Grok’s explanation about why and how the rich keep promulgating the BULLSHIT

I’m becoming more impressed and also more depressed about Grok.

Impressed because it fleshes out its explanations with data from various sources into one cohesive and logical commentary.

Depressed for exactly the same reason. It shows a frightening ability to mimic and improve on human thinking processes.  I am becoming increasingly obsolete, and not just because I’m ninety years old.

I asked Grok to explain why and how the wealthy support the false narrative that federal deficit spending is a ticking economic time bomb. Here is Grok’s explanation:

How the Rich Shape the Debt Narrative

Mitchell’s post calls out 85 years of “BULLSHIT” about federal debt, hinting in his comments that the rich benefit from austerity to widen the income/wealth/power gap. Your additions—campaign contributions, media control, and university/think tank influence—explain the how. Here’s a breakdown of these mechanisms, grounded in MS principles and the post’s evidence:

1. Control Over Politicians via Campaign Contributions and Job Promises
   • Mechanism: The wealthy funnel money into political campaigns through donations, PACs, and lobbying, ensuring politicians push debt-fear narratives that justify austerity. Promises of cushy post-office jobs (e.g., corporate boards, consulting gigs) further align politicians with elite interests. This leads to policies that cut public spending (e.g., Social Security, Medicare) while preserving tax breaks for the rich.
   • Connection to Debt Myth: Mitchell’s timeline cites politicians like Mitch McConnell (1985), Kevin McCarthy (2023), and Nancy Mace (2025) parroting “ticking time bomb” rhetoric. These figures often rely on donor support from wealthy individuals or corporations who oppose deficit-funded programs that level the playing field (e.g., universal healthcare). Austerity keeps resources concentrated among the elite, as Mitchell notes in his blog comments about the rich having “their own Medicare” via money.
   • Evidence: Campaign finance data (e.g., OpenSecrets) shows top donors like financial firms and billionaires heavily fund candidates who advocate fiscal restraint. For example, the 2013 Chamber of Commerce warning about safety nets “bankrupting” the nation aligns with corporate interests pushing tax cuts over public investment. Job promises are harder to quantify but visible in revolving-door cases (e.g., former Treasury officials joining Wall Street).
2. Control Over Media via Advertising Dollars and Ownership
   • Mechanism: The rich, through corporate ownership of media outlets and advertising budgets, shape narratives to amplify debt panic. Major news organizations (e.g., owned by conglomerates like Comcast or billionaires like Jeff Bezos) prioritize stories that frame deficits as dangerous, as seen in Mitchell’s list from the 1940 New York Times to 2025’s World Socialist Website. Advertising from financial institutions reinforces this, as they benefit from austerity (e.g., less regulation, lower corporate taxes).
   • Connection to Debt Myth: Articles like Emily Chen’s (May 2025) or USA Today’s 2007 “explosion waiting to happen” piece use sensational “time bomb” language to scare the public, aligning with elite interests in limiting public spending. This drowns out MS truths (e.g., deficits fuel growth, T-securities aren’t borrowing) because they’re less clickable than doom headlines. Mitchell’s frustration with media “BULLSHIT” reflects this bias—fear sells, and the rich bankroll it.
   • Evidence: Media consolidation (e.g., six corporations controlling 90% of U.S. media) and ad revenue from banks/investment firms create incentives to push debt fear. The 2019 Fortune piece by Shawn Tully or 2020 Yahoo Finance article by Stephen Koukoulas show how media outlets, even “reputable” ones, recycle the same myths without challenging sovereignty.
3. Control Over Economists via University Endowments and Think Tanks
   • Mechanism: Wealthy donors fund university economics departments and think tanks, steering academic and policy research toward debt-skeptical narratives. Endowments (e.g., from billionaires like the Koch brothers) influence curricula, prioritizing classical/neoclassical models over MS/MMT. Think tanks like the Heritage Foundation (cited in 2010, 2023, 2024) or Cato Institute, funded by wealthy donors, churn out reports calling debt “unsustainable,” as seen in E.J. Antoni’s 2024 piece. Lucrative think tank jobs reward economists who toe the line.
   • Connection to Debt Myth: These institutions produce “experts” like Paul Tudor Jones (2024) or the University of Colorado professor (2024) who push debt panic, ignoring MS principles like those from Greenspan or Bernanke (quoted by Mitchell) that the U.S. can’t run out of dollars. This drowns out voices like Stephanie Kelton’s, who are sidelined as “fringe” despite data showing deficits correlate with GDP growth, not crises.
   • Evidence: Think tank funding (e.g., Heritage’s $80M+ annual budget, partly from wealthy donors) and university endowments (e.g., Harvard’s $50B, influenced by corporate donors) shape economic discourse. Mitchell’s timeline shows their output—like the 2010 Heritage report or 2019 TIL Journal—repeating “time bomb” claims despite 85 years of failed predictions.

Why This Keeps the Myth Alive

These mechanisms—political funding, media control, and academic influence—create a self-reinforcing cycle where the rich amplify debt fears to protect their wealth. As Mitchell notes, austerity widens the gap by denying the non-rich benefits (e.g., Medicare for All) that deficits could fund. The public, bombarded with “ticking bomb” headlines and politician soundbites, buys the household analogy (“debt burdens our kids”) because it’s intuitive, even though it’s wrong for a sovereign issuer. This drowns out MS truths: Deficits are an economy’s surplus, T-securities are deposits, and taxes control demand, not fund spending.

Tying It to Mitchell’s Post

Mitchell’s 85-year catalog of “BULLSHIT” shows how these influences manifest. Politicians (McConnell, Mace) rely on donor cash to push austerity. Media outlets (NYT, Fortune) parrot debt fears for clicks and ad dollars. Economists (Antoni, Tudor Jones) from funded institutions churn out “unsustainable” warnings, ignoring FRED data showing deficits driving GDP and recessions following surplus attempts. The rich’s control ensures this narrative persists, as it protects their tax breaks and private wealth while blocking public goods.

Wrapping It Up

The rich perpetuate the debt myth via campaign contributions (buying politicians like McCarthy), media control (funding sensationalism in NYT, Fortune), and academic influence (endowments and think tanks like Heritage). This keeps the public scared of deficits, justifying austerity that widens inequality while ignoring MS truths: The U.S. can’t go bankrupt, deficits fuel growth, and the “debt bomb” is 85 years of hot air. This is how the rich rig the game, and Mitchell’s post exposes their narrative for what it is: pure “BULLSHIT.”

All I can say is “Wow.”

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell

Search #monetarysovereignty

Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;

MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell;

https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY