Why are Democrats such nebbishes?

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

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

We’ve harped on this so long my “harp” almost is broken, so it is refreshing to hear another blog’s harp. Some excerpts from an excellent article.

The Democratic Party Must Undergo a Dramatic Transformation to Lead America into the Future
By Michael Payne

The departure of Hillary Clinton gives the Democratic Party the great opportunity to truly reinvent itself and move into the future with a new sense of purpose and direction.

The same can be said of Barack Obama who presented himself as an agent of change but most certainly wasn’t up to the task by any stretch of the imagination. These two should be like the last of that breed of politicians within the Democratic Party.

Obama’s legacy, if you wish to elevate his lack of action to “legacy” status, will be that he borrowed a Rube Goldbergian, right-wing program (Romneycare) for his “signature” achievement, tried to foist on us his right-wing “Grand Bargain” (i.e. cut social spending and raise taxes), and created the Simpson-Bowles committee to attempt a suicidal, right-wing “balanced budget.”

The committee’s recommendations were strongly supported by  JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, who along with all his fellow, rich banksters, never was prosecuted by the right-wing Obama administration. Need I say more?

Oh yes, he deported more immigrants than any President in history. Why? Because the right-wing wanted him to. See a pattern, here?

We assume these right-wing “achievements” will be well documented in Obama’s overpriced ode to failure: the Obama Presidential library.

Here’s what, in my opinion, the Democratic Party must do:

*Attack GOP voter suppression. Don’t wait until the next election when it will be too late. Democrats, time and time again, have watched the GOP prevent qualified voters from casting their ballots and just haven’t found the ways to put a stop to this politically evil process.

*Expose the Republican Party for what it is; an albatross around the neck of America, a party with no vision, possessing a badly damaged moral and directional compass.

It is a completely immoral compass. Just think of the all-consuming dishonesty of the man they elected President.

*Stop the current Democratic movement toward the Right and move back to the center left where Democrats do best. Acting like a more liberal version of Republicanism is certainly not working; ask Hillary Clinton about that.

*Never, ever allow someone like the overly aggressive war hawk, Hillary Clinton, to be the party’s candidate for president.

*Democrats must be far more proactive in connecting with the American people; communicate, communicate and communicate.

Obama’s message was whispered weakly from afar and above. Trump’s messages, though lies, were strong and straight to the people.

*Never again let someone like the incompetent Debbie Wasserman Schulz head the DNC; pick someone like former Gov. Howard Dean who used his “50-state strategy,” to strengthen the Democratic Party’s infrastructure and recruitment of solid candidates in all levels of organization in every state.

*Develop key goals and objectives that relate to America’s most critical problems.

First, identify those key problems. Start with the widening Gap between the rich and the rest. Then refer to the Ten Steps to Prosperity ( below).

*When Democrats return home they need to be constantly talking directly to their constituents, arranging town hall meetings, discussing problems and solutions; how to make things better for all Americans.

Bernie Sanders connected in that way with people; he should be the leader of this movement but he needs to surround himself with some younger, very energetic individuals who have the promise to rise to leadership roles in the party.

For the next president, Sen. Elizabeth Warren would be a great candidate and could well be the first female president.

Scores of Democrats need to be talking with reporters day in and day out and constantly doing interviews on CNN and MSNBC, telling all who will listen about their ideas for solving this country’s problems.

They should make clear to people what will happen to many of them when these very necessary social programs are torn apart. The media will provide them coverage because they love the controversies and it increases their ratings.

My state, Illinois, has a Democratic Senator who has occupied his seat since 1997: His name is Dick Durbin. Have you heard of him?  After almost 20 years in his office, and what did we get?

Have you ever heard him speak? He’s the Minority whip. Do not expect him to do any whipping. He is a Democrat, a nice, harmless, well-meaning nebbish, who would rather apologize than take a stand. Almost twenty years of whispers.

