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, 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, wes.benedict@lp.org) 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:
Outlays:
Appropriated (“discretionary”) programs:
Defense: 671 billion
Non-defense: 614 billionSubtotal: 1,285 billion
Mandatory programs:
Social Security: 768 billion
Medicare: 466 billion
Medicaid: 251 billion
Other mandatory programs: 548 billionSubtotal: 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”?
Probably not.
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.”
The Economist
Leviathan stirs againToday 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.”
In summary:
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
Monetary Sovereignty
====================================================================================================================================================
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.
#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 
Off Topic
Roger—Have you posted any information about the “FATCA ACT
which takes effect 1st July 2014
Not many know that FATCA Act is part and portion of the so-called Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (US-HR 2847) known as HIRE Act that was signed into law in March, 2010.
About Americans and Business banking overseas and countries sending information back to (IRS)
If you can shed some information on this HR 2847, sure would be appreciated.
Thanks
L.W
LikeLike
Fundamentally, this bill provides rewards for hiring unemployed people. I haven’t researched the details, but the whole concept is questionable.
Think it out. Businesses employ the number of people they think they need. So, if this bill results in one additional person being hired, what would happen?
Answer: They will fire someone, either right away or after a couple of months..
I can’t imagine why any business would hire more people than it needs. Why pay an extra salary, just to get a small bonus from the feds?
I’m puzzled about how this is supposed to reduce unemployment..
Additionally, the law has some foreign banking “junk” tossed in, that will be a negative for the economy.
LikeLike
[1] Outstanding post, Rodger. I read it three times, with an hour interval between readings. Your logic is so solid that the only way the “big government” clowns could respond to it would be to go silent.
[2] The HIRE Act is ridiculous. True, it excuses businesses from having to pay their half of the FICA tax on new employees (6.2% of each employee’s salary). It also gives a maximum $1,000 break on business taxes if a company employs a new worker for 52 weeks. But this is nowhere near enough to make it profitable for companies to hire new workers. It’s an insult.
The bill allocates $20 billion for highway and transit projects, but that’s a drop in the bucket, and much of that $20 billion will be siphoned off by the rich owners of asphalt companies, concrete companies, and so on.
“LW” (above) notes the HIRE Act includes the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FACTA). This is especially ridiculous. It requires all foreign financial institutions to report the income and assets of all US citizens living around the world, plus the income of foreign nationals born to US citizens. The only way the IRS could enforce this on countless financial institutions in 195 foreign countries is via a punitive withholding levy on US assets. As a result, foreign financial institutions will simply divest (or not invest) in U.S. assets, resulting in capital flight.
Also, it is arrogant of the IRS to demand that all foreign financial institutions and all foreign governments in the world collect data on US citizens at their own expense and transmit it to the IRS. Ridiculous! (Incidentally the US is the only country, save Eritrea, that imposes tax on its citizens abroad.)
Already FACTA has caused a seven-fold increase in Americans renouncing their US citizenship. An example is singer Tina Turner, who (because of FACTA) became a citizen of Switzerland in April 2013. Eduardo Saverin, the co-founder of Facebook, renounced his US citizenship to avoid excessive taxes. In previous years the average number of renunciations was in the hundreds. Since 2010 it has been thousands each year, because of oppressive taxes. 1,800 U.S. citizens renounced their citizenship in 2011. In 2012 it was 2,200. (Note that in order to formally renounce or “relinquish” your US citizenship, you must pay an “exit tax” at a US consulate or embassy. Ridiculous!)
Of course, the worst thing about all this is that it reinforces the Big Lie that the US government needs tax revenue. For example, the ostensive purpose of FACTA is to “pay for” the HIRE Act!
Rodger thinks that ultimately the only purpose of federal taxes is to help widen the gap between the rich and the rest.
I agree. (See https://mythfighter.com/2013/09/03/the-real-purpose-of-federal-taxes/)
Thus, I have no time for the insulting MMT mantra that “taxes drive money.”
