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.
There was a time when our politicians actually gave some thought to the primary role of government: To protect the less powerful from the most powerful.
That was before the the loathsome, pretend-religious, pretend-American selfishness of the right-wing, Koch-inspired, FOX News supported, Tea Party, for which all social benefits are anathema.
Today, the twin “BIG LIEs,” that the government “cannot afford” social spending and that social spending leads to sloth, predominate.
Thus we have the shameful spectacle of “red” states refusing billions of free dollars from the federal government, for no other reason than to deny health care to their poorest people.
Those who are least religious and least American, are most likely to claim religion, and to parade about carrying the American flag. This is not irony, but rather an intentional disguise — a deliberate camouflage.
Past generations were far more religious and far more American. Prior to instituting the social programs of the 1960’s, our great nation passed the “GI Bill.”
The Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, known informally as the G.I. Bill, was a law that provided a range of benefits for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as G.I.s).
Benefits included low-cost mortgages, low-interest loans to start a business, cash payments of tuition and living expenses to attend college, high school or vocational education, as well as one year of unemployment compensation.
Can you imagine today’s sniveling Congress, a group that regards unemployment compensation, food stamps and indeed, all of the poor themselves, with disdain — can you imagine these creatures of low character, enacting such beneficial laws?
A look at the available statistics reveals that these later bills had an important influence on the lives of returning veterans, higher education, and the economy.
Congress succeeded, often in the face of fierce objections from the fiscally conservative Nixon and Ford Administrations, to raise benefit levels.
As the funding levels increased, the numbers of veterans entering higher education rose correspondingly.
Higher education and other GI Bill benefits helped not only the individual recipient, but America as a whole.
Prior to its passage, detractors feared that paying the education expenses of veterans would lead to overcrowding at colleges, which before World War II were accessible predominantly to members of society’s upper class.
Critics were concerned that veterans would wreak havoc on educational standards and overburden campuses with their lack of preparation for the rigors of higher learning.
Veterans were not the only beneficiaries of the GI Bill. Colleges, with increased enrollments, received years of financial security following its enactment.
Veterans demanded more practical college course work, and this need led to a changed concept of higher education, with more emphasis on degree programs like business and engineering.
The lines of race, class, and religion blurred as higher education became attainable for all veterans. No longer was a college degree—and the higher paying jobs that normally follow it—limited to members of the upper class.
As the veterans graduated from colleges, women and members of minorities enrolled to fill the gaps they left. The GI Bill’s mortgage subsidies led to an escalated demand for housing and the development of suburbs.
One-fifth of all single-family homes built in the 20 years following World War II were financed with help from the GI Bill’s loan guarantee program, symbolizing the emergence of a new middle class.
The GI Bill, in both its versions, is widely regarded as a success.
Yet today, millions of potential leaders are denied college by high tuitions. Millions more suffer through the student loan trap. Even more millions go without adequate medical care, housing and even food.
The GI Bills began at a time when the U.S. federal government was less Monetarily Sovereign than it is today. (Being on a gold standard until 1971, the federal government had less freedom to create dollars and to pay bills. Yet then, there was compassion for the 99%, something notably lacking today.
We have a “GI Bill for everyone,” waiting for an honest President and a principled Congress to enact. It is called: The Ten Steps to Prosperity
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 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.
23 thoughts on “–Why not a “GI Bill” for all Americans?”
 How far we have fallen. How savage we have become. After a mass shooting, particularly at colleges, students place flowers and balloons and crosses at the shooting sites, along with signs saying, “We love you.”
LIES! If people loved each other, then we wouldn’t have so many individuals opening fire. We wouldn’t have austerity mania, and student debt, and extreme inequality. When Elliot Rodger shot eight people in California, the reaction across the Internet was so full of rage against Elliot Rodger that commentators were mirror images of Elliot Rodger.
“We love you.” LIES! Our society is so full of hate that we can’t think rationally about anything. The Big Lie is a product of hate. So is the smug dismissal of the facts of Monetary Sovereignty.
Hate has twisted everything into its opposite. As Rodger says, “Those who are least religious and least American are most likely to claim religion, and to parade about carrying the American flag.”
In England, politicians will terminate an additional million-plus civil servants and government employees by the end of 2019. That’s the equivalent of firing one state employee every four minutes, every day, for the next five years.
In addition, there will be fresh waves of mass privatization that will turn government offices into “public service mutuals.”