The facts of Monetary Sovereignty should be should be a magic wand for Durbin and the Democrats. MS tells us that deficits are necessary and beneficial, and the federal government never can run short of dollars — exactly in line with the liberal agenda — the authentic liberal agenda of spending for the underdog.

However, a certain amount of courage is necessary to explain the truths of MS to the public, and courage has not been the Democrats’ strong point since Lyndon Johnson.

It’s not ignorance. Stephanie Kelton, the MMT economics professor from UMKC surely informed everyone of the facts. No, it’s cowardice.  So, lacking courage the Dems were crushed in the last election.

We are left to pray that the likes of Sanders, Warren, Schumer et al, will grow a pair and win back the nation by explaining the Monetary Sovereignty facts, and telling people “your Social Security, Medicare, and aids to the less fortunate are possible without raising your taxes and without inflation.”

Is this too much to hope?

Yes, it actually is, if the American left-leaning public continues to suffer in silence, refrains from complaint, spreads its legs and lets it all happen to them.

Jeez, people, don’t just sit there.  In this instance, emulate the right-wing. Pick up the phone; write letters; do something. Fight for your life.

Or, the Trumps of the world simply will take it.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics.

Implementation of The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

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.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can 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 ANNUAL 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 benefitting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
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.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-transferring 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.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) 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 a 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.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
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.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

22 thoughts on “Why are Democrats such nebbishes?

  1. OFF TOPIC

    *****************************************************

    LOGIC SPOILS THE FUN

    Average people’s motivations for echoing the Big Lie include habit. Another motivation is gap dynamics. Still another motivation is that for members of the BIG LIE INDUSTRY, lying is a living (e.g. professors, politicians, “think tank” members, gold hucksters, and so on).

    A fourth motivation is sheer fun.

    Many people amuse themselves by claiming that federal dollars are worthless because federal dollars are not “backed” by anything. They also claim that the federal government relies on tax dollars. They never ask what “backs” the tax dollars, since logic would spoil their fun. It’s like claiming that the earth floats on a giant tub of water that sits on the back of a turtle. If we ask what the cosmic turtle stands on, we spoil the fun.

    For instance, I just saw two people have the following conversation in a blog…

    JOE: There are millions of examples from individual debt to national debt that lay out the end result of excessive and runaway debt. Three national-level examples include Greece, Spain, and Italy.

    FRANK: Do you understand that your three examples do not have their own currency?

    JOE: Are you saying that being able to print your own money, without having anything to back it up other than a “promise to repay,” doesn’t have ass-biting consequences? Interest payments on the U.S. national debt come from taxpayers. Tax money is taken out of the national economy. The money doesn’t produce a product or provide a service. It is a direct transfer of dollars from the working class to the lenders. A nation being able to print its own currency is a temporary solution at best. It merely delays the inevitable.

    FRANK: Personal debt, local government debt, and state debt must either be repaid, or else discharged in bankruptcy. However a nation that has its own currency is in an entirely different situation. Principle reduction is not necessary. Of course, if debt is too excessive, troubles would surely ensue and debts might have to be inflated away, for instance.

    “Frank” is partly correct. He understands that the US government creates dollars out of thin air. Unfortunately he still believes (falsely) that the US government must borrow its spending money, and that the government uses dollars created out of thin air to repay the dollars that the government supposedly borrows. Where do the government’s (supposedly) borrowed dollars come from? This question is logical, but it spoils the fun.

    (For Ellen Brown and her brain-addled disciples, it is fun to claim that *ALL* dollars are created by bankers as loans.)

    Kids gave played the “Monopoly” board game for 114 years and counting. As Rodger says, “Monopoly” explains economics. “Monopoly” dollars and “real world” dollars are both “backed” by players’ willingness to abide by the rules of the game. However it is fun to claim that “Monopoly” has nothing to do with “real life.”

    It is fun to claim that dollars are “worthless” because they are not “backed” by anything, even as we cling to every “worthless” dollar we can get.