LikeLike
quat – was your loan private or federal? you say it was bought from the dept of education, so i am assuming federal. either way, could there not be a statute of limitations (state specific) on collection? this was a debt from the 80s, yes? and it’s a private collection company after you, not the federal govt?
LikeLike
Next time you read or hear a politician say he’s all for education, and how vital education is, ask him why the government lends money, rather than gives it. (Is the government afraid it will run short of dollars?)
And why the truly onerous collection methods?
LikeLike
@ blacksocialist: Thanks for your question. I don’t remember what type of loan it was. I sent the collection agency a note asking for original documents to show what kind of loan it was, and to prove that I owe this debt. And no, there is no statute of limitations on student loans, nor can the debt be discharged via bankruptcy. The US Congress has seen to that.
Two questions I have are…
[1] How did this collection agency come up with the figure of $36k for a loan that was $8K? It seems to me that they can arbitrarily make up any figure they like, and call it “interest and penalties.”
[2] For all I know, many of these collection agencies are scammers who take payments on student loans, and do nothing. You could pay off a student loan, and then get a new letter from a different agency claiming that you still owe the full amount, plus added interest and penalties. You may protest, saying you have the proof that you paid off the loan, but they can respond with, “Sorry if that other firm stole all the money you paid, but that’s between you and them. In the meantime, you still owe the full amount of your loan, plus added interest and penalties. So PAY!”
I’m waiting for a response from this collection agency. My sister says she might be able to lend me $3,000 if the collection outfit would accept $3,000 as a lump sum. I’ll have to see how greedy they are. I already know I will never be eligible for Social Security until this loan thing is resolved.
I was born in California, where a university education was free until Ronald Reagan became governor in 1967 and “reformed” higher education. The other states quickly did likewise. Now higher education has become a hideous scam, sustained by the Big Lie.
Students have over a Trillion dollars in loan debt, plus interest and penalties. Talk about a captive market!
LikeLike
private student loans have a statute of limitations determined by state law, hence my original question. but you are correct with regard to federal loans. also, as i stated in my previous post, if the debt, let’s assume it was federal, was sold to a collection agency, does that change the nature of the debt.
LikeLike
“where university education was free.” Quatloox
Teachers work for free… oops… no… states have to pay them.
Monetary sovereignty is Rodger’s answer to that reality. Spending money resolves that – because the newly created currency does not remove value from existing one.
3rd grade math says otherwise.
LikeLike
By the time someone reaches the 3rd grade, they possibly will learn how to handle equations that have more than two terms.
Apparently this is beyond you, because you seem to think: Inflation = Money Supply.
When you get to the 4th grade, please read: https://mythfighter.com/2014/02/02/the-economics-of-chaos-what-we-know-for-sure/
LikeLike
To be honest, Rodger, a university education in California was not “free.” It was paid for by property taxes and a county sales tax, just like grades K-12.
But students had no debt.
Now, because of the student loan scam, universities keep raising their tuitions, which cause higher debt, which necessitates more loans, which allows universities to raise their tuitions even higher, which causes higher debt, higher tuitions, and so on.
All education should be paid for by the federal government.
In such a world, students would not spend their entire lives loafing in college. Students would have to maintain a certain grade average if they wanted to remain in school, and they would be given a limited (but reasonable) time frame to complete degrees.
+++++++++++++
Regarding the person who insists that inflation is a product of the money supply, that person refuses to accept that money is not physical. Money is a social invention created in people’s minds. Therefore we can make money have whatever value we want it to have.
LikeLike
FATCA is an attempt to tax foreign held accounts.
United States persons (even if you live outside of the US) and corporations are supposed to report their outside accounts to the IRS, so that the IRS can hit them with a tax. This bill has nothing to do with jobs, unless of course, you think that taxes create jobs.
Even if you are not willing to comply, don’t worry – banks will do it for you. Especially US based banks.
LikeLike
Hahahahahaha…
So poor are better off by having a government enforcing the will of the wealthy than no government at all. Hmmmmm…
Either you think our government is ruled by the rich and for the rich or you don’t.