Public assets and government offices will be given to the rich, who will multiply the fees and reduce the services. And when any public asset is given to the rich, it can never be taken back, since the government always protects rich people’s “private property rights” and “free speech rights.”
It’s all because of mass hate.
Despite the severe and ever-worsening austerity, the British republic remains suicidal, judging from the continued hate shown by reader comments at the corporate media blogs.
Quite literally, most people would rather die than question the Big Lie. Why?
 Rodger says the GI bill began at a time when the U.S. federal government was less Monetarily Sovereign than it is today.
Yes, and it also began when the ratio of the “national debt” to America’s GDP was far higher than today. The UK’s “national debt” was also at an all-time high in ratio to GDP, yet the British managed to start the National Health Service, a form of Single Payer health care that the austerians are now privatizing.
Incidentally, why was the UK’s and USA’s “national debt” was so high during WW II? It wasn’t because the governments “borrowed” to finance the war effort. Even with a gold standard, governments had ways to create money from thin air. Besides, governments routinely dropped their gold standard, and resumed it later, then dropped it again whenever crisis struck.
No, the WW II “national debt” was high because unemployment was close to zero, but consumer goods were in short supply. This caused price inflation, which the government offset by encouraging people to buy mass quantities of “war bonds.” In this way, dollars earned from all those jobs were temporarily removed from circulation, thereby controlling inflation. The dollars were not destroyed, but sidelined. Those dollars added to the “national debt” — which for the US and UK was as meaningless then as it is today.
 == Off topic ==
The function of deficit-doves is to ensure that liberals support the Big Lie as much as conservatives do. Economics rhetoric is analogous to a hard cop / soft cop interrogation. The hard cop is a deficit-hawk. The kind cop is a deficit-dove. Both want to send you to the gas chamber.
If you oppose austerity and right-wing hate, then deficit doves are there to seduce you into supporting both.
Below is an article from a blog in the UK. It is a deficit-dove blog because it supports austerity while pretending to oppose it.
Look at the article’s first paragraph…
“No country can run huge deficits every year forever. The bigger the national debt that builds up, the more expensive it is to meet interest payments. At some point it becomes more difficult and more expensive for governments to borrow extra money because people become reluctant to lend to them. But we are nowhere near that point in the UK.”
Right away we see the Big Lie that a money creator is the same as a money user.
If you believe this lie, then you support austerity and inequality, no matter what you say. All your comments are empty chatter about the color of the emperor’s new clothes. You might even become a deficit-dove like Paul Krugman, who seeks a kinder, gentler way to shove millions of people into the slaughterhouse.
(Krugman is a darling if NEP bloggers, even though Krugman denounces MMT, and praises the now-famous book “Capital” by Thoman Pietty, who thinks that all governments are reliant on tax revenue.)
In the euro-zone, the equivalent of a deficit-dove is a person who claims to care about mass suffering, but who also defends the euro. All euro-zone politicians do this. They are free to question austerity and the Troika, but they know they will be kicked off the payroll if they question the euro.
Anyway this British blog (link below) uses the standard deficit-dove trick of comparing the UK’s “national debt” with countries like Spain, saying, “From this you can see that there is nothing special about the UK’s debt when compared to other countries.”
Again the deficit-dove pretends to care about the masses, while screwing the masses by concealing the differences between countries that have Monetary Sovereignty, and countries that do not.
The rest of the article gets much worse, with statements like this…
“Governments need to borrow money all the time as previous loans need to be paid back, or simply because tax does not come in evenly over a year.”
Garbage! I prefer deficit hawks. At least they provide comic relief.
Another article on that same blog begins with this…
“The first thing we have to do is junk the idea that the national economy is like a household’s.”
Wow! Will the article expose the Big Lie?
Of course not. This is a deficit-dove blog, dedicated to upholding the Big Lie.
The article says the reason why the national economy is not like a household’s economy is that a household’s economy is small, but the national economy is collective.
Of course the real difference (concealed by deficit-doves) is that countries with MS can create money out of thin air, while private households cannot.
And of course the article says that the UK government needs tax revenue, and that its deficit must be reduced, and that the best way to reduce the deficit is to encourage growth, and blah, blah, blah. Standard deficit-dove drivel.
The Big Lie means there can be no growth in the real economy — although there is fabulous growth in the financial economy, which includes student loan debt, for example.
To repeat, if you do not question the Big Lie, then you support austerity and inequality, no matter what you say. Either you believe the lie that a money creator is the same as a money user, or you don’t. Period. There is no middle ground in this; no “sort of” believing the Big Lie.
