If only they were Monetarily Sovereign. They could have done so much more.

Informative article: How the European countries are doing a much better job than the GOP-dominated U.S.Unemployment benefits: Another 6.6 million Americans filed for ...

How Europe is bailing out its workers
The Week Staff May 9, 2020

European countries are paying workers who’ve been sent home by employers. Can they afford it? Here’s everything you need to know:

What is their plan?
Unlike the U.S., where some 30 million people have filed for unemployment and millions of gig workers are going without income, most European workers are still getting paid through their employers.

But instead of requiring workers to apply for unemployment and sending them a $1,200 bailout check, many European Union countries chose to begin paying part of their workers’ salaries, so companies would not have to fire them.

Germany, for example, is paying workers about 60 percent of their wages up to a cap of $7,575 a month, and France, Spain, Denmark, and the Netherlands have similar plans, although with lower caps.

The U.K. is paying up to 80 percent of wages, capped at $3,100 a month. Employers generally have to cover payroll up front and then get reimbursed by the government. For the self-employed, federal or local governments are providing direct cash assistance.

Despite being monetarily non-sovereign, and so, not having the unlimited ability to create euros, the euro nations are trying to live up to the fundamental purpose of any government: To protect and improve the lives of the people.

By contrast, the Monetarily Sovereign U.S. government, nominally led by Donald Trump, but actually led by Mitch McConnell and Fox News, has penny-pinched it’s way to massive unemployment and poverty. This, despite having the unlimited ability to create its own sovereign currency, the U.S. dollar.

Our right-wing-dominated government has amply demonstrated its disdain for the middle- and lower-income groups by trying to eliminate ACA with no plan to take its place, and by cutting taxes on the rich.

And let us not forget the pro-rich, anti-everyone-else tax cuts and reductions in poverty aids.

Today, the government continues its pro-rich, anti-everyone-else path by failing to support the unemployed and the impoverished, and by fighting against the meager ant-recession proposals of the left-wing.

To the right, federal money is tight when it doesn’t help the rich, but ample when it does.

Getting back to Europe, it is astounding that monetarily non-sovereign Germany has a higher cap on wage support ($3,100) than does Monetarily Sovereign England ($7,575), though with a lower percentage of wages.

Germany needs to get the money from taxpayers; England merely presses computer keys to create the money.

Yes, it is astounding , but not as astounding as the federal government’s intentional underpaying.

Why does the unlimited-ability-to-spend U.S. government intentionally underpay? Answer: To benefit business by creating a massive supply of desperate workers, who are willing to accept any jobs at low wages.

The most astounding aspect of this entire sham is that so many of those desperate lower- and middle-income people vote for the very politicians who made them desperate and lower income in the first place.

To avoid layoffs in times of slow production, Germany innovated a scheme called Kurzarbeit, or short-time work. When firms have fewer orders, they cut back on workers’ hours, and the government pays the salary difference.

When business picks up, companies simply increase workers’ hours. During the 2008 financial crisis, the number of unemployed workers went up just 9 percent in Germany, compared with 56 percent in the U.S.

“We have one of the strongest welfare states in the world,” says German Labor Minister Hubertus Heil, “and we have built up reserves for difficult times during good times.”

Other EU countries have modeled their payments on that system.

In most of the world, “welfare” is a good thing, meaning “benefit” or “well-being.” Governments are created to do things for the welfare of their people.

In America however, “welfare” has come to be a cruel epithet that translates to: “Support for the lazy good-for-nothing poor.” Thus have our hearts hardened.

How many people are covered?
As of mid-April, at least 18 million European workers were working less or not at all — and with each passing week, the numbers are growing. Management consulting firm McKinsey estimates that up to 59 million jobs in the EU and the U.K. are in jeopardy, a staggering 26 percent of total employment.

That compares with some 54 million at risk in the U.S.

In France alone, some 785,000 companies have applied for wage subsidies for about 9.6 million workers — half the private-sector workforce. In Ireland, some 40 percent of all workers are now on government aid.

In hard-hit Spain, which already had unemployment of 13 percent, the rate could soar to 20 percent. Germany, by contrast, predicts a bump from 5.2 percent unemployment to 5.9 percent.