And it doesn’t stop there, the government has the army and a huge police state, funded 100% by the slave class, to ensure people follow the rules. It has the Federal Reserve and a banking system to manage the money supply as it wishes. It has a school administration/union that is treated very nicely, and gets to retire at 45-50 – while the rests gets to retire 20 years later. A school administration that does as the government wishes.
Do I think we would do better without a government? Heck yeah I do. Look around you Rodger – you know who made that? An average Joe made that – whatever it is you are looking at.
The only thing I have to thank our government for is for monitoring everything we do and pulling strings to make sure we all follow the rules. I think the mob actually learnt something from our government.
When you say that our government is ruled by the wealthy – I believe that. People, non-organized, are less dangerous than a group of bullies that impose their will on the rest. You need to pick a side – either the government is ruled by the wealthy or they are not. Which one is it?
LikeLike
The government is ruled by the wealthy, but anarchy repeatedly has proved to be far worse.
LikeLike
The number of murders by “big government” that libertarians claim are tiny compared to the the number of murder created by the markets for slavery, price manipulation in food, medicine, energy, arms, and shipping. How many people are killed by dirty water, poor working conditions, criminal gangs? All of these things are the driven by the “free market.” How come we don’t tally the deaths caused by corporate and private greed? Because it would be in the billions.
One simply has to read about the late Victorian holocausts all of which where driven by the Empire’s “free trade” “free market” colonialism.
The only Leviathan is the plutocratic capitalist class who buy and trade governance on the open market without regard to the public interest but only their own selfishness and narcissism.
LikeLike
I am going to take a bet and say you have no clue how markets work.
There aren’t many things you could actually manipulate – unless – they are regulated by the government. Only the government has the authority and power to grant monopoly rights.
– Medicine/healthcare? it’s a monopoly because of the government. Providers are allowed not to post their prices – it’s the only industry this is allowed.
– Energy? it’s not a monopoly, prices are based on demand.. Yes, Wall Street can drive up demand for oil using leverage they’ve borrowed from the banking system. A banking system designed by the government and managed by the Fed (a quasy government entity)
– Arms? Need I say anything on this?
– Food? Where is the manipulation? There are thousands of stores/supermarkets/retailers. Don’t like the price in one, go to another one. If one chain increases price – they are asking their clients to go to the store next door.
Manipulation does not happen in free markets, Septeus7…
Here is where the selfishness is. People that call bloody murder – while asking the government to do the dirty work for them. Take the money from the rich, and give it to us because it’s “unfair”.
– Is it fair that someone in China is making 50 cents a day – while any American makes 8 dollars an hour?
– Is it fair that some people are starving around the world, while our poor people eat better than most?
Should we make it fairer than, and take from all of us and send over to these poor people? The answer to this question is the same answer to the question you posed.
If you understand how fractional reserve came about, you understand that it is the government that is fleecing you, not the free markets. Governments are anti free markets by design.
Free markets work, governments don’t.
LikeLike
Shish,
Name one country that has a functioning free market nirvana stripped of government.
LikeLike
I never said nirvana.
As in my response to Septeus7, free markets can live within the confines of today’s government.
I can single out a nation with free-er markets. The United States of America.
And for that – we have the biggest economy in the world, the biggest capital markets in the world, the top technology corporations, and much much more. Are you surprised?
LikeLike
Sheesh, but you just said gov’ts are anti free market by design and that it doesn’t work.
So, how free is your idea of a free market and what is your ideal government?
LikeLike
Correct, governments are anti free markets.
The bigger the government, the less the extent of free markets. The US is a perfect example.
LikeLike
Seems like you’re a little confused and incoherent because you keep on contradicting yourself. Now you’re saying that the US is a perfect example of big gov’t that constrain free market – a 180 degree pivot from a couple of posts back.
