Obamacare and the great “states’ rights” con

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

BACKGROUND

When we have been fooled, we deny or point at others. But no one can deceive us as effectively as we can. We know what words, what thoughts, will turn us best.

There may be a handful of Congresspeople who have the courage to say and do what they believe is ethically or economically right. But for the most part, Congress is amoral, caring about two things only: Money and votes.

I know for certain that many members of Congress understand Monetary Sovereignty. They understand that the U.S. federal government cannot run short of its own sovereign currency, the dollar.

They know that by controlling both the supply and the demand (via interest rates), the U.S. government controls the value of the dollar (inflation).

They know that federal taxes and taxpayers do not fund federal spending, so federal deficits are not a burden on future taxpayers or on the government.

And they know that the monetarily non-sovereign state and local governments, businesses, individual citizens have none of these powers. State and local taxpayers do fund state and local spending for governments which often do run short of dollars.

Given those facts, it’s clear that we taxpayers benefit when the federal government spends more and the state and local governments spend less. 

The words “states’ rights” are meant to convey the notion that the federal government is too big. The ruling class asks us to reduce the federal government and to lay more financial responsibility on the local governments.

The pitch is insidious: “The federal government, being too huge, and being housed far way, in Washington, DC, ‘does not understand’ your local problems as well as your nearby state government. 

The pitch is: Your state government “knows and cares more for you.”

It is utter nonsense.

The criminal next door is the most deceptive. The one you trust most can swindle you best. Your mirror is the truest liar.

Consider Illinois. There is no “Illinois,” and you know it. There is Chicago. There is Scales Mound, IL. There is Morrisonville, IL. There is Kenilworth, IL. There is Jonesboro, IL.

Are they alike? No, they are places on a map surrounded by a thick black line, with the word “Illinois” inscribed, but they are no more alike than the sun and the sun flower. In Illinois, Chicago is progressive and downstate is conservative.

What then is Illinois? It’s as though you owned two blue hats and one red hat. So what is your hat color?

1. The problems and needs of Chicago are not the problems and needs of Scales Mound, Morrisonville, Kenilworth, nor Jonesboro.  Using the “states’ rights” logic, one easily could argue for “counties’ rights” or even “cities’ rights.”
2. Today, very little reason exists for most Illinois laws to differ from Texas laws or Minnesota laws.
3. Illinois politicians neither are more honest, more competent, nor more caring about Illinois taxpayers than are members of the U.S. Congress. Money and votes: It is all we are to them.
4. Illinois not only is broken but broke, and so deeply in debt it functionally has lost the ability to borrow or even to pay its existing debts. Illinois is Greece without the history. Everything from schools, to roads, to fire and police protection, to infrastructure to pride is severely stressed and badly in need.

If Rolls Royces were a penny each, Illinois couldn’t afford a wiper blade. Yet the “states’ rights'” advocates want Illinois to pay more so the “too big” federal government can pay less.

The concept of “states’ rights,” began with the original Colonies, which were small, European-style nations. Their leaders wanted federal protections but treasured their own powers.

That hasn’t changed.

Ultimately, this deceit was formalized with the 10th Amendment, which reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

As though 18th century authors could list in one short document, all the necessary needs of a 21st-century superpower.  Really? Laughable, and you know it.

Today, the myth that each little state should have different laws still remains. But why? What is the logical purpose?

Why must criminal and civil laws in Illinois be different from criminal and civil laws in Iowa or Texas? Is a murderer in one state deserving of a different trial and a different punishment from a murderer in another state? Why not one national murder law?

Is there a logical reason why the air and water in one state should be cleaner than the air and water in another state, or why food should be less adulterated and pharmaceuticals should be purer, from one state to another?

Why does each state have different healthcare laws? What is the logic?

“They” say local laws provide citizens with “more choices.” But you don’t need more choices. You need fewer and better choices.

Who are “they”?  The very rich — the ruling class — are “they.”

Reality:

1. Politicians disclaim responsibility for laws that defy voter bias.
2. Federal politicians have been told by the ruling class to trim federal budgets and to shift financial responsibility to the states.
3. Supreme Court justices, concerned less with the practical effect of laws and more with their political agenda, are children of their own prejudices. They claim to seek a federalist “balance of power” between the states and the federal government, but such a “balance” does not, cannot, exist.

