–The fortress mentality of American voters, and a “poll tax” solution

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Mitchell’s laws:
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the gap between rich and poor.
●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.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive,
and the motive is the Gap.
==================================================================================================================================================================

Thank you reader Scott Baker, “scottonthespot,” who provided an excellent brief on America’s election systems. (America’s majority rushes to the right, Comment #8.)

Here it is in its entirety:

The election means much less than it seems.

– nearly 2/3 of the potential electorate didn’t, or couldn’t, vote. This means that as little as 1/6 of the electorate (1/3 split mostly evenly between two or more candidates), gets to decide who’s elected.

– Winner-take-all elections means that a third party candidate can siphon off enough votes to tip the balance to the candidate the people LEAST want. This happened in England, with David Cameron who got less than 40% of the vote in his first election. It happened here, with Bush II and Clinton both actually getting less than half the majority, due to third party choices. We need instant runoff voting to prevent this.

– Unverifiable voting machines have been shown to flip votes, curiously, more often to Republicans. Read Brad Friedman’s Brad Blog. It’s full of verifiable examples. Poll workers no longer have the capability to check these complicated machines.

– Gerry-mandering ensures even normally blue districts vote red, or that all blue voters are clustered into one district instead of spread out as simple majorities in many.

– The poor, young and even women (through name-changing when they marry) are disproportionately discriminated against for tough new voter ID laws that are also a back-door poll tax.

– Money in dark pools guarantees a skewing of voter exposure to right-wing Koch Brother type ads. Fox TV does the rest. Even so, actual polls of American attitudes shows stubborn centrism, not right-wing ideology like what comes out of Washington. They don’t represent us.

– The list of reasons to disenfranchise people grows longer every day. In many swing states, like Florida, thousands, millions nationwide, of one-time felons can never vote again, over a million in Florida alone. Felons tend to vote democratic, or left.

The election in no way represents the majority will. Give that American Democracy fantasy up.

Spot on.

How did things get so bad? Could it be that we cannot help but surrender our democracy to the rich and powerful?

When I write an article criticizing one political party or one politician, I am sure to receive comments to the effect: “The other party is just as bad.” Write a negative about Pelosi, and in come the negatives about Boehner. Mention the conservative Koch brothers, and I’ll hear about liberal billionaires.

Mostly we vote against, not for. Negative political advertising works. No politician ever was thrown out of office because the other guy was loved. Politicians lose because they are hated, usually for some narrow reason.

Though Americans tend to be centrists, we are disproportionately influenced by extremes. How could people like Sen. Joe McCarthy or Sen. Ted Cruz have had a following, much less a strong influence? How could the Tea Party be treated seriously?

I believe that evolution has given each of us a fortress mentality — a danger-avoidance system that requires us to make a superficial examination, then a quick decision to defend the evil in the lesser of two evils.

When danger threatens, there is no time for subtleties. It’s flee or fight. Simple, one-word dangers — criminals, communists, terrorists, immigrants, blacks — demand simple, one-word solutions: Flee, fight, jail, deport, shoot.

We are trained not to think deeply, but rather to trust all thinking to our leaders. We are shallow, bumper sticker believers. We get what our own chosen leaders choose to give us.

I don’t know what to do about what evolution has wrought, but I do have a thought about people who don’t vote. There are many reasons for this:

–“My vote won’t matter.”
–“All the candidates are bad.”
–“I don’t have time.”
–“The process is too difficult.”
–“The process is rigged.”

One school of thought holds: Those who care, find a way to vote. Because carers tend to be better informed, non-voting by the less motivated, benefits America. It’s all good.

I disagree. The vast majority of non-voters are lower-income people, dissuaded from voting by financial considerations, poll requirements and deliberately long lines at inconveniently located polling places.

The upper income groups vote, so their wishes are reflected by their choices of political representation, who give the rich what they want. And so, non-voting widens the income/wealth/power Gap, and that’s bad. Plutocracy ultimately self-destroys from within.