Anyways, I think I now know where you’re coming from. You’re one of those privatization guys who consider von Hayek, Friedman, and St. Ronnie as the reincarnated father, son, and holy ghost of libertarian economics who, further, would want to privatize everything that moves, from public education, Social Security, prisons system, and the sewerage system.
LikeLike
You need to learn how to read. The US has been leaning from free-er markets to less in the last 100 year’s, starting with the implementation of the Fed Reserve in 1913, to the closing of the gold window in 1971 to a welfare state we have today.
Whe you compare countries around the world, the US still has free-er markets. This should be pretty clear, but I know you will find another twist. As I said, anyone that questions MS is stupid. Am I coherent now?
LikeLike
Nope, I think you’re even more confused and incoherent now. In what way does the creation of a central bank and the coming off from the gold standard constrain your free market panacea?
LikeLike
Central banks manipulate the value of money (interest) and it’s system manipulate the supply of money.
Free markets don’t manipulate. During gold standard gold is profitable during certain times (which increases its supply) and is not profitable during other times.
I have a feeling you know this but chose to ignore it.
People will make this happen in free markets, the central planners do in a less free-er market. Since there is always motive, central planners skew the process to their advantage. Politicians buy votes, they bail banks, support fraud, etc.. that is not possible in a free market. They love ignorant people too.
LikeLike
Let me repeat my question because you seem to be unable to understand it.
“How does the creation of a central bank and the coming off from the gold standard constrain your free market panacea?”
Among the synonyms of constrain are : limit, restrict, throttle, restrain.
Rephrased for your better understanding, here’s the question :
Did the producers and traders of real goods and services were constrained, limited, restricted, throttled, and restrained from engaging in producing and trading when the central bank was created and the gold standard was abolished?
And again, please, get out of your confused state. Stop confusing free market with money market because those are two entirely different things.
The gold buggery of Ron Paul had been reduced to the fringe of modern economics because, among other things, its supply is finite and is thus inflexible with the demands of a growing economy.
And of course, there’s monetary sovereignty. Which is, imo, a far more noble idea than hoarding shiny pieces of metal.
LikeLike
Quote from Shish: “There aren’t many things you could actually manipulate – unless – they are regulated by the government. Only the government has the authority and power to grant monopoly rights.”
Really? What regulations and monopoly right on the unregulated derivatives market forced the financial sector to commit massive accounting control fraud? What regulations created the LIBOR fraud? Your statements are ahistorical nonsense and lies. They are economic theology akin to denying common descent in biology based on dogma.
Quote”- Medicine/healthcare? it’s a monopoly because of the government. Providers are allowed not to post their prices – it’s the only industry this is allowed. ”
Absurd. Prior to the modern system people where killed by quacks selling radium pills all the time and often the poor simply died without any access to healthcare at all except for the snakes. That is the free market.
Medicine is especially prone to manipulation due to the inherently slanted bias toward the providers to the fact that the consumers are often in desperate need and don’t have the training of experience necessary to make good decisions.
Quote: “- Food? Where is the manipulation? There are thousands of stores/supermarkets/retailers. Don’t like the price in one, go to another one. If one chain increases price – they are asking their clients to go to the store next door..”
No, there aren’t. There are five major cartels who control 80%+ of the global food supply and constant manipulation by speculators like Goldman-Sachs controls the pricing so that executives get bonuses to people starve in African for profit.
Read about the food riots in 2008 and the run up to the Arab spring most of which was caused by the free market banksters created food price inflation. If you aren’t aware the food supply is being colonized by the Imperial Cartels destroying local markets everywhere with what can only be compared with a militaristic and genocidal intentions then you don’t know the first thing about the global food economics.
Quote: “Manipulation does not happen in free markets, Septeus7…”
Ergo the concepts of free market are unacceptable to real world analysis. You committing a logically fallacy by using a perfect world to justify real world policy and arguments.
Quote: “Here is where the selfishness is. People that call bloody murder – while asking the government to do the dirty work for them. Take the money from the rich, and give it to us because it’s “unfair.”
