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.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•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.
•The single most important problem in economics is the Gap between rich and poor.
•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.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..
============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Whenever the politicians boast about how bipartisan they are, hold on to your wallets and guard your children.
Here is the latest scam, direct from Scam Central:
REPS. MCCRERY AND POMEROY LAUNCH SSDI SOLUTIONS INITIATIVE
By: Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB)Former Congressmen Jim McCrery (R-LA) and Earl Pomeroy (D-ND) today launched the McCrery-Pomeroy SSDI Solutions Initiative, a bipartisan effort to identify potential improvements to the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) program.
There’s a Republican; there’s a Democrat; it’s a bipartisan effort; the purpose is to identify “improvements.”
What could possibly be wrong with that?
The goal of the SSDI Solutions Initiative will be to solicit practical, implementable, and thoughtful ideas to improve the SSDI program through a “call for papers,” a peer-review process, and an academic-style conference.
“Practical,” “implementable,” “thoughtful,” “improve,” “call for papers,” “peer-review,” “academic-style conference”: Most impressive, especially when you already know the answer: Pretend the government is running short of money, so take dollars from poor Peter to pay poor Paul, while adding nothing to the system.
Just a guess: Not one of those practical, implementable, thoughtful peer-reviewed papers will include any mention of Monetary Sovereignty.
As we’ve explained before, the SSDI trust fund is projected to run out of funds in just two years – after which current law calls for a 20 percent across-the-board benefit cut.
This could be avoided by borrowing or reallocating funds from the old-age system, but doing so would further strain the OASI trust fund, which also faces projected insolvency in the early 2030s.
In reality, the SSDI trust fund is an accounting fiction, which can run out of funds only if Congress wants it to.
For a Monetarily Sovereign nation, borrowing and reallocating funds is not necessary.
Our federal government (unlike state and local governments) easily can add funds to the mythical “trust fund,” at the touch of a computer key.
The CRFB’s raison d’etre is to pretend federal finances are like state and local government finances, so they can convince you there simply is not enough money for you and for the rich — so give it to the rich, who are needier than you.
More importantly, the SSDI Solutions Initiative argues, it represents a missed chance to begin making improvements to various aspects of the SSDI program.
In CRFB-speak, “improvements” means taking from the poor and middle, and giving to the rich.
They explain:
Instead of viewing the avoidance of trust fund exhaustion as a political liability, we believe policymakers should regard it as a policy opportunity.
If provided with thoughtful and practical ideas to improve the SSDI program, policymakers could not only avoid insolvency but begin to reform the SSDI program for the better.
This means identifying proposals well in advance of the deadline, rather than waiting for Congress to cobble together a last-minute, poorly conceived solution.
Translation: –“Trust fund exhaustion” means “phony accounting tricks.”
–“Policy opportunity” means “opportunity to widen the Gap between the rich and the rest.”
–“Avoid insolvency” means “more phony accounting tricks.”
–“Reform” (See “policy opportunity” above)
–“Identifying proposals” means “feeding you the same old BS you’ve been buying all these years.
–“Solution” (See “reform.”)
The SSDI Solutions Initiative will be lead by Pomeroy and McCrery, who will select proposals and synthesize their findings with assistance from an Advisory Council of experts, advocates, and practitioners from across the ideological spectrum.
Translation: –The “Advisory Council” will consist of people who either are ignorant of the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, or are being paid by the rich to be ignorant — or both.
–“Across the ideological spectrum” means “people who think just like us.”
They both chaired the Social Security subcommittee of Ways & Means when in Congress.
That explains why these programs are “insolvent.”
In a press release, McCrery explained the goals of the initiative:
“The SSDI trust fund is going to run out of money in only two years, and policymakers have done little to prepare…”
Translation: “Amazingly, the federal government is about to run short of its own sovereign currency, the currency it invented and created from thin air more than 200 years ago, and still creates from thin air every day.
“So, don’t expect the government to create the dollars needed to support disabled people. We would rather create dollars for billionaire tax breaks and bank rescues.”
And then we hear from the always-reliable, right-wing Heritage Foundation:
Workers are healthier today, people are living longer, and jobs are less physically demanding.
