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.
======================================================================================================================================================================================
I’m not sure about the real purpose of religion. I suspect it has to do with enabling group cohesion. We are a social species, and the stronger our group, the better able we are to survive.
(There is some irony to the notion that religion aids our evolution.)
But the ostensible purpose of religion is to provide moral guidance. The foundation of morality is the Golden Rule: “Treat others as you wish to be treated.”
Supposedly, we need religion to remind us of the Golden Rule, because selfishness comes easier than generosity. “Me first” is easier than “You first.” And fear is more natural than courage.
For the individual, evolution has made it so.
Yes, in our society, generosity and courage are more admirable than selfishness and fear. Group survival trumps individual survival.
But what can a person do, if he simply cannot bring himself to be generous or brave? He may try to hide his faults in the cloak of religion.
Border Crisis Tests Religious Faith — And Some Fail Badly
Flamboyant piety has long been fashionable on the political right, where activists, commentators, and elected officials never hesitate to hector us about their great moral and theological rectitude.
But occasionally, something happens that separates the people of faith from the sanctimonious fakers. With thousands of defenseless children now gathered on America’s southern border, seeking asylum from deprivation and deadly violence, something like that is happening right now.
Arizona Republican congressional candidate Adam Kwasman wanted heroically to stop a busload of immigrant children. He tweeted, “Bus coming in. This is not compassion. This is the abrogation of the rule of law.” He then said, “I was actually able to see some of the children in the buses. The fear on their faces … this is not compassion.”
Turns out the “hero” tried to stop a bus full of kids on their way to a YMCA camp. And rather than the fear Kwasman saw, the kids were laughing and taking photos of a fool standing in the road.
Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA), a medical doctor, wrote, “Reports of illegal immigrants carrying deadly diseases such as swine flu, dengue fever, Ebola virus and tuberculosis are particularly concerning. Many of the children who are coming across the border also lack basic vaccinations such as those to prevent chicken pox or measles.”
Of course, no such reports exist. Ebola, for instance, never has been found in the Americas. Meanwhile, children in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, which offer free vaccinations, are more likely to be vaccinated than children in Gingrey’s Georgia.
And (the irony just keeps on coming), Gingery is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, right-wingers who oppose vaccination.
The always incredible Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) said, “I don’t know how much God has to do to get the attention of the politicians. We’ve had an earthquake; we’ve had a hurricane . . . My heart is broken for a female college student in Minnesota who was raped, murdered and mutilated by a foreign national who came into our country. We had a school bus full of kids in Minnesota — four children were killed on that school bus because an illegal alien driving a van went into that school bus.”
In the crazed, right-wing religious world, God punishes us with earthquakes, and children coming across our border — half of whom are female — are likely to rape, murder, mutilate and drive unsafely.
And then there’s the fear-mongering, Rep. Rich Nugent (R-FL), who was rated 90% by Gun Owners of America: ““A lot of these children … quote-unquote … ya know, they’re gang members. They’re gang affiliated. Listen, if you’re 14, 15, 16, 17 years old, and you’re coming from a country that’s gang-infested — particularly with MS-13 types, that is the most aggressive of all the street gangs — when you have those types coming across the border, they’re not children at that point. These kids have been brought up in a culture of thievery. A culture of murder, of rape. And now we are going to infuse them into the American culture. It’s just ludicrous.”
Now comes the oh-so-religious Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX): “Do you believe in sharing the good news that will keep people from going to hell, consistent with the Christian beliefs? . . . Either you believe as a Christian that Jesus is the way, the truth, or life, or you don’t.”
That “religious” leader also said, “You want to talk about a war on women? This administration will not defend the women of America from criminal aliens! By the thousands, and hundreds of thousands. . . Well, we know thousands. And we know people are coming in by the hundreds of thousands illegally. And this administration wants to talk about other people having a war on women when they will not defend the women that are being sexually assaulted by illegal aliens in this country.“
(What is this fixation that Republicans have on rape? And why do they think immigrant children have that same fixation?)
There are two philosophies about helping people in need. Which one would you say is religious?
