Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
●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, and the motive is the gap.
The upper .1% income/wealth/power group (You know, the ones who bribe politicians to widen the GAP between them and the rest of us) loves to talk about the horrors of “big” government.
Some of them call the U.S. government “Leviathan,” to make you visualize a huge, malevolent monster trying to swallow you up and controlling your life against your will.
The rich have recruited the Tea Party, the religious right and the Libertarians to call for smaller government, simply because reducing the size of government reduces benefits to the 99.9%, thus widening the GAP.
Given their choice, they would opt for no government at all. That would give the rich free rein to run rampant over the rest of us.
One Libertarian site named, “The Daily Bell” uses the term “Leviathan” in describing the U.S. government, and claims that big government has caused 150 million murders.
They forget that people, not governments kill, and citizens of small governments kill just as well, if not better.
The 150 million murder number undoubtedly includes the small governments of Uganda’s Idi Amin, the Khmer Rouge of Cambodia, the slaughters of Burundi and Rwanda, and the small governments of Vichy France, Poland, Austria and Germany itself, where the people and their small governments joyfully sent their neighbors to the gas chambers.
South Africa’s apartheid government was smaller than many U.S. state governments by any measure, and far more murderous.
Is “big” government worse than the state governments that embraced slavery? Or the state governments that foster cruelty to gays, women, browns, blacks, the poor, the elderly and immigrants?
Recently, I contacted Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the Libertarian National Committee, Inc. ((202) 333-0008 ext. 232, email@example.com) and asked him one simple question: “Specifically, which Big Government spending do you wish to reduce or eliminate, and which do you wish to maintain or increase?”
His simple answer: “Reduce spending on defense, Social Security, Medicare, HHS, along with most other things. Increase nothing.”
(I wrote to him, a follow up question: “Why does the Libertarian Party wish to reduce spending on Social Security, Medicare and HHS?” but he will not answer.)
Although his answer differs somewhat from that of other right-wingers (Most of them want to increase military spending), still it leaves the question of “Why?” Why cut benefits to the elderly, the sick and the poor?
Before we address that question, let’s see where the federal government currently spends money:
If you go to the Federal Budget, Table S–4. Adjusted Baseline by Category, you’ll see the following figures for 2012:
Appropriated (“discretionary”) programs:
Defense: 671 billion
Non-defense: 614 billion
Subtotal: 1,285 billion
Social Security: 768 billion
Medicare: 466 billion
Medicaid: 251 billion
Other mandatory programs: 548 billion
Subtotal: 2,032 billion
Net Interest: 220 billion
Total Outlays: 3,537 billion
Which of the above benefits do you feel is a monster, controlling your life against your will and trying to swallow you up?
Would you rather receive a smaller Social Security benefit? A smaller Medicare or Medicaid benefit? Less of other benefits (aids to the poor, the middle, the unemployed, the disabled and others in need)?
When you receive that Social Security check, or your medical bills are paid by Medicare, do you feel oppressed by the “Leviathan”?
And if you understand it isn’t the federal benefits that are oppressive, but rather the federal taxes, keep in mind that federal taxes do not fund federal spending.
You could receive exactly the same benefits if there were no federal taxes at all.
So if we don’t cut the military, and we don’t cut mandatory programs, what we have left is 614 billion, or about 17% of the budget. And what is the 17%? “Useless” things like road and bridge building, aids to education, NASA, the courts, Congress, the Supreme Court, the White House and thousands upon thousands of federal efforts to keep the country running.
So, in reality “cutting the size of the federal government” is mostly the same as “cutting the free benefits coming from the federal government.” Yet, still we hear about this nasty old “Leviathan.”
Leviathan stirs again
Today big government is back with a vengeance: not just as a brute fact, but as a vigorous ideology.
America’s financial capital has shifted from New York to Washington, DC, and the government has been trying to extend its control over the health-care industry.
Ah yes, not only “Leviathan,” but also “vengeance,” “brute” and “control.” Hmmm . . . do you think they’re trying to influence you with emotion rather than fact?
As for the government “extending its control,” this apparently is a synonym for the government trying to supply health care to the many millions of people who can’t afford it. Shame on the “Leviathan” for that.
But it gets worse. (Remember, this is from a publication that calls itself, “The Economist”):
The revival of the state is creating a series of fierce debates that will shape policymaking over the coming decades. Governments are beginning to cut public spending in an attempt to deal with surging deficits.
But the inevitable quarrels over cuts will be paltry compared with those about the growth of entitlements. America’s deficit, boosted by recession, is already hovering at a post-war high of 12% of GDP, and the American economy depends on the willingness of other countries (particularly China) to fund its debt.
The CBO calculates that the deficit could rise to 23% of GDP in the next 40 years if it fails to tackle the yawning imbalance between revenue and expenditure.
Here is a magazine, dedicated to the science of economics, that writes articles, pretending that:
–Deficits, which are absolutely necessary for economic growth, should be reduced, and
–China, which buys those unnecessary T-securities, is in some unexplained way, funding our debt, which itself, in some unexplained way, is funding the American government.
No, Economist, the deficit should not be reduced, it should be increased, via tax cuts and spending increases.
And no, Economist, neither China nor any other country provides the U.S. with dollars, our own sovereign currency.
We could pay off 100% of our so-called “debt” to China tomorrow, simply by transferring dollars from China’s T-security accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank, to China’s checking account at any bank. No new dollars needed.
That a magazine devoted to economics, can be completely ignorant of even the basics of Monetary Sovereignty is stunning — or would be until you remember that it, like most media, is owned by rich people: “Since 1928, half the shares have been owned by the Financial Times, a subsidiary of Pearson, the other half by a group of independent shareholders.”
1. Despite loaded names like “Leviathan,” big governments neither are more nor less honest, compassionate, understanding or beneficial than small governments. If you live in a cruelly run state, cutting federal Social Security benefits won’t help you.
Even a tiny county run by someone like Sheriff Joe Arpaio can be a nightmare if your skin is black or brown.
2. Names like “Leviathan” are used as emotional pejoratives for government, to convince you to cut your own wrists at the behest of the upper .01%. They want to widen the gap, and one way to do that is to cut what benefits you. The rich want to limit or even eliminate government, because only government is able to control the power lust of the rich.
3. If you read any article calling the U.S. government “Leviathan,” you can be absolutely positive the author is a liar or a fool.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
8. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here)
10. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with much higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
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
THE RECESSION CLOCK
Vertical gray bars mark recessions.
As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the lines rise. Federal deficit growth is absolutely, positively necessary for economic growth. Period.