I have never said take money from the rich. I have simply said spend more money on the poor and middle class. The Monetary Sovereign can spend as much money on the poor without taking a thing from the rich and rich will get richer if the government spends on the poor as the money will be spent on goods produced by the firms owned by capital aka trickle up.
Quote: “- Is it fair that someone in China is making 50 cents a day – while any American makes 8 dollars an hour?
– Is it fair that some people are starving around the world, while our poor people eat better than most?”
No, it isn’t fair and the goal of good economic policy to raise people up to our standards not bring down everyone to the level of slaves.
Americans, historically, were opposed to the British Imperial system. We argue for national sovereignty and development independent of the slave systems of private free trade corporations. You are anti-American.
Quote: “If you understand how fractional reserve came about, you understand that it is the government that is fleecing you, not the free markets. Governments are anti free markets by design.”
We don’t have a fractional reserve system we have a National system which some partial privatization which has proved politically confusing.
Read Alexander Hamilton, Fredrich List, Marriner Eccles and Roger’s book on Monetary Sovereignty. You understand nothing about the real world of competing National systems versus the Transnationalist Corporate Imperialist legacy of the old Empire. You have no understanding of the Grand Chessboard and the Great Game.
You understand nothing and reason like a child as under every market are the competing values of every interconnection of social norms, social conditioning and cognitive bias of all of our history and thus your thinking is not your own is it bound to others, past and present, and by each cruelty and every kindness give birth to our future in a unity transcending all time.
You know nothing about banking. We have a system driving by private consumer demand and private bank loans creating deposits and unregulated shadow banking.
The National governments have very little oversight and essentially zero since Obama refuses to enforce banking regulations and criminal law. Essentially, we have no regulations at all and are in an entirely free market where accounting control fraud rules and everything is left to market to regulate in what some have called some call totalitarian anarchy.
We are living in period where weaken National states are under constant attack by private corporate imperialist interests so they can impose their antidemocratic totalitarianism of free “slave” markets on the working classes without opposition. The “free market” is about making corporate owned markets safe for the unregulated savagery of total slavery. “Free Market” is code for “Slave Market.”
If you doubt me simply read the argument by the Southern Free Traders about how abolition was communism and destroying the liberty of the slavers. All of your arguments are those of the Atlantic system apologists and frankly boring.
You aren’t even doing a good job of presenting the neoliberal position in economics. You have to get better than making statements of nonsense and unfacts which is all you guys ever seem to do.
LikeLike
LOL…. Let’s be a little honest here.
No-one has to be an expert to see the lies from the truth – just have common sense. You confuse law with regulations – the 2 are different things.I sure hope you are not a teacher.
1) Derivatives… fair enough. You say banks are committing fraud. Is fraud not a crime punishable by the law? And it’s not the trading of derivatives that’s the issue – nope. Here is the issue: when banks get in trouble and become insolvent – who is there to bail them out?
2) Medicine – again you confuse law with regulation. Being careless and killing someone has legal consequences. If you have a business and you conspire with your competitors to set prices (monopoly) – you are committing a crime – who gives them the free pass?
3) Food… Yikes.. I’m not sure what world you are living in. In the one I live in, people without jobs are eating 24 ounce tenderloin steaks. What you fail to see is that if one corporation raises its prices, another one could come in and undercut them – effectively putting the other one out of business. Food prices are cheap and will continue to be cheap so long as the government stays out of it. The food prices seen around the world are, in part, the result of the fractional reserve currency (the dollar) exporting some of the inflation to those nations. The instability there is more to blame.How you could put all the blame the US for all the world sorrows and call me anti American is mind boggling.
4) Spend more on the poor – lol… You think corporations just want pieces of paper? Well, that would be easy to fix right – forget about giving the money to people – all the government has to do is just give it to corporations and voila – our economy would be soooo great. And then we wake up and see reality. Monetary Sovereignty is a dream – and when someone questions it – they are stupid.