1. We help people in need, because it’s the moral thing to do, and that’s who we are as a nation.
or
2. We don’t help people in need, because that just encourages people to be needy.
There was a time when we clearly would have considered #1 to be the way of religion:
Leviticus 19.34: The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.”
Exodus 22.21: Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
Deuteronomy 10.19: Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
Now however, those having neither the heart for compassion nor the strength for courage, have in Orwellian logic, made selfishness and cowardice primary features of religiousness.
Now, greed is generosity; fear is courage. Immorality has become the new morality.
We are on a slippery slope, indeed. The religionists have closed their hearts to the poor, to the unemployed, to the pregnant, to the sick, to the uneducated, to the indebted, to the foreigners.
And now they even close their hearts to children — all in the name of a strange, new faith.
How far have we sunk, how weak have we become, from fear and meanness and greed, when we pervert our religions to turn our backs on children? On children!
And if even children are not safe in our hands, what fate awaits the rest of us? What fate awaits America?
Mr. President, for the sake of God, for the sake of America, tear down that wall!
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 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 growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.
#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 
Typical meaningless message from a formerly liberal Senator, who stands firmly on all sides of every key issue:
LikeLike
Durbin notes that, “There is no legislation pending in Congress addressing this issue.”
This may not be quite as bad as it sounds. And Durbin’s chagrin at Republican intransigence may not be as good as it sounds.
When people like Durbin speak of “immigration reform,” they point to the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013, which was introduced on 2 Oct 2013, and was never passed.
This bill would supposedly have been a path to citizenship. However, let’s look at it more closely…
[1] DIVIDE AND CONQUER: the bill’s strict employment and income requirements would have disqualified 40 percent of migrants for being low-income, or being unemployed longer than two months. Therefore the bill (H.R. 15) would have divided the migrant community along class lines, leaving 4.4 million people undocumented, and at risk of deportation. This dividing was intentional, since it would have undermined the solidarity of the migrant cause.
[2] GREATER MILITARIZATION: The (H.R. 15) would also have expanded the Border Patrol, and deployed National Guard troops to the border, making the journey even more perilous for child migrants.
[3] GREATER HUMANITARIAN CRISIS: H.R. 15 would have done nothing to address the driving forces behind migration, from poverty created by US-backed “free trade” agreements, to violence in Honduras created by the US-backed 2009 military coup. Nor would the bill provide any funding to combat the rust fungus, which has wiped out coffee crops, and countless jobs with it. By militarizing the border without addressing these root causes, H.R. 15 would only worsen a humanitarian crisis that has already claimed at least 6,000 lives over the past two decades.
[4] DE-POLITICIZATION: H.R. 15 was not a solid foundation on which to build, nor was it a first step toward a just immigration policy. On the contrary, it would have been the last. H.R. 15 is like the Affordable Care Act, which removed healthcare from the political agenda, and permanently sidelined Single Payer. Once immigration policy has been officially “reformed,” it too will vanish from the political agenda. Just as there has been no serious discussion in Washington of transitioning to single-payer in the wake of the ACA, there would be no serious discussion of the plight of migrants in the wake of H.R. 15.
Therefore is that it is not always true that “something is better than nothing.” H.R. 15 would offer limited gains for some migrants at the expense of many other migrants.
Congress will go into recess on 1 Aug 2014, at which time the 113th Congress will have been the least productive ever, in terms of passing bills for the benefit of the 99%. The gap continues to widen quite nicely, and politicians will not upset that.
After the recess, politicians will focus on getting re-elected. Then the current congress will end on 31 December, at which point all pending bills will be wiped clean.
Thus, “immigration reform” is “off the table” until next year. (The new congress will begin on 3 Jan 2015).
During that time, activists should direct their energies to more meaningful struggles, like combating the Obama’s record-breaking deportation policies.
LikeLike
As I’ve noted frequently, there are no (almost no) liberals in Congress. Just varying degrees of right wing. (Elizabeth Warren may be an exception.)
Obama, the deporter in chief, the FICA raiser, the “grand bargain” of austerity President, is far to the right of any previous President in my long lifetime,including Ronald Reagan.