So why has the percentage of the working-age population (ages 16 to 64) who receive SSDI benefits more than doubled from 2.3 percent in 1990 to 5.1 percent in 2014?
A good portion of the growth has to do with demographic factors, such as the aging of the baby boomers, women’s increased labor force participation (and SSDI eligibility), and the increase in Social Security’s standard retirement age.
Translation: Congress and the President, at the bidding of the rich, have punished the poor and middle-classes so ruthlessly, that two earners are needed to support their families.
That partly explains women’s increased labor force participation.
But the real coup was to raise the standard retirement age for Social Security, which has helped cause the need for more SSDI benefits — which the rich now decry.
Clever, huh?
And even though we acknowledge that the number of disabled people and elderly people needing help has risen, we politicians will not add dollars to the Social Security System.
Instead, we will shuffle dollars around, with pretend borrowing and fake trust funds, and then in a couple of years come back to you with more needs to cut your benefits.
Simply pumping more money into a broken system is the wrong approach.
Translation: Giving money to people who need it is the wrong approach. It would narrow the Gap between the rich and the rest, and the rich won’t like it.
Allowing the SSDI program to continue unchecked not only harms taxpayers who finance the program, it is also a disservice to truly disabled individuals who are often stigmatized as a result of fraud and abuse in SSDI that goes largely uncheced.
Translation: Yes, we know that federal taxpayers do not pay for federal spending, but you have been buying the Big Lie for all these years, so we continue telling it.
And to remove the stigma from receiving disability benefits, we’ll cut your benefits. Understand? Cutting benefits is the best way to reduce fraud. (Don’t ask “Why”? Just trust us.)
So here are our recommendations:
*Providing incentives and support to help disabled individuals return to work; (Force the disabled to work difficult and unpleasant jobs.)
*Establishing needs-based disability periods; (Cut benefits and change the definitions of “disabled,” to reduce the number of people who qualify.)
*Offering optional private disability insurance as part of the public program; (“Optional” means: You pay or you get nothing)
*Modernizing the disability definitions and qualifications; (Fewer people qualify)
*Implementing more effective and regular continuing disability reviews; (Kick ’em off the rolls)
*Applying a flat benefit structure; (You receive less)
*Improving the efficiency and integrity of the adjudication process. (Get more right-wing judges who will cut your benefits)
Bottom line: The non-existent “insolvency problem” will be solved by transferring dollars from one benefits program to another, always being careful not to touch any benefits to the rich.
We politicians might raise your taxes. We might delay your benefits, like we do almost every year, with Social Security. Or we might re-define “disability.” (We already have increased the definition of “old age.”)
Whatever we do, don’t expect to receive any additional dollars from OUR government. As we’ve told you for many years, we can’t afford it.
But you can. And you will.
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 Click here
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
Vertical gray bars mark recessions. Recessions come after the blue line drops below zero and when deficit growth declines.
As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recessions, each of which has been cured only when the growth lines rose.
Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.
#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 
If the papers submitted don’t mention Monetary Sovereignty, whose fault is that?
LikeLike
Mine, presumably. Yours, too, and all of us who do know the difference and have not been able to communicate it to the public.
But mostly, it’s the fault of the rich.
LikeLike
Nice and Caustic, Rodger. Pity we cannot exile these idiots from the human race then stick them in a circus to get whipped into shape!
LikeLike
Rodger
Have you seen this?
https://anticap.wordpress.com/2015/11/02/only-in-america-115/
LikeLike
PERFECT!
LikeLike
Why do so many people reject the truth about Monetary Sovereignty?
My explanation is based on Rodger’s comments.
We know that the sensation of “wealth” is relative to the gap between the rich and the rest. That is, the sensation does not depend on how much you have, but on how much more you have than others have. In order for an American to feel rich, he needs lower classes to look down on. He needs the gap.
Likewise, in order for an American to feel “middle class,” he needs a bottom class to look down on. He needs the gap.
The middle class American votes for austerity, because he falsely thinks that austerity will hurt the bottom class more than him. Austerity is how he maintains the gap – and austerity is justified by the Big Lie that the U.S. government is “broke.” The middle class American falsely thinks that social programs help others more than him, and that tax increases hurt others more than him. Therefore he votes to cut social programs, and to “broaden the tax base.” In so doing, he votes to impoverish himself, while justifying his masochism via the Big Lie.