I offer one partial solution: A reverse poll tax. Remember Jim Crow poll taxes, the sole purpose of which was to prevent blacks from voting? The same bigotry that created poll taxes now has replaced them with Jim Crow ID requirements, having exactly the same purpose.

(Seemingly, bigots never change. They just beget bigots.)

A reverse poll tax — a payment for voting — would encourage blacks, browns, yellows, reds and all people of less affluence to vote. I suggest each person voting receive an inflation pegged, $500 reward from the federal government

The .1% would hate it. The right wing would hate it. Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito would hate it. The Tea Party would hate it. Sen. Cruz would hate it. The Koch brothers would hate it.

Therefore, a reverse poll tax must be a good idea.

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. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

The Ten Steps will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.
——————————————————————————————————————————————

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.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

THE RECESSION CLOCK
Monetary Sovereignty

Monetary Sovereignty

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

9 thoughts on “–The fortress mentality of American voters, and a “poll tax” solution

  1. This is so funny.

    All the items highlighted by your reader could potentially benefit any party – not just Republicans. The only one that could tilt to the Democrat side is the voter ID law.

    I had a question about that – when you guys oppose a law that requires ID – are you folks kidding or are you for real? I mean, you want people to have an ID to carry a gun – yet a free pass to do something that only citizens are allowed to do?

    Aside from that, all the other items can push votes either way. I’m not sure what the big deal is with the GOP winning the senate – nothing is going to change anyway.

    Like

    1. The whole concept of voter registration and ID are insulting.
      Everyone gets a SS # automatically, everyone should be registered to vote automatically. Problem solved. 1 SS# 1 vote. simple.

      If people are to be forced to have some kind of photo ID to vote, then everyone should get those IDs for free.

      Like

      1. I don’t know about you but I pay for my drivers license, registration, identification from dmv, etc…

        I really think it’s interesting some people are ok with allowing people to vote without identification knowing the potential for fraud. Nobody should be allowed to cast a vote without one.

        Like

  2. “nothing is going to change anyway…” You’re right, not for the better, but yes for the worse.

    Votes don’t kill; guns, like cars, in the hands of incompetence, can and do.

    Like

  3. Before the 2004 presidential election, I spent one afternoon a week for the better part of a year attempting to register voters while also distributing information about single payer healthcare at our local Free Clinic.

    By the end of the year, I was ashamed of myself. The people I spoke with were poor. Most of them had been born poor, were raising families in poverty, and are going to die poor. The Democrats never did anything for them but sell them out. These people had forgotten more about grit and survival than I’ll ever learn. And they knew, for god-damned sure, that neither the Republican nor the Democrat party was going to improve their lives. I came to see their decision not to vote as entirely rational.

    As you, RMM and Scott Baker, have just written, it’s a rigged game.

    On the other hand, when I circulated a petition to put an issue on the ballot last year supporting a proposed 28th Constitutional amendment (Corporations are not people and Money is not speech), people grabbed the clipboard out of my hands to sign it. It passed with 77.6% of my city’s population voting “yes.” The Move to Amend has been on ballots in hundreds of cities across the U.S. and it has passed every time: http://www.movetoamend.org.

    When there is something worth voting for, people will vote. And you won’t have to pay them to do it.

    Like

      1. Not enough people have had the chance to VOTE for it yet. Rodger, I hope you will start a petition to get it on the ballot in your community. If you’re really powerful, maybe you can get it passed in your state.

        Now, of course, we all know that Congress does not work for us, the people. If it did, we wouldn’t have to spend every g.d. moment of our spare time hawking this at the local library/post office/grocery store/bar.

        But we’re building a broad-based, grass-roots, nonpartisan movement.

        If you think you might need political support for Monetary Sovereignty, perhaps you will consider joining us. And some of us might consider joining you.

        Like

    1. Yes, corporations aren’t people or else they would need a passport.

      We like to say money talks but it’s still not speech. The Supreme Court conflated it with influence.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s