LikeLike
I think we all have some form of suspicion or another. Some things 100% of the people agree with, other things a small percentage believes in while the majority does not. Other things the majority believes in while the minority does not.
Here’s where “we” sounds like a play on words. Americans tend to be a pretty dry bunch, but a caring one. It’s been evident during every major crisis, Americans band together and help each other come through. The great depression, world war 2, 911, etc…
The post begins by outlining how humans are “social species” – let me ask – what does that mean? That we talk to each other – what’s so special about that. Even animals communicate in some form or another. But that’s not what is meant – in the mind of a liberal “social” means we are part of a community and must accept the believes of that community whether we like it or not, only if it’s a liberal agenda. The difficult part is identifying who decides what the community should believe is right. In a liberal utopia, you are labeled with 1000 names and even called terrorist if you disagree. So “social” is simply a code word for “you must believe what I believe and do as I want you to do otherwise you are a terrorist”. So, who is the terrorist – the “moral” one or the “in-moral” one here – the forcer or the forcee?
You ask the following 2 questions:
1. We help people in need, because it’s the moral thing to do, and that’s who we are as a nation.
or
2. We don’t help people in need, because that just encourages people to be needy.
Anyone being asked these questions will say we should always do #1, but you are not asking the question correctly, there is no context behind them. So anyone saying that #1 is the “moral” thing to do is in fact in-moral for not asking for context behind the question.
Here’s something to think about:
– Can I afford it?
– Do I believe in the cause?
– Is it moral to extort purchasing power from your population for your “moral” cause?
– Do I want to support the cause?
If you think I’m just full of it, than perhaps you think that it’s moral if the “right wingers” force their believes onto the population if they take over the 3 branches. Kill welfare, medicare, social security, etc, etc… So the question about helping others is not a “we” question, it’s an “I” question. You want to help others by giving money, etc, etc, do you it yourself. I should not be forced to do the same if I don’t chose to and neither should you.
Either way, the constitution is trashed on a daily basis to support these “moral” agendas, which are nothing more than theft by force. It’s only “we” to force purchasing power out of the population, it’s “I” for the beneficiaries and the politicians.
So it’s not about whether something is right or wrong – that doesn’t matter – what matters is your personal liberty and theft. So you are trashing both personal liberty and theft, just because you think “giving to the needy” is moral.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, “ME” still believes that federal taxpayers pay for federal spending.
So he begins with a false premise, and continues into greater and greater falsity.
LikeLike
You believe the same and preach the opposite. Communism is a sickness Rodger, you should get treatment.
I struggle to understand how people can say certain things while believing the exact opposite. Who are you trying to kid?
LikeLike
== Off topic ==
THE RICH EAT THE RICH
I’m loving it.
Warren Lichtenstein is a multi-millionaire hedge fund manager.
His ex-girlfriend Annabelle Bond is the daughter of Sir John Reginald Hartnell, the mega-rich former head of HSBC Bank, and current Chairman of the mining conglomerate Xstrata.
Bond, 44, and Lichtenstein, 48, never married. They were briefly engaged, but they split in 2007 after Ms. Bond became pregnant with a daughter named Isabelle, now aged 6.
Yesterday Lichtenstein lost a court battle to slash the $50,000-a-month child support payments that he must make to Ms. Bond. The child support arrangements were made in Hong Kong.
Mr. Lichtenstein said that New York should not recognize decisions from Hong Kong the same way it accepts rulings from courts in London or Paris.
The US court disagreed.
Yesterday, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Manuel Mendez ruled that Mr. Lichtenstein must keep paying $50k in child support, and must also cough up the $570,110 plus interest that he owes Ms. Bond in unpaid child support in and legal fees.
Ms. Bond is currently living with Andrew Cader, 54, who owns the Tampa Bay Rays pro-baseball team. Mr. Cader once headed a Wall Street company that he sold to Goldman Sachs for $7.5 billion in 2000.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/hedge-fund-millionaire-paying-50g-monthly-child-support-court-article-1.1872289?google_editors_picks=true
LikeLike