    It is also fun (for some people) to habitually drink excessive amounts of alcohol.

    However both types of fun are hazardous to one’s health.

    Like

  2. Wiki article explains it simply. People believe we have what FDR wanted without his 2nd bill of rights.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights

    “We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[3] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

    In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

    Among these are:

    The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
    The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
    The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
    The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
    The right of every family to a decent home;
    The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
    The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
    The right to a good education.
    All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

    America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.”

    Like

    1. Penny, I’m not sure I agree that everyone should have a right to a job or every business should be protected from competition.

      But I do agree that every person should be provided adequate food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, personal safety, and education, and that the federal government has the means to accomplish this.

      The “Ten Steps” are a plan in that direction.

      Like

    2. “Necessitous men are not free men. People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.”

      Exactly.

      We live in an island village whose water supply is a well at the center of our village. Our water is infinite, since the well is bottomless and inexhaustible. The closer people live to the well, the more they enjoy plentiful water, and the more they claim that the well is “about to run dry” — in order to make everyone farther out from the well grovel to them for every drop of the infinite water.

      Each concentric circle of villagers shares the same lie. Each circle plays the same game against all wider circles, out to the villagers who live farthest from the well, which the entire village keeps permanently on the verge of dying from thirst. The outliers are called sub-human, and are falsely blamed for most problems in the entire village. Many are kept in jail for life.

      Each concentric circle of villagers knows that the well is inexhaustible. (They know that the US government can “print” limitless dollars.)

      Nonetheless they say, “If we give one more drop of water to people who are farther out from the well, we will cause the well to run dry! Therefore we must have water responsibility! We must reduce the water deficit via water austerity!”

      Each concentric circle willfully indulges in this combined sadism and masochism, while saying, “Don’t blame us for this situation; blame those who are closer to the well!” (That is, blame rich people and politicians.)

      Each concentric circle plays this same game, while denying that they play it, just as they deny that the bottomless well is bottomless.

      Each concentric circle intentionally sustains the madness by bickering about everything except the bottomless nature of the well.

      We will have social strata as long as we have gap dynamics. And we will have gap dynamics as long as we imagine that each of us is an independent universe.

      Like

  3. Elizabeth, you are correct, of course.

    When someone wishes that the dollar was “backed” by gold, they really are wishing that gold was “collateral” for the dollar. The belief is that having gold as collateral somehow makes the dollar safer.

    This is similar to a house being collateral for a mortgage loan and a car being collateral for a car loan. Collateral makes a loan safer.

    However, there is one massive difference. Collateral is meaningless if the borrower has the unlimited right to change it at any time.

    For example, what if you had the right to tell your mortgage holder, “From now on, my mortgage is collateralized not by my house, but rather only by my front door.” Would that be a safer mortgage?

    Or if you could tell your car title lender, “From now on, the collateral on the car loan is not the whole Cadillac, but just one of the tires.” Would you feel comfortable being the lender?

    Under those circumstances, no one would consider the house and the car as backing anything.

    But, this is exactly what happened when gold or silver were said to “back” the dollar. The U.S. government had, and still has, the unlimited right to change that faux “backing” to anything it wished, any time it wished.

    During my lifetime, the federal government decided that the dollar was “backed” by gold in the tune of $35 to 1 ounce of gold.

    This came after a long series of changes that began in the 1700s — changes arbitrarily decided by the federal government.

    In 1971, the federal government arbitrarily decided that gold and silver had no legal relationship to the dollar. The so-called “backing” disappeared.

    So what good was the so-called gold “backing” if it could disappear overnight?

    Any time someone tells you that the dollar should be backed by gold or silver, ask them two things:
    1. What amount of gold or silver per dollar?
    2. What happens if the government arbitrarily decides to change that amount?

    Then try not to laugh at their consternation.

