This article got me so damn angry I could spit. Why Democrats lose elections.

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..

The following article got me so damn angry, I could spit:

Opinion: Pelosi’s ‘Medicare for All’ Problem
Democrats want it, but at what cost?
Jonathan Allen,

Democrats were advised to stay away from promoting the “Medicare for All” plan that has energized the party’s grass-roots activists and its rank and file in Congress.

“Keep the focus on the Republican plan and make them own it,” the polling memo from GBA Strategies & Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research reads. “The Republican plan is extremely unpopular and Democrats have little to gain by shifting the spotlight to new Democratic proposals or fixes.”

Democrats have little to gain by telling the truth??

Democrats have little to gain by providing health care to every man woman and child in America??

The Democrats have little to gain by doing what its grass-roots activists want??

Is this the nuttiest idea, ever?

Democrats’ polling data shows that health care is a top-of-mind issue for many voters. The data was accompanied by a three-page memo on messaging, two pages of which were dedicated to likely GOP attacks on a single-payer system.

Notably, none of those arguments were refuted in the message document.

The Democrats are so clueless, they don’t know how to justify giving everyone a longer, healthier life.

If you can’t even sell long life and health, what the heck good are you? Why are you in Congress?

Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi is trying to squash her own party’s desire to fight for a health care system in which the government is the single payer for necessary medical expenses and the health insurance industry is all but eliminated as a middle man.

Pelosi said she’s supported the idea for decades but that the American public isn’t there yet.

Well, Nancy, if the Democrats aren’t “there yet,” and you aren’t “there yet,” is it any wonder your constituents aren’t “there yet”?

Or do you expect the people to do the leading, while you trail miserably behind?

And now, here comes the really, really stupid part:

“I say to people, ‘If you want it, do it in your states. States are laboratories,’” she said. “States are a good place to start.”

What a cowardly comment. “Let the states do it. We are too frightened to take a chance. We are afraid to lose elections — which is we have been doing consistently for the past 8 years!”

Image result for lady hiding under desk
Our political leaders

Is this why you are in the House, Nancy — to hide under your desk and hope the states will do something for your constituents??

No, Nancy, states are not a good place to start. States are monetarily NON-sovereign.

Like you and me, they do not have the unlimited ability to create dollars.

Making the states “laboratories” practically guarantees the failure of any Medicare for All plan, because of the states’ need for taxes.

By contrast, the Federal Government is Monetarily Sovereign. It never can run short of its sovereign currency, the U.S. dollar.

The Federal Government creates dollars, ad hoc, every time it pays a bill. That is something I can’t do, you can’t do, the states, counties and villages can’t do — but it is exactly what the federal government does every day.

It is how the federal government was created to operate.

The federal government creates dollars by deficit spending.

Michigan Rep. John Conyers now has 112 members of the caucus signed up for his “Medicare for All” bill — nearly 60 percent of the rank and file.

The problem is that Sanders’s bill and Conyers’s bill talk about “affordability,”  and “cost cutting,” and “taxes”, none of which are appropriate to a federally funded program.

The federal government can afford to fund a comprehensive, no-deductible, Medicare for All program, plus long-term care for everyone, without using a single tax dollar.

Moreover, the dollars the federal government would create to fund these programs would stimulate economic growth, create millions of jobs, and dramatically improve the health and lifespans of Americans

When I asked a Pelosi aide about her position, I was sent a Vox piece on the cost of California’s single-payer health care plan — $400 billion per year, or twice the state’s budget.

Right. The so-called state “laboratories” would have to spend billions of taxpayers’ dollars.

In a vacuum, most Americans think the government should provide health care for all — either through a single-payer or hybrid system — but the question isn’t usually asked with a price tag attached.

Conyers’ plan would require massive tax increases not only on the 1 percent but on the top 5 percent of earners.

No, no, no, dammit, no.

Federal funding of Medicare for All would not require a single tax dollar.  Zero. Zilch. Nada.

The Monetarily Sovereign federal government uniquely does not spend tax dollars. It creates new dollars, ad hoc, by spending.