5) Perfect world… how can anyone justify this argument. The government is in place to create and enforce laws, it doesn’t know a damn thing about business and markets. So I’m loony because I ask that the government do it’s job and let the markets do theirs. I’m sorry – I think a good deal of people just can’t apply common sense.
6) National system… whatever that means. The US congress passed the Federal Reserve Act on December 23rd 1913. Why don’t you go back and see which acts are signed during Christmas time – most of them are the ones that the government doesn’t want you to know about. We have a fractional reserve system that allows banks to lend the same money over and over – diluting existing money. Banks love it because they get to extract the wealth from the people by giving them credit – the government allows it because it allows them to spend without recourse. It’s a mutual relationship – there is no attach from the privates to the government – the idea that a private company would attack the US government is moronic.
7) Raise the poor to our level.. but isn’t redistribution a big deal on the left? Why not apply it to the current issue instead of waiting years to bring them up.
8) Banking free markets? The federal reserve, not the market, sets the lending rates. The government created regulations that made it easy for banks to lend to people without resources (home ownership program??). When banks blew up – the government came to save them. Is that what you call free markets? Why not let the banks decide what rates they will charge? Why not let the markets decide who should be able to buy a home? Why not let the markets decide which banks survive and which ones fail? No cigar….
9) Southern Free Traders… are you purposely switching topics to make a point? horrible job at best. What does slavery have to do with free markets? If you haven’t yet figured it out – corporations are a bunch of people – a corporation is not a monster – a corporation benefits the people working in it and society as a whole.
There are people that think like you, but are on opposite ends of the spectrum. One thinks that the government is all evil, the other that corporations are evil. Both are completely wrong. Nonetheless, to say that the government is “weak” is a spin I’ve never heard before – you got me there. The most sophisticated army in the world, nukes, cybertechnology gurus, bullying of high tech companies, spying on people – and you think our government is “weak”?
In closing – regulations are not laws. Having free markets does not mean having no laws. A free market is a type of economic system – not a legal one. A free market can live within a legal system. Governments were instituted to create and enforce laws, not to run markets. You have common sense – use it.
LikeLike
RMM, ” 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. ”
Great article,thanks.
“Big” is not a monster, for even small could be a bigger monster.
The results of the actions of any group determines their status.
Who would not want “Newman’s Own” (social corp) to become the ‘biggest worldwide’ ?
Who would not want “Grameen Bank” (social bank) to become the ‘biggest worldwide’ ?
If the US government were to fund its mandate : .” to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,…”
who would not want to be a member of that social group ?
We the people possess the wealth to accomplish this, we need only
togovern ourselves accordingly!
LikeLike
RMM,
Is this blog getting bigger? Are your hits increasing? Your book sales?
Mainstream media is as you say bought out by the gap lovers. That only leaves the internet which isn’t owned by anyone. This is as far as I can tell the best and quickest way to impact the truth. But how many are listening?
The NSA is listening I’ll bet, because the internet is not owned and therefore leaves the NSA with the only remaining option–legal eavesdropping. Somebody wants to know what/how everyone is thinking so they can better prepare their next assault, imo.
LikeLike
Re. ‘BIG GOVERNMENT”
“Red states” are those whose voters are more conservative than liberal. People in “red states” whine about “big government.” They call poor people “parasites” and “takers.”
Yet those same “red states” get much more money from the federal government than do “blue states,” and give much less money back in the form of taxes. Therefore, they are the worst “parasites” and “takers” (by their own definition).
This is in keeping with a general rule of life: the richer you are, the more you get from the government. The fortunes of most rich people depend, at least to some extent, on government handouts, including government-funded research.
Put another way, the worst “parasites” and “takers” are people who denounce the poor as “parasites” and “takers.”
See article…
http://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/
LikeLike
Well, at least to some degree that will change. Many of the Red states stupidly have refused to accept government money to fund Medicaid expansion.
My own state, Illinois, one of the worst run states in America, at least had the sense to accept a nice $2.4 billion from the federal government.
By contrast, the Red states feel open-carry is a good substitute for money.
LikeLike