For example, Universal Social Security would narrow the gap between the middle and bottom classes. Therefore the middle class American says that Universal Social Security is “unaffordable. The U.S. government is “broke,” and Social Security is already “insolvent.”
In short, the Big Lie is crucial to maintaining all social strata from top to bottom. When the middle class person echoes the (false) axiom that “there is no free lunch,” he is expressing his hatred of the bottom class, and his fear of falling into the bottom class. His hatred and fear maintain the gap that makes him feel “middle class,” while closing his mind to the truths of Monetary Sovereignty.
Looked at another way, the middle class is a “trustee” class. If you rule society, the best way to maintain power is to elevate some of your slaves slightly above the rest of your slaves. You must make some of your slaves “trustees” with special rights and privileges. When you do this, your trustee slaves will flog the rest of your slaves so that the trustees can keep their special privileges. The worse your trustee slaves treat the rest of your slaves, the more your trustees feel “special” and “superior.”
In today’s society, middle-class slaves are “trustees” of the rich. They flog lower-class slaves by echoing the Big Lie. “We must eliminate social programs that help the poor! After all, the U.S. government is BROKE!”
The poorer the middle class becomes, the more its members can only maintain the gap by brutalizing the lower class in increasingly savage ways, such as privatized schools (i.e. charter schools), racial profiling, the “war on drugs,” predatory lending, “three strikes” laws, mass incarceration, institutionalized racism, immigrant-bashing, and so on.
One popular means of crushing the bottom class is to base city budgets not on local sales taxes, but on fines from petty drug offenses and petty traffic offenses. Across the USA, victims from the bottom class must now pay for a public defender, pay for a court room, pay for a judge, pay for imprisonment, and pay for probation. Since the victims cannot pay, they rotate in and out of jail for life. They can never escape the debt / jail system, since they can never hold a job. The system will not let them. They can never escape the nationwide prison camp. If their driver’s license is suspended in one state, it will be automatically suspended in all other states.
It’s all about maintaining the social strata. The upper class and the middle class both maintain their status (i.e. maintain the gap) by mistreating everyone below them. They both justify their mistreatment via the Big Lie that the U.S. government is “broke.” They both depend on the Big Lie. They both defend it.
To repeat, middle class people reject the truth about Monetary Sovereignty, because they know that Rodger’s “Ten Steps to Prosperity” (for example) would reduce the gap between themselves and the lower classes.
Lower class people do NOT reject the truth about Monetary Sovereignty, since they have nothing to lose. I know this because I have talked to them.
Upton Sinclair famously said in 1935, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
I would add: “…or when his social status depends on it.”
“Universal Social Security for all, including Blacks and Hispanics? Nonsense!The U.S. government is ‘broke,’ and Social Security is already ‘insolvent’!”
LikeLike
perhaps the oligarchs of the past two centuries learned something from what their European forebearers, in the privileged class, had to contend with between the 14th-18th centuries. it is not a coincidence that the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment were tied to newfound financial freedoms to the lower classes. the privileged understand that with financial freedoms comes leisure, and with leisure comes the ability to think critically about the issues of the day, and the response to those issues via politics, art, etc……….
LikeLike
BUT AT LEAST THEY CARE
Right-wingers push for austerity by demanding the elimination of social programs that help average people.
Left-wingers push for austerity by demanding an increase in taxes that are destroyed upon receipt.
Either way the gap is widened between the rich and the rest. (But at least the left-wingers “care.”)
Indeed the essence and purpose of modern capitalism is to continually widen the gap between the rich and the rest.
As an example of left-wingers who demand more austerity, the UK Guardian has an article titled, “Austerity was a political choice. Now it’s starting to look like a bad one.”
The UK Guardian agrees that austerity is good, and that the U.K. budget should be balanced. The “bad choice” is that austerity has been imposed by cutting social programs, rather than increasing taxes. Therefore the UK Guardian criticizes austerity while demanding more austerity. (But at least the UK Guardian “cares.”)