I said above that the mission of deficit-doves is to ensure that liberals support the Big Lie as much as conservatives do. That is why deficit-doves like Paul Krugman actually get paid to spew their excrement.
Even that deficit-dove blog from the UK has corporate sponsors. See the bottom of their “about us” page…
The question we have not answered is: Why are recent generations so inferior in mind and morals, to previous generations? What are the roots of today’s “Me-Only” generation?
And it’s not just in America. The Taliban of Middle East Islam, the Tea Party of American Christianity, the EU of Europe — all doing everything they can to widen the GAP, between the rich and the rest.
Yes the increase in greed, hate, and selfishness is global. But why now?
What is your answer?
I blame technology. We’ve always had greed, hate, and selfishness, but not until recently have we had drones, high-frequency trading, total surveillance, and countless other things that have led to global inequality on an unprecedented scale. Many of these items are double-edged. GPS lets us navigate, but it also allows mass surveillance. The Internet allowed me to learn about MS, but is also a place where haters form online social groups. Plus, the Internet encourages withdrawal from society into the cyber-world. And it lets companies like Amazon destroy small local stores on a scale that would make Wal Mart blush. Meanwhile inside Amazon, employees are electronically monitored at every second, and are under surveillance at all times. They must swipe a card to enter a restroom or lunch room. Every physical movement of their arms and legs is tracked, so that no slave can perpetrate “time theft.” All this is allowed by technology.
No single technology brought us to this stage, just as no single polluter causes global climate change. But when all technologies act together, we have severe global inequality, which is the number one cause of civil unrest.
At the bottom, increasing poverty creates frustration, which creates hostility. At the top, technology enhances greed, which always seeks new technologies to further boost profits and inequality. With new technologies come new ways for the rich to rob, cheat, steal, and enslave. Consider electronic voting, which is another technology than has gone global. Countless videos and articles on the Internet prove that electronic voting machines can be (and in fact are) manipulated so that the masses vote “correctly” (i.e. to widen the gap).
Some science fiction writers of the past correctly predicted that our technology would be our ruin. Whether it be robots, or nuclear war, or some plague caused by radiation, or whatever, our technological know-how would outpace our wisdom, such that we doom ourselves to destruction or slavery.
I find Rodger’s question very interesting, and I hope that other readers will share their own views on it.
Hmmm. Yes, the one word answer to the question, “Why now”? might be “distance.”
A million people starving in China may have less emotional effect on us than one child starving in the house next door.
Interestingly, electronics were supposed to make the world “smaller,” but could it be that electronics actually make everyone more distant (as in, “aloof”?)
Distance. Yes. Or alienation. The erosion of empathy via technology.
In informal social gatherings of people under the age of 50, the people no longer talk to each other. Instead, they all sit quietly reading their I-phones and other gadgets. Cyber-space has eclipsed physical reality.
Today the president of the U.S. has threatened to cut financial aid to Uganda. Uganda replied it is a sovereign state and is not about to be intimidated by US.
Holy Cow, Batman! This could be the start of something big, like Uganda coming on board the flagship MS and letting the cat out of the bag.
How long before someone representing the .1% tells the Chief of Uganda “You can’t do that! You’ll spoil our game. Fall into line old boy or you’re Dead meat.”
Unfortunately, Uganda does not use its Monetary Sovereignty, for it is one of the poorest nations on earth.
It actually has a good, viable currency, which it doesn’t use on behalf of the lower economic groups — much like the philosophy of the Tea Party in the U.S.
Don’t worry about global warming. It only will happen to your grandchildren
From Time magazine:
“The biggest obstacle to dealing with climate change is time. It will take decades before the carbon dioxide we emit now begins to have its full effect on the planet’s climate.”
The effects of climate change are happening RIGHT NOW, and they are ACCELERATING. Here in the USA we have a permanent drought in the Southwest, increased tornados in the Midwest, increased flooding in the East, and increased hurricanes in the Southeast.
As I previously explained, climate change is what caused the tens of thousands of child migrants from Central America.
The effects are here and now, and they are compounding.
We could do many things to address it, but they all cost money, and all governments are “broke,” including the USA’s.
WHAT GLOBAL WARMING?
May 2014 was the hottest May in more than 130 years of recorded weather history, says the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
South Korea saw its warmest May on record. Norway saw its warmest spring since national records began in 1900.