    Like

    1. QUESTION: “What good was the so-called gold ‘backing’ if it could disappear overnight?”

      ANSWER: The “gold standard” kept dollars from being “worthless,” and a “ticking bomb.” (So say the clowns yesterday, today, and tomorrow.)

      By the way, as I have often noted, the “gold standard” was always a sham that served as an excuse to apply selective austerity to the lower classes. The sham was a political tool that never actually limited how many dollars the US government could create. No government could viably base its fiscal policy on volatile gold trading markets.

      ***********************************************************

      “Any time someone tells you that the dollar should be backed by gold or silver, ask them two things:
      1. What amount of gold or silver per dollar?
      2. What happens if the government arbitrarily decides to change that amount?” ~ RMM

      Excellent points. If we want to adopt a “gold standard,” then who will decide how many dollars an ounce of gold is worth? The “markets”? The “markets” are rigged, manipulated, and ruled by the big players.

      QUESTION: What happens if the government arbitrarily decides to change that amount?

      ANSWER: We would be back to having “worthless” dollars. Therefore, all power must be taken from governments and given to the (rigged) markets. 🙂

      Like

  4. Tell you what, the likelihood of the Dems to embrace MS is not good. Here in Australia we saw an excellent presentation in 2014. which was sponsored by the Greens in South Australia. For a little while it looked promising.

    Then nothing. Most of us were a bit perplexed at the silence, but someone pointed out the obvious. A party member decided to run the ideas past economists, maybe even the Central Bank to see if they agreed with it. Well they didn’t, or at least said it’s not what happens there. so it was dropped.

    For the Dems to avoid the same fate, they have to be very careful who they trust to tell them about it. Because you can be sure MS or MMT will not be given a free pass into policy without a lot of opposition. Stephanie Kelton would be a good start but asking just her is not enough.

    Like

    1. @ejhr2015 – Are you familiar with your countryman, Prof. William (Bill) Mitchell? He is a professor at the Univ. of Newcastle, IIRC, and is a leading proponent of MMT. He writes the daily “billy blog” which is a great blog to follow (by email). His criticism of the neo-liberal project is one of the best out there. In fact, he has written books on the subject and on the failure of the Left to provide any kind of opposition to the neo-liberals. He pays special attention to the damaging machinations of the Australian government.

      http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/

      Like

      1. Yes, John. I am a friend of his. I visit him when I am in Newcastle [he hates coming to Sydney]. Apart from the truth that the Nobel prize in economics is a fraud, a parody even, he is far more deserving of a top accolade than the usual mainstream suspects. Like you obviously, I am a fan.
        PS. I can’t use my real name because WordPress says its already taken [but by me] It’s John Doyle anyway.

        Like

        1. John – That is very cool. I would love to meet him sometime. He really does deserve the highest accolades, even the fake Nobel. I consider him one of the best and most knowledgeable proponents of MMT. His billy blog is one of my favorite things to read every morning with my coffee. I especially like his work on the failure of the Left, as I said, as well as his analysis of the groupthink dystopia that has overtaken Europe and the US. His writing, in spite of the numerous typos, is very appealing and educational. I have learned so much from reading his posts.

          Perhaps when you seem him again, you might consider mentioning that he has a big fan here in Mobile, Alabama. If he ever comes within a 150 miles of here, i would drop everything to go see him.

          Like

          1. He travels a lot to the USA. He’s also part of the group in the Uni of Kansas promoting MMT , like Stephanie Kelton, Warren Mosler and Randy Wray. Michael Hudson writes a lot of sensible articles and on the side Steve Keen is there as well. So contact them and see when he’s over your way. Rodger here has also been there. The more the better!