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/25/austerity-political-choice-bad-one-george-osborne
Austerity is an example of artificial scarcity, which is the basis of social power. Since we outnumber the bankers and rich people by tens of millions to one, they use austerity to starve us into submission. Austerity is justified by the Big Lie.
LikeLike
There is no greater hatred than what the middle classes feel for the lower classes.
LikeLike
Precisely Rodger. Middle-class hatred of the bottom class is greater than rich people’s hatred of the lower classes. Why? Because the middle class is precarious, and its members are being pushed downward. Middle-class hatred is a product of middle-class fear of falling.
Middle-class fear and hate is what blinds people to the truth of Monetary Sovereignty. The Big Lie is what justifies this fear and hate. It makes people agree to more austerity, which pushes people down into the bottom class they fear to join.
I once mentioned to a man that federal tax revenue is destroyed upon receipt. He responded by calling me names too vile to repeat here. Surprised, I checked into his background and discovered that he was a white supremacist, an immigrant-basher, and anti-Semite Neo-Nazi.
Wretched, impoverished, unemployed, and alone (with no girlfriend) he needed someone to despise as “inferior” and as a “threat.” Therefore he violently rejected the facts of Monetary Sovereignty, since the facts debunked the “threat.”
I submit that there is some of him in everyone who denies the facts of MS.
In right-wing blogs that support the Big Lie, reader comments are universally hostile toward anyone (such as refugees) who is part of the bottom class, and toward anyone who exposes the Big Lie.
Therefore, here it is in a nutshell…
QUESTION: We know that politicians and media pundits are paid by the rich to promote the Big Lie and austerity. But why are average people so eager to believe the lies?
ANSWER: Because they fear falling into the bottom class. And their fear is what causes more and more of them to join the bottom class each day. If people would give up their fear (their cowardice really) they would dismiss the Big Lie. Then we could all have things like single payer heath insurance, and Universal Social Security.
LikeLike
Hatred evolves from fear, evolves from insecurity. Show me a hater and I’ll show you a frightened person, looking for a Leader to save him.
LikeLike
Elizabeth,
I cannot thank you enough for these comments. Are you on Twitter? I took the liberty of posting your comments, tweet by tweet on Twitter. What you said needs to reach a wider audience. Someone who can articulate the issue ailing us (TINA) needs a wider recognition.
Once again thank you and best wishes for everything you do.
LikeLike
@Netbacker. Thanks for your kind worlds. No I am not on Twitter. Nor do I have a Facebook page, or a blog, or a web site. In fact, the only place I leave comments on is here, since it’s the only place where I can be truthful.
Since my comments are lengthy, perhaps I should start my own blog titled: “Monetary Sovereignty II: Carrying On the Teachings Of Rodger Malcolm Mitchell.”
Would you visit such a blog?
LikeLike
yesterday i flew home from a business trip , luckily i managed a first class ticket from priceline, and found myself seated next to an interesting fellow. He was returning to his home on Jupiter Island from Australia where he confessed to selling his private consumer debt collections business for an insanely large number, in the hundreds of millions.
He lived down the street from the Elmer Fudd of Leiman’s, whom he said was a buddy. We began talking about horse racing , but soon politics and the presidential campaign came up. I know this is anecdotal, but this immensely successful ,wealthy ,arrogant conservative , whom proffessed insider access through influential golf compadres and political contributions, had never heard of the concept of monetary sovereignty. i tried my best to explain the important simple tenants, but this old guy just shook his head in disbelief and contempt. His entire demeanor changed, i was now a loony, a threat to his perception of reality. He had a strong religious faith as well, and sadly that giving spirit of his, that he continually expressed earnestly expecting me to understand ,never thinking it at odds with his otherwise miserly career and political inclinations, was also terribly threatened by my new explanation of federal financing.
Very strange and sureal, because it always seems to me that the wealthier and more successful a person is , coupled with overtly confessed deep religous convictions of faith and love , the less likely they seem to want to understand what i’m talking about, let alone accept it. The reality that a living breathing person i can physically communicate with in the flesh has a grasp of the truth about macro economics and monetary sovereignty , i’ve yet to experience. Only through impersonal blogs and articles on the internet do i get affirmation that insanity , at least with respect to this subject, is not my diagnosis. Keep up the good work Rodger, sure there are other places to get the facts, but i love your sarcastic comments. They are priceless, i only wish they could be leveled in person on a larger format, as im sure you do as well!!!
