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.

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.