            Just yesterday the Guardian posted a relevant article on the household budget fallacy. You can see from the comments a lot of people are on side;

            https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/06/listen-up-scott-morrison-its-time-to-bust-the-myth-of-the-budget-surplus?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+AUS+v1+-+AUS+morning+mail+callout&utm_term=207314&subid=10558307&CMP=ema_632#comment-90707043

            Economic comments in “The Conversation” also have MMT/MS adherents.
            I spend a lot of time there hopefully overcoming the poor understanding rampant about macroeconomics. Same as Rodger does here. Rodger is good because he’s very direct and clear. Bill is also a mainstream educated economist so he writes 6000 word articles to cover every angle which is intended for other economists but hard for us amateurs to understand. We need them both!

            Like

          2. Unfortunately, KC is out of my travel range at this time. Maybe one day. I’ve been following the people in that group for the past 6 years. It’s been quite an education. I earned a degree in Economics from the Wharton School in 1972, before monetarism got a good start, so I didn’t receive quite the indoctrination that has been standard since the late ’70’s. It prepared me to accept the logic of MMT/MS as soon as I read about it.

            I’ll check out that article and look into “The Conversation” as well. Thanks.

            Like

  5. Have not learnt a damn thing.

    The funny thing is that the republicans were in the gutter and pretty much a dead party just 4 years ago. If, and thats a long if, trump and the republicans implememt the changes he campaigned on – the democratic party can kiss their assess good bye.

    How can anyone in their right mind think that the gop/dems are moving to the right when in fact, the legislations that have passed the last 8 years were completely on the left (obamacare, increased budgets, welfare, etc)?

    Im kind of glad that liberals are such a hard headed bunch – this will guarantee their demise.

    Voter suppression my ass – look at the major cities and how many fraudulent votes show up.

    Good riddance democrats…

    Like

    1. And this, dear friends, is exactly why it’s so important to read this post.

      Danny is one of the minority who actually:
      –believes what Trump tells him
      –believes that cuts to federal spending will benefit the economy
      –would like to see our roads and bridges privatized so the rich can skim off profits for worse service
      –doesn’t care that Trump has appointed a white supremacist, Steve Bannon, to serve in the White House
      –doesn’t care that the new Republican Congress’s first act was to try to get rid of ethics laws
      –doesn’t care that Trump cheated innocent students with his phony Trump university and cheated creditors with his multiple bankruptcies
      –doesn’t care that Trump is a draft dodger
      –believes Trump’s lie that human-caused climate change is a Chinese hoax
      –believes Trump’s claim that there was widespread voter fraud, despite absence of evidence
      –doesn’t care that Trump is hiding his tax returns so he can steal more
      –doesn’t care that Trump screwed thousands of workers out of their salaries
      –doesn’t care that Trump talks about U.S. jobs, but makes Trump products in China
      –believes Trump’s denials about his friend Putin’s hacking of U.S. government Emails
      –doesn’t care that Trump, who knows nothing of foreign politics, and doesn’t think he needs to learn, has his finger on the red button
      –doesn’t care whether Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are cut and FICA is increased
      –doesn’t care that the GOP continues to try to destroy ACA, with no plan for the poor
      –doesn’t blame the Republican Congress for the slow growth
      –and doesn’t care whether the rich grow richer while he, Danny, grows poorer.

      But when Danny’s sad life slowly but surely ebbs as a result of Republican efforts against the middle class and the poor, he will whine and blame, not himself, but . . . probably Hillary.

      Like

      1. 1) i do not believe everything trump says. In fact, he already changes his tune on repealing obamacare. The right thing to do is erase obamacare and apply the anti monopoly laws on medical providers, which judging by trump’s healthcare chief, does not seem likely.

        2) i believe that a balanced budget is good for the economy because it leaves the capital on private hands, where it rightfully belongs and where it is put to use more efficiently.

        3) i agree with you on his appointments, exactly why i dont believe he will do what he promises.

        Your beef with trump (aside from stuff he did on his personal life – which you should not care about) is what he promised to do during his campaign. I agree with pretty much all he promised, except the stupid wall and his trade views.

        I seriously believe that if he goes after medical fraud, to call it for what it is, we will have a beautiful economy.