LikeLike
Eric Hoffer invented the term, “True Believer.” He meant it to refer to people who participated in mass movements, his claim being that no matter what the movement — Naziism,the religions, etc., — the really strong adherents all are the same.
The rich generally are true believers — believers that their wealth comes from a special quality that sets them apart from the non-rich.
This special quality means they always are right, know everything, and have nothing to learn from the rest.
Trying to teach a rich person something is like trying to teach a very pious person Evolution.
If it doesn’t come from a “Leader” (a richer person or a more pious person), it likely will not be accepted by a true believer.
True believers are the world’s greatest followers. They will follow the Leader over a cliff, and no logic will convince them otherwise.
Wayne LaPierre is an example of a Leader, and gun-nuts are true believers, followers who will believe anything that comes from LaPierre, and nothing that doesn’t.
Logic cannot convince them, just as logic could not convince your rich friend.
LikeLike
As a quick aside Rodger, i know your against legal weapon possesion by the masses , encouraged and lobbied through insane groups such as the NRA. So am I, the only caveat being that I want a weapon. Sort of hypocritical, and maybe that is the real issue. Semi automatic rifles of any sort , “assault” or hunting types, ( no difference except for appearences,), should be extremely limited. Personally i abhor killing of any sort, animal or man, and limiting these semi automatics would invariably make hunting more difficult, which sounds great to me, and obviously make it more difficult for mass killings. Non the less, most fire arm deaths of humans come from handguns, which sort of makes banning the former a kind of misdirection, without the same restrictions applied to handguns.
But i still want access for myself- for that flawed presumption that i will be safer- and i understand how rediculous that sounds. The core of the problem. Entertainment, media of all sorts, and basic fear of our fellow man encourages this stupidity. Marketing works all too well, but once a cultural imprint is amassed , reversing that trend proves disheartingly futile without massive upheavel. MS and MMT suffer similar obsticles from cultural imprinting, as does vegan ism, cleaner renewable energy options, and a host of obvious solutions to many of the scourages modern society has placed on our socio-economic and ecological environment.
One would think people would embrace ideas that allowed for the proverbial have your cake and eat it, but they dont. I champion healthy skepticism , yet sometimes things just are as simple as they seem. People from all sorts of diverse backgrounds seem to eat up the childish assumptions of a fatherly figure in the heavens watching over them, providing eternal pleasures for the faithful and answering their prayers ,while banishing apostates, the unfaithfull, and whomever is deemed bad. But tell those same proffesed lovers of love and compassion that we can create a nearly utopian society in the here and now, and they’ll call you a childish hopeless naive nucklehead. We live in a time of immense wealth , knowledge and resources are still freely flowing, hopefully we modern humans wont kill the golden goose we inherited from our forefathers, but i wouldnt bet on it. Of course that depressing thought provides fodder for selfishness, and thus the snowball effect that ultimately dooms us all.
LikeLike
Larry Silber says: “I have yet to experience a living breathing person I can physically communicate with in the flesh who has a grasp of the truth about macro-economics and monetary sovereignty.”
People in the bottom class accept the truth when they hear it, since they have nothing to lose. Homeless people, newly arrived refugees, Black people in places like Ferguson Missouri – they “get it” right away. I know this from personal experience.
Unfortunately no one will listen to them, since they are “evil” (i.e. poor). They don’t count. They are “parasites.” (Which is the opposite of the truth. In reality, the higher you are on the social ladder, the more you are a “taker.”)
Bottom-class people will believe anything that has the potential to authentically raise them up.
Middle-class people will believe anything (such as the Big Lie) that has the potential to keep the bottom class down.
LikeLike
A professor did a study on this MS/MMT nonsense. He told the students that everyone would be treated with “equality” – so the grading was based on the entire class as opposed to individually.
The first time around, the class got a B grade – as the top group pulled the average up and most students were really happy. But… the top group was not happy – they spent hours and hours studying their butts off, while the lower groups spent their time partying and hanging out – they didn’t even open their books.