May temperatures have been warming worldwide since the 1950s.
there is a caveat to this statement, “Past generations were far more religious and far more American. Prior to instituting the social programs of the 1960′s, our great nation passed the “GI Bill.”…. and it is that the GI Bill excluded blacks from its benefits (as well as social security). an exclusion which can help define the wealth gap that exists today between blacks and whites. as long as the scary undeserving blacks are around (as well as other undesirable so called minorities) the implementation of a new GI Bill is a wonderful pipe dream, and one I wholeheartedly agree with.
I was not aware that the GI Bill and Social Security excluded blacks.
and then, of course, when the federal govt deemed blacks “american” enough to warrant assistance (late 60s, Fannie/Freddie/FHA), the predatory lenders were laying in wait. and even before the “blacks” were deemed sufficiently “american”, there was a collusion between private real estate owners and the state to exploit “blacks” with housing contracts which denied ownership rights. the New Deal was enacted with the explicit understanding that the “blacks” would not benefit (with the blessing of FDR…… maybe not his wife though)
“lying in wait”…… how did that “a” get in there?
“The New Deal programs of the 1930s helped revive the U.S. economy after the Great Depression. In 1935, the Social Security Act provided retirement benefits for U.S. workers, but domestics and farm workers were initially excluded from eligibility, a policy that largely affected blacks and Latinos.
The GI Bill of Rights or the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, which provided for college and vocational education for returning World War II veterans as well as one-year of unemployment compensation, resulted in an expansion of the middle class. The GI bill also provided loans for returning veterans to buy homes and start businesses, but non-whites were widely discriminated against in these programs. The legacy of discrimination in these programs served to create and maintain the wealth gap between whites and non-whites, which is reflected in rates of home ownership, assets, savings and investment even today.”
Intellectually arousing as usual, Sir Rodger! How about elaborating on Quatloosx’ ‘Real v Financial Economy’ assertions and their long/short – up/down implications for an MS economy………….
Best health, wise man!
It hurts my knees to be sitting cross legged on this mountain top . . . but seriously:
The “Real Economy” (i.e. the economy of goods and services) creates the “Financial Economy (i.e. the economy of financial transactions), while the later supports the former. Both are necessary.
There is widespread belief that only the “real” economy productively grows the economy and creates human benefits, and that the financial economy leeches on the real economy, sucking blood, but providing no effective benefit.
One can argue that, endlessly. Does your accountant provide benefits? Your banker? Your stock broker? The high-speed, computerized stock trader?
I suggest a case can be made for the notion that they all provide benefits.
The more fundamental questions might be:
1. Are they overpaid for any benefits they provide?
2. Are they, on balance, actually detrimental to economic growth (particularly of the 99.9%) — a net loss to the economy?
It might surprise you to see that my answer to both questions is, “No.”
I believe the question is not “real” vs. “financial,” but rather “rich” vs. “not rich.”
That is, if in the above two questions, the words “upper .1%” are substituted for the word, “they,” my answer would be, “Yes.”
I believe the very rich are overpaid for whatever they do, whether you’re talking about a Bill Gates, a Warren Buffet or any other billionaire.
Yes, they are overpaid, in money and power, for their contributions to the world, and in fact are detrimental to economic growth — a net loss to the economy.
Contrary to right-wing myth, the very rich are not “makers.” They are just people who did one or two things right, and by the grace of God, those one things became extremely remunerative.
These people would have worked just as hard, and been just as productive, if they received 1/10th the money.
Bottom line, we should keep our eye on the ball: The ‘enemy” is the GAP.
By “financial economy” I mean finance capitalism, i.e. the game of making money from money, which is now the predominant force in the global economy. It is the subordination of processes of production to the accumulation of profits by any means, including fraud, gimmicks, firing workers, moving production, and raiding pension funds. It is casino capitalism, rather than investment for entrepreneurial growth. It means an ever-increasing concentration and centralization of capital in large corporations, cartels, trusts, and banks. It means that upper corporate management is increasingly paid with stock options. It means that production is only relevant to the extent that it increases the price of a company’s stock. Therefore corporations heavily involved in production—automobile or steel makers, for example—have become increasingly financial in orientation, diversifying into credit, insurance, real estate, etc. The 1% now derive more of their wealth from finance than from production.
By “real economy” I mean industrial capitalism, i.e. the physical production and consumption of goods and services.
The two are separate but intertwined. The financial economy is an abstract game. The real economy is the physical casino, which exists to serve the game. Thus, the rulers of the financial economy are parasites on the real economy. One way or another, we all exist to serve the casino and its rich players. For example, we must pay taxes after local governments issue bonds. Or we must submit to low wages because companies want to cut costs and boost their stock prices. The financial sector is complex, opaque, and ungovernable. It produces nothing. It owns.