“Balance of power” between federal and state governments is an impossible concept, a meaningless concept, having zero relationship to fact.

Southern states claimed states’ rights when defending “separate-but-equal” bigotry laws. But America understands that morality, amorality, and immorality all cross borders. There was no justification for one state to need black or white drinking fountains while adjacent states did not.

Yet, today’s conservative Supreme Court might rule differently, based on “states’ rights,” and we will believe it if already we are wont to believe it.

For seven years, the Republican Party has debated a replacement for the Affordable Care Act (i.e ACA and Obamacare, nee Romneycare). Seven years. The lie could have been found in one year.

Still, the Republican electorate believed the lie they told themselves.

Most concerns with ACA purportedly had to do with costs to the consumer and with states’ rights, though the real concern was the name applied to it:  Obamacare. OBAMA care.

During those seven years, numerous “repeal and replace” votes were taken and numerous plans were submitted, and numerous revised votes and revised plans are sure to be submitted in the tomorrows ahead.

They all will be built upon two wounds to America:

1. Fewer poor will afford health care
2. The states and the American people will be burdened with more financial liability.

All the plans will roll back the very purpose of ACA: More people protected. That widening of the Gap is exactly what the rich want.

WHAT IS THE CON?

Federal spending costs taxpayers nothing, while local spending is a cost to taxpayers.

Since federal politicians are no less honest, understanding or compassionate than local politicians, why move expenses from the federal government to state governments? Why spare the infinitely wealthy to burden the impoverished?

“States’ rights” advocates will claim this gives the states “freedom of choice.” But that is an ephemeral and meaningless excuse. Choice among bad alternatives is no choice at all.  And, whose “freedom” of choice? Certainly not yours.

The real purpose of “repeal and replace” is to widen the Gap between the rich and the rest. Without the Gap, no one would be rich, and the wider the Gap, the richer they are. They widen the Gap by taking from you and giving to themselves.

Federal taxes do not fund federal spending; state taxes fund state spending.

Most state taxes are regressive: Sales taxes, property taxes, water/garbage fees — all are inverse proportion to income and wealth.

Thus, moving expenses from the federal government to state and local governments widens the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest — the primary goal of the rich.

So they can pay less tax money while costing you more tax money the rich sell you the false notions that:

*The federal government is too big (or spends too much)
*Federal deficits are a burden on you, while state and local deficits are not a burden
*The federal government cares less and knows less about your needs
*The Constitution’s 10th Amendment requires state spending over federal spending, and
*State spending gives individuals and families more “freedom” of choice

All lies. All part of the con.

You will see it in the Republican Obamacare “solution,” which undoubtedly will continue to include lower payments by the federal government, higher payments by the states, fewer people insured, and fewer doctors and hospitals available to the serving class — exactly what the ruling class wants.

As the realization sinks in, you serving class folks may rue the day you voted to make this happen to you, though even the Democrats can’t claim innocence.

They should have pressed leaders for Step #2 of the Ten Steps to Prosperity: Federally funded Medicare for every man, woman, and child in America.

Should have.  Should have. Should have.

If by now you feel hopelessness creeping in, you may be starting to see reality. The ruling class, the billionaires, run the world. They are the royalty, the kings and queens of yore, forever skirmishing, battling, climbing for the best view.

In the wars, ending Obamacare is an inch in the endless effort to widen the Gap between the ruling class and the serving class. In that effort, no Gap is wide enough.

The very rich, Donald Trump, and his “Heinrich Himmler,” Steve Bannon, don’t care about you or your healthcare or your children or your life.  You only are necessary to provide the serving class part of the Gap.

For them, you are a mere rung in their climb to the top.

[The GINI index. A rising line indicates greater inequality — a widening Gap between the ruling class and the serving class.]

 

The ruling class cares only about widening the Gap, and Obamacare is their latest “states’ rights” con, just another tactic to keep the serving class down.

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 A MONTHLY ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA (similar to Social Security for All) (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Guaranteed Income)) 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 EVERYONE Five 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 FEDERAL TAXES ON BUSINESS
Businesses are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the federal government (the later having no use for those dollars). Any tax on businesses reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all business taxes reduce 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 business 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