Ho hum. Another mass shooting. 50 dead.

Another mass shooting. Another 50 lives lost. Many more wounded. Yawn.

Who benefits from all the misery? The gun manufacturers and their paid flacks, the NRA, who convince a gullible public that allowing every damn fool in the street to carry a gun, makes you safer.

So people die. Every day, innocent men, women and children die.

Meanwhile, the gun manufacturers grow rich. The bribed politicians grow rich. The NRA executives grow rich. On blood money.

Soon, will come the denials:

“We good guys need more guns and more powerful guns to protect ourselves from those bad guys.”

“It’s not a gun problem; it’s a mental health problem. We need more mental health.”

“It was foreign terrorism. The Muslims are to blame. The Mexicans are to blame. We need a bigger wall.”

Our cities are stained with your innocent children’s blood, and you demand more guns, more guns, more guns. Guns for you. Guns for your neighbors. Guns for total strangers.

And the gun manufacturers laugh all the way to the bank.

Sure, you want your guns.  But, has it ever occurred to you that your having guns also allows damn fool, complete strangers also to have guns?

And can’t you figure out that when damn fool, complete strangers are allowed to walk the street with guns, that puts you and your family in greater danger?

Is this too complicated for you?

So long as the rich gun manufacturers and the politicians and the NRA can rely on public stupidity, this tragedy will be repeated again and again and again. Just as it has been.

So how about this.  Why the half-way measures? Let’s  just allow everyone to carry fully automatic, machine guns, even 50 caliber machine guns, anywhere.

No background checks. They don’t work, and anyway, you don’t want the government to know you have a gun. Right?

No restrictions. Any restrictions violate the gun manufacturers’ twisted interpretation of the Constitution that they have brainwashed you to believe. (Forget that “militia” nonsense. The framers of the Constitution had some extra words to throw in.)

And you’re a “good guy,” so even if the bad guys carry machine guns, you always can stop them with your machine guns. You’re a better shot than they are.  Right?

And most importantly, the rich gun manufacturers, bribed politicians, and the NRA need your money.

Give me one reason why this is a bad idea.

=Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich afford better health care than the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefiting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-tranferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be an good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

The Ten Steps will grow the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and you.


Recessions begin an average of 2 years after the blue line first dips below zero. A common phenomenon is for the line briefly to dip below zero, then rise above zero, before falling dramatically below zero. There was a brief dip below zero in 2015, followed by another dip – the familiar pre-recession pattern.
Recessions are cured by a rising red line.

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.


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..

•No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.
•Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.
•A growing economy requires a growing supply of money (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
•Deficit spending grows the supply of money
•The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
•The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

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 the rest..
•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..


3 thoughts on “Ho hum. Another mass shooting. 50 dead.

  1. Therefore, all laws are useless. Right?

    Isn’t it wonderful how every shooting “proves” more people should carry guns?

    Additionally, any reduction in shootings “proves” carrying guns works.

    Ergo, everything “proves” the country needs more guns.

    A perfect marketing strategy by the gun manufacturers to sell guns to boobs.


  2. First Trump, then Cruz try to exploit the mass shooting to prove everyone should have guns and Muslims should be hated.

    Cruz said,

    “The next few days will be sadly predictable. Democrats will try to use this attack to change the subject. As a matter of rigid ideology, far too many Democrats – from Barack Obama to Hillary Clinton – will refuse to utter the words ‘radical Islamic terrorism.”

    Fortunately, Cruz does not subscribe to the rigid ideology of bigotry.

    “They will claim this attack, like they claimed every previous attack, was isolated and had nothing to do with the vicious Islamist theology that is daily waging war on us across the globe.”

    “And they will try to exploit this terror attack to undermine the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms of law-abiding Americans.”

    Er, uh, . . . excuse me, Mr. Cruz, but the shooter was a “law-abiding American” up until the moment he started shooting. He was one of the “good guys” who was allowed to buy guns.

    That is the whole problem with mass gun ownership. So-called “law abiding citizens” cannot be identified at any given moment

    And here is the best one from the Muslim hater:

    “Every human being has a right to live according to his or her faith and conscience, and nobody has a right to murder someone who doesn’t share their faith or sexual orientation.”

    Right-wing bigots will fail to see the disgusting irony in that statement coming from a guy who hates Muslims and gays.


    The real problem is Muslims, right?

    What about the white guy from Indiana, James Wesley Howell, who was arrested Sunday with a cache of weapons, ammunition and explosive-making materials in his car.

    What about Seung-Hui Cho who shot and killed 32 people in 2007?

    What about Adam Lanza who gunned down dozens of people at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012?

    And then there were those white Christian boys, Eric Harris and Dylan Kelbold at Columbine.

    Eric Harris

    Dylan Klebold

    Were they “good guys” or “bad guys” before the shooting began?

    No, the problem isn’t Muslims, or bigotry, or gays or any other diversion the gun nuts can think of. The problem is guns.


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 )

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