        Some, on the other hand, think that throwing money at it is the answer. The entire premise that there are no consequenses to government creation of money borders insanity.

        Like

  6. Danny If I might butt in. Let me assure you that You and I live in an MMT/MS world. That is the macroeconomic world out there in reality land. MMT/MS are not test theories. They are EXPLANATIONS.
    If you don’t wish to understand it’s your problem. We cannot force understanding on to you. If you try, then one day the penny will drop and it will all make sense, but it is hard when we have been brainwashed from birth to believe in the lie.

    All of your questions have been answered within Rodger’s blog here. Try looking?

    Like

    1. Ejhr,

      No they haven’t – ever. Not once.

      If YOU look, everytime anyone questions MS/MMT they are quickly insulted and told exactly what you are telling. Nothing…

      Would you believe me if i told you godzilla existed – just because i think it does? Thats how moronic the idea of mmt and ms are.

      Try asking rodger to prove that rising prices are beneficial to the economy. Try asking if doubling the money supply would give us double the production of the country. Try asking him to prove how deflation “damages” the economy.

      Try asking how it is that the fed and every government agency states deficit money is borrowed via the treasury and broker dealers, yet rodger somehow figured out that the government prints it.

      If rodger decides to post, i bet neither you nor him will answer any of these and all i will get will be insults.

      Like

      1. To quote a famous Paul Newman movie, “What we have here is a failure to communicate.

        “Try asking rodger to prove that rising prices are beneficial to the economy.”
        Rodger never said that.

        “Try asking if doubling the money supply would give us double the production of the country.” Rodger never said that.

        Try asking him to prove how deflation “damages” the economy.”
        Rodger never said that.

        “Try asking how it is that the fed and every government agency states deficit money is borrowed via the treasury and broker dealers, yet rodger somehow figured out that the government prints it.”
        The entire point of this blog is to demonstrate how the federal government is telling the Big Lie. If the government were truthful about Monetary Sovereignty, there would be no need for this blog.

        Try reading some of the explanations rather than making up stuff that never was said, and concluding it’s wrong.

        No insult intended.

        By the way, here is something you said: “i believe that a balanced budget is good for the economy because it leaves the capital on private hands, where it rightfully belongs and where it is put to use more efficiently.”

        Actually, with a balanced budget, if there is inflation, less real money is in private hands. And if there is a trade deficit, much less money is in private hands.

        If you like putting money in private hands (which you should) the way to accomplish that is for the federal government to run deficits.

        Like

        1. You havent said any of those and you never will because they completely invalidate your theory.

          How nice, if its so good when the government runs a deficit than why doesnt the government allow anyone to counterfeit?

          Just imagine, everyone running a deficit – we’d be in heaven – right Rodger?

          Like

          1. You have no grounds for denying MMT/MS, Danny. Are you serious or just trolling? You have offered no facts only whinged about being offended. You are making a rod for your own back. You are not contributing to this factual discussion. I see below, Rodger has called time. so Good bye and good riddance.

            Like

  7. Having limited time, and having given up on the idea of teaching him anything, this will be my final response to “Danny” or whatever his real name is:

    You havent said any of those and you never will because they completely invalidate your theory.

    Well, I guess that’s why I didn’t say them as you implied.

    “How nice, if its so good when the government runs a deficit than why doesnt the government allow anyone to counterfeit?”

    Of course, the question makes no sense. The Monetarily Sovereign government runs a deficit when it creates more dollars than it taxes.”

    On a completely different subject, the government prevents people from counterfeiting dollars so it can maintain control over supply. Two separate issues.

    “Just imagine, everyone running a deficit – we’d be in heaven – right Rodger?”

    Actually, anyone in the U.S. can create their own money at will. You can create all the “Dannys” you wish. You just can’t create U.S. dollars. The problem you would face with “Dannys” is acceptance. But if you can convince your creditors to accept “Dannys” go for it.

    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