During the second exam things didn’t go as well and the class got a D. The top group didn’t study as hard and the lower groups did the same. Nobody was happy this time around.
The remaining exams were even worst and the entire class ended failing. This is what this “equality” nonsense does. The only way it works is when a group works their butts off while a chosen few gets a free pass. It’s pure nonsense and a lie.
LikeLike
Sure,
Since you claim to be a lover of the truth, please tell me the name of the professor and the school in which he/she taught.
You see, I don’t believe you.
I do believe you made up that story.
I don’t believe there was a professor who “did a study on this MS/MMT nonsense,” and I don’t believe that mythical professor gave the tests you mentioned.
In short, I do believe your whole story is a big, fat lie.
But feel free to prove me wrong.
LikeLike
Ha, I love it (said sarcastically). I went to a college “friend’s” bday party this summer, at his country club in Westchester, NY. he is a managing director (in bonds) of a major bank. his party of 20 or so folks was filled with bigtime bankers and lawyers. we all live in and around NYC. whenever I get around my former college mates, all of whom are bankers and lawyers, I make a point of bringing up politics (I am a democratic socialist and they are most assuredly not) and most recently, monetary sovereignty. now, we are talking elite NE college and post educated folk. it did not matter how simplistically I explained the ways of the world, I was either mocked or ignored. when asked if they understood that the US was not under the gold standard, they all profusely said “yes yes, of course”, and looked at me with jaundiced eyes. my college MD ‘friend’, when asked if he believed that the federal govt funded its expenditures through revenue, said “of course”, and mockingly asked his banker friend, “hey blah blah, why do you pay federal taxes?”. “to pay for shit”…. they both laughed……..
LikeLike
Oh no! The U.S. national debt is projected to be $20 trillion by the time Obama leaves office in January 2017.
Divided by a U.S. population of 322,014,853, this means that every man, woman, and child will owe $62,1082.00 to …whoever. (China? Trump? Extraterrestrials?)
You have lived beyond your means, and mortgaged your grandchildren’s future. The only way you can pay your debt is to agree to the privatization of Social Security and Medicare. That way, trillions in FICA tax revenue will go to Wall Street, which will use it to create the biggest bubble in history. When the bubble pops, all those trillions will vanish. Sorry folks. Better luck next time.
WASHINGTON TIMES: “Mr. Obama’s spending agreement with Congress will suspend the nation’s debt limit and allow the Treasury to borrow another $1.5 trillion or so by the end of his presidency in 2017. “
Translation: The Treasury will be authorized to sell another $1.5 trillion worth of T-securities by 2017. If there are no buyers, then the Fed will “buy” the T-securities itself, such that the U.S. government will “owe itself” another $1.5 trillion. Some crisis, huh?
WASHINGTON TIMES: When Mr. Obama took over in January 2009, the total national debt stood at $10.6 trillion. That means the debt will have very nearly doubled during his eight years in office, and there is much more debt ahead with the abandonment of “sequestration” spending caps enacted in 2011.
Translation: Because of the (fake) “national debt,” Medicare and Social security are “unsustainable.” They must be given to Wall Street fat cats now, before it is too late. Indeed EVERY public asset or operation must be given to rich people now, before it is too late.
(Politicians all have to walk a tightrope. On one hand they give unlimited money to their cronies such as military contractors and Wall Street. On the other hand those same cronies require politicians to keep average Americans down by pretending that the U.S. government is “broke.”)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/1/obama-presidency-to-end-with-20-trillion-national-/
LikeLike
If you are trying to sway some of the conservative voters, I suggest being truthful and putting together a thoughtful analysis for once.
The people visiting your blog, barring a few, will vote democratic even if they get hit with a 10 foot pole in the middle of their foreheads by the same democrats they are voting for. They may even consider voting even more at that stage. Sorry folks to say the least.
LikeLike
Continuing the false game of scarcity economics is like playing musical chairs with 10 people and 9 chairs but in the background up against the wall are a row of additional chairs sitting empty. The people who designed the game know full well it’s all over if the truth be known of what our real output capacity is.
LikeLike