-mentioned article included the following paragraph:
“That first analysis found the bill would only reduce future illegal immigration by about 25 percent, which comes to about 1.3 million people over the next decade. That still means about 4 million more illegal immigrants would get through.”
So, there must be more than 5 million “known criminals” and “terrorists” trying to get in. Yeah, sure.
Let’s be honest. All the rationalizing in the world cannot hide the fact that the right wing now has been taken over by xenophobes who hate all immigrants, and by bigots who hate all brown immigrants (as well as hating children out of the womb, women, blacks, gays, the unemployed and the poor).
What next, a wall between Canada and us? Illegals come from Canada, too.
This all is especially traumatic for me, because for most of my life — up through most of the Reagan years, I myself leaned right.
Sadly, today’s right-wing is being led by cowardly, bigoted nuts, who need to hide behind guns and walls.
LikeLike
No, you’ve got the known criminals and terrorists confused with the people who enter legally and overstay their visas. The 75% who would still get in are the ones we would let in, gratefully, through the border crossings. The 25% who are stopped by the wall would include the criminals and terrorists who today come through the desert, avoiding the border crossings.
Another part of that 25% would not be criminals and terrorists, and not desert crossings, but those who are discouraged from overstaying their visas because they would not be able to work once they got here. Those are because of the other changes, not because of the wall. If there are jobs for them here, then the quotas on green cards should be raised. I agree that those who would oppose these immigrants (unions, mostly) are indeed bigots.
The 75% who would continue to get in would include family members who would be supported by someone already here legally, but who for some reason were not granted visas, probably due to quotas. The right answer for them, I think, is to raise the quotas. I think opposition to these immigrants is also likely born of bigotry.
I meet a lot of Canadians who come here for the winter, and they are all (to a fault) scrupulous about the immigration laws. They make quite sure they do not overstay their visas by even a single day, because they want to be able to come back again next year. If illegals are entering through Canada, they are likely not Canadians, and would receive greater scrutiny at the border for that reason. If the illegal crossings shift from Mexico to Canada because of the wall, I think we’d get better cooperation from Canada in an effort to stop it, so a wall there might not be necessary.
Most countries do not need a wall on their borders, because of natural barriers. The only ones I know of who have built walls did it to keep people in, not out. But every country I’ve visited in Europe, Africa, and the Far East have paid very great attention to who comes in, and while welcoming us, have always made sure they would know where we were and when we left. Lots more so than the US does.
LikeLike
Not sure why you’re so afraid of Mexicans, but I do thank you for your research about Canadians. Surprised about the “natural barriers” between France, Spain, Italy, and all the other European nations. Maybe they too should build walls.
LikeLike
What gives you the idea that I am afraid of Mexicans? I vacation in Mexico, and I love it there. Mexicans are incredibly gracious and hospitable. You may not like them, though. Most are very devout Christians.
LikeLike
Golfer, glad to hear you love Mexicans. Perhaps, some of your best friends are Mexican — as the old saying goes — so long as they stay in their own country.
I like devout Christians. I also like devout Muslims, devout Jews and devout Hindus.
What I don’t like is devout anythings who claim to love God, but hate people — in short, devout phonies.
Sadly, the extreme “religious” right wing is loaded with them as is demonstrated by their attitudes toward gays, women, children out of the womb, the poor, the unemployed and those of a different religion.
Every religion has its extreme “religious” right wing, and they all have the same bigotry. It just happens that most of the American extreme “religious” right call themselves “Christians,” though they are as far from Christ as it is possible to be.
Islam has its extreme “religious” right, though they are nothing like Mohammed. Jews too, have a an extreme “religious” right, and they beat women for praying in the wrong place.
In my mind, a bigot who claims to love God, is the ultimate phony, but a non-pious, good person still is a good person..
What do you think?
LikeLike
I like Mexicans in the US, too. If you live and work in Arizona and hate Mexicans, you won’t be a happy person. Like you, I do tend to judge people I don’t know, but only based on what they do. I don’t like murderers, drug runners, human smugglers, kidnappers, extortionists, identity thieves, and generally people who try to profit at the expense of law-abiding Mexicans by deception and cheating.
You should stick to what you know, and not assume so much about others.
Borders within the EU are open, like borders between US States. If you try to enter the EU from outside, that’s when they have controls. (But I think you knew that.) If people from outside the EU were doing what the Mexican drug cartels (who are not “peaceful neighbors”) are doing, I think it wouldn’t take them long to react.
I’m done now. Not learning any economics from this discussion.
LikeLike
Americans are a very timid sort. Only a complete jackass believes your small arms will protect you from the government. A delusional jackass. As Snowden recently commented, “you have a better chance of dying from slipping in your bath tub than of dying from a terrorist attack. The same can be said about illegal Mexicans. Are they taking jobs you are interested in, wanna’ be Tiger? However, I must say, Rodger, your comment about israel is a one-sided assessment. The wall there is not to keep them out, it’s there to pen them in. The criminal israeli government has created most of its issues with its islamic neighbors. Just as our criminal government has.consistantly.
LikeLike
See: Israel, return Arab lands
LikeLike
No, they’re not taking my job, and I think immigration quotas should be raised. Maybe not now, with unemployment high, but certainly before 2008. And most especially for Mexican immigrants, but probably across the board.
Despite the low risk of various activities, humans everywhere, not just Americans, take precautions that cannot be cost-justified, because the costs of a single incident, however unlikely, are very high.
I don’t own guns, but after Waco and Ruby Ridge it’s hard to say the people who do are delusional. Those were not delusions, they were murders of American citizens by their government. Rare, probably more rare than death by slipping in the bathtub for non-seniors, but they happened. It’s true that small arms against the US Army is a losing strategy, but I understand why it may be more attractive than surrender. The Taliban know they can’t beat the US Army, but they fight anyway. Mere survival is not the only motivation, or always the strongest.
LikeLike
Those people had guns. Maybe that was their problem.
LikeLike
I think the problem was their beliefs.
LikeLike
The children didn’t have guns, either.
LikeLike
The extreme right, now controlling the GOP. is freaked out by demographic figures that point toward a brown America and a permanent Democratic majority unless the GOP capitulates and goes multicultural. This trend will increase as the white supremacists, racists, xenophobes, bigots, and self-styled “christians,” “patriots,” and “real Americans” wrap themselves in the flag to further their narrow interests based on skin color.
LikeLike
” O.K., Israel has a wall. But Israel is a tiny country surrounded by big countries that have vowed to destroy it, and in fact repeatedly have tried to destroy it, and Israel daily is attacked by rockets.”
You lost me there. If you can’t see through that blatant zionist propaganda, you are blind.
LikeLike
John G.
You’re right.
Actually, Israel is a huge country surrounded by just a few dozen people who love it, never have attacked it in the past, and are doing everything possible to help it succeed.
Here’s the map that proves you’re right:
Israel really should give up its massive land holdings to make more room for another Gaza.
LikeLike
“Israel” is a European settler colony borne of deception, violence and ethnic cleansing. And it has never been attacked by the neighbouring countries, but it has attacked every one of its neighbours, plus a few others.
Seriously, if you swallow the zionist propaganda, you’re a fool. And probably an islamophobe/orientalist.
LikeLike
Presumably, you’re too clever to swallow the anti-Israel propaganda.
In looking at the above map, to whom would you suggest the tiny, red sliver of land should go, and how would that solve the massive problems of the Arab nations?
LikeLike