The financial economy is the province of the 1%, and the rentier class; those who get their income not by labor, but by the ownership of capital and assets. These people do not do anything or make anything. Instead, they play with numbers. They oversee the trading of currencies and financial products such as bonds, stocks, futures, various derivatives, and so on. The financial economy also involves the lending of money at interest.
Rodger says the real problem is the gap (i.e. inequality).
I agree, but I also say that if we want to understand the mechanisms of inequality, then we need to understand the difference between finance capitalism and industrial (or “real”) capitalism.
Corporate media outlets pretend that there is no difference; that there is only one “economy.” This is done so they can claim that GDP is up, simply because the stock market (for example) is up. They do it to make the casino gamblers seem like productive people, rather than parasites. They do it to conceal the fact that austerity widens the gap between the real economy and the financial economy, making all of us slaves of the casino players.
Keynesian democracy (1945 -1973) was the last stage of corporate industrial capitalism. It was an age when the 1% had to compromise with labor in order to stay rich. Every income category of people experienced real-income growth, with the poorest families having the highest rate of growth of all.
The 1980s brought a reversal into neo-liberalism, the purpose of which is to subordinate industrial capitalism to finance capitalism.
Today, labor is disposable. Governments serve the financial class, not the public. Austerity mania is global. Poverty and inequality keep growing.
Incredibly rich responses! Thank you both!
== Off topic ==
Some weeks ago I asserted that when countries have Monetary Sovereignty, the interest on their “national debt” is not paid by taxpayers or the federal government.
Instead, the interest is created out of thin air by central banks (e.g. the Fed or the Bank of England) simply by crediting accounts.
I said this because there is never any provision in the US federal budget for paying interest on T-securities.
The Fed confirms my assertion on its own web site, saying that the Fed “does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress.”
Read it here at the end of the second paragraph…
== Off topic ==
Ellen Brown and her disciples agree that banks create money out of nothing, simply by crediting accounts. However they staunchly deny that the US government also creates money out of nothing, by crediting accounts.
I once tried to explain to them that Social Security benefits, for example, are dispersed by the US Treasury, not by any bank, including the Fed. I tried to explain that money created by banks is issued as loans, unlike money created by the US government.
But they always flamed me and called me names.
They say our problems would be solved if the US government issued money directly, like President Lincoln did with his “greenbacks.” I explained that the US government already does this, albeit not enough. It’s called fiscal austerity.
But they wouldn’t listen.
They think that ALL money is issued by banks as loans. Therefore they believe the lie that the US government is $17 trillion “in debt.”
In her latest blog post, Ellen Brown says, “Central banks have the power to create national currencies with accounting entries.”
No. Wrong. Banks can create money as loans (via accounting entries), but only governments have authority over a nation’s monetary unit of account. That is, authority over the nation’s currency, what it shall be called, how it shall be valued, and so on.
Banks do not have Monetary Sovereignty, nor do they print bills, or mint coins. Nor do central banks have any fiscal authority in nations that have MS.
In the euro-zone, the ECB has fiscal power, but true Monetary Sovereignty belongs to the European Commission and European Parliament.
Some people wake up. Others never do. Still others wake up part way, and get stuck in a kind of limbo, refusing to budge. They remain in a confused, semi-conscious state. For example, Ellen Brown and her disciples agree that banks create money by crediting accounts, yet many of them cling to the myth of “fractional reserve banking.”
How do they account for this logical contradiction? By saying, “Bankers are evil,” and leaving it at that. That’s how most people deal with cognitive dissonance. They slap a label on it, and change the subject.
Re. Ellen Brown, when the name of a blog is “The Web of Debt,” it pretty much locks in what you have to believe.
 Austerity causes poverty, which in turn breeds hate-filled religious fundamentalism. This is one reason why the sociopathic “Tea Party” types are now so common.
Allow me to illustrate…
Click the link below and scroll down to the second photo on the left. It shows Afghan women of the 1950s, before Afghanistan was destroyed by the Soviet and US invasions, plus the fundamentalist Taliban.
This was Afghanistan before poverty and inequality set in. Arabs and Iranians dressed this way too. It was a different world.
 At the link below is a photo of Osama bin Laden as a smiling adolescent on vacation in Sweden. Little did he know that he would one day become the greatest bogeyman since Hitler.