Even if all federal tax collections were $0, the federal government could continue spending — and creating dollars — forever.

Pelosi outlined her alternative at the California Democratic Party’s convention earlier this month.

“We must defeat the repeal of the Affordable Care Act,” she said. “But that is not our only fight. We must go further. The Affordable Care Act enables every state to create a public option.

“I believe California can lead the way for America by creating a strong public option.”

What unmitigated bullshit.

Monetarily NON-sovereign California and its taxpayers are supposed to “lead the way,” while the cowardly, lying national Democratic party pretends to lead — from behind?

Let’s just get this straight. The states, counties, and cities cannot afford Medicare for All without increasing taxes, and with price inflation on medical services, the problem only will worsen.

The federal government can afford Medicare for All, with zero additional taxes. All medical price inflation will do is cause the government to pump more stimulus dollars into the economy.

In that sense, medical price inflation will help grow America.

Pelosi’s a tough customer who has shown a willingness to stand up to her base at times, but it’s getting harder for leaders in Washington to tell activists that they’re wrong and survive the backlash.

This will be a big test of Democrats’ faith in her leadership and of Pelosi’s ability to navigate the increasingly treacherous shoals of modern politics.

Yeah, some “tough customer” she is — hoping California, not her, will lead.

No, this election will be a big test of Democrats’ courage and willingness to tell voters the truth.  So far, they have shown neither.

The voters have been lied to continually since August, 1972 (when the federal government became Monetarily Sovereign).

So, perhaps the public can be excused for not understanding the financial differences between the monetarily NON-sovereign states and the  Monetarily Sovereign federal government.

But the Democratic politicians have no such excuse. Professor Stephanie Kelton (UMKC), who understands Monetary Sovereignty quite well, and has been an adviser to Sanders and the Democrats, has been ignored by the weak-willed ninnies now leading the party.

I feel for her. I don’t see how she can stand dealing with those useless people.

Democrats. Either do your jobs or get the heck out of Congress.

Really, I’m so damn angry I could spit.

Are you angry, too?

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.
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 (Economic Bonus)) 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.
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.
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.
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.


4 thoughts on “This article got me so damn angry I could spit. Why Democrats lose elections.

  1. Classic GOP BS about Medicaid being “unsustainable” (the right-wing’s favorite word). See: HERE.

    Anytime you hear or read about a federal expense being “unsustainable” know this: The author either is ignorant of economics or is a liar.

    An expense can be “unsustainable” for cities, counties, states, businesses, you, or me — but no expense is “unsustainable” for the federal government.

    “Unsustainable” is a con job by the rich to widen the Gap between them and you.


  2. This is why I can’t support the Conyers plan, even though I support Medicare-for-all. I came up with my own proposal for “Sammycare.” As I say at the end of my article: “Since it uses Uncle SAM’s Sovereign MoneY to provide Health CARE that does not have to be taxed into existence or borrowed, let’s call it SAMMYCARE.”
    I also provide some indirect proof that a dollar spent on health coverage provides at least that much in economic stimulus, though this was only a study at the state level. Even if you can convince the public that the Federal Gov’t can’t run out of money, which, as we both know, is a herculean task, they probably won’t be convinced that it’s a good idea unless you can show them that new money won’t be for digging holes-in-the-ground…though that’s exactly what Keynes famously proposed to get us out of the Great Depression.


  3. Scott, don’t get into the wrong debate.

    Whether or not “a dollar spent on health coverage provides at least that much in economic stimulus” is not the point.

    What if someone were to “prove” that a dollar spent on health coverage provides less than that much in economic stimulus? Does that “prove” the government should not spend on health care?

    The facts are straightforward:
    1. Health care is vital for America
    2. We already know how to do Medicare
    3. The federal government can afford to provide Medicare for All at no cost to anyone.

    Yes, ALL federal spending is stimulative, but the issue is health care. I don’t want to muddy the waters by debating whether the federal government should pay for everything.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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