The primary issue is not unemployment. Labor is not the primary goal for most people. The primary goal is income.

Sadly, the very rich, who incidentally, labor less than any other income group, have been able to make employment a necessity.

“Unemployment” is defined as wanting a job but not having one. If someone, for instance a spouse, does not have a job, and is not looking for one, that person is not unemployed.

But if the same spouse is looking for a job, and can’t find one, that same spouse is unemployed.

So what do unemployment figures tell us about the health of the economy? Missing from those figures is federal stimulus actions.

If the federal government were to, say, raise unemployment compensation to 100% of previous income, unemployment figures would have very little economic meaning (depending on whether there remained enough workers to produce what we need).

I foresee a time when machines will do so much that the vast majority of us will not be employed for wages, yet we still will have a healthy economy.

How much will this cost?
It depends on how long the crisis lasts.

In Britain, assuming one million people need assistance for three months, the tab will be about $51 billion, or 2 percent of the nation’s economic output.

In France, the bill will be $21 billion for the next three months, but in Germany, because its benefits are so substantial anyway, the extra cost should be just $11 billion.

Keep in mind that “cost” means something different for such Monetarily Sovereign nations as Britain and the U.S. vs. monetarily non-sovereign nations like France and Germany.

The former can afford anything just by creating money. The latter must tap taxpayers for the needed money.

If the lockdowns continue longer than three months, or if the global economy falls into a depression that drags on for years, the toll for Europe could be in the trillions.

And that is why trillions must be added to the various economies. The U.S. alone, having dilly-dallied for months, has arrived at the place where about $7 trillion to $9 trillion in stimulus dollars will be needed to fend off a depression.

How will they pay for that?
The poorer countries like Italy and Spain — which are also some of the hardest hit by the virus — wanted the EU to issue “coronabonds” that would be dispensed to those nations that needed cash the most.

But fiscally conservative Germany and the Netherlands balked, saying that would make them pay for profligate budgets they don’t control.

Instead, the European Commission plans to borrow $350 billion to provide a package of loans and grants to governments.

To pay the loan back — the EU is not allowed to run a budget deficit — it proposes raising taxes on carbon emissions, plastics, or financial transactions, or some combination of those.

Europe has a massive problem. It needs to add net money to its economies, but is required by its own laws to borrow the money, which must be paid back to lenders.

So there will not be the net money, unless the EU changes its own laws.

How does this compare with the U.S.?
Some economists say that the U.S. system will help the economy rebound faster than in Europe, because it will allow laid-off workers to go where they’re needed in the post–COVID-19 economy, rather than trapping them in industries that might not fully recover for years.

But the U.S. subsidies are far more expensive and complicated, and many workers and small businesses are falling through the cracks.

The U.S., with a population of 328 million to the EU’s 446 million, has already spent more than $2.6 trillion on coronavirus rescue loans and grants.

The U.S. budget deficit is expected to reach at least $3.8 trillion this year. Nobel Prize–winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says the cost of following Europe’s plan and paying workers directly would be “a fraction of what we’re now spending.”

What will help the U.S. economy’s rebound is the fact that the federal government has the unlimited ability to create dollars, without borrowing and without taxing — net dollars to replace the dollars lost to closed businesses.

The advantage is not just that paying workers directly might be “a fraction of what we’re now spending.” The real advantage is that to the U.S., cost doesn’t matter. The more the better.

And no, please don’t get into the phony “inflation” argument. See: “Only 450 words answer the question, ‘Does printing money cause inflation?’”

Contrary to popular myth, inflation is caused by shortages, usually shortages of food and/or energy, never by money “printing.” Scarcity always causes price increases.

In fact, money “printing” can cure inflations, if the money is used to access the scarce items and distribute them to the public.

Italy’s anger at the EU
Italy has the highest death toll from the virus in Europe, at more than 28,000 as of May 1.

But its rescue package of some $87 billion is smaller than that of other EU countries, because, (being monetarily non-sovereign) it simply can’t afford much.

The EU’s insistence on providing loans, rather than direct cash, to hard-hit governments of member states has frustrated Italy and raised fears of renewed years of punishing budget cuts.

As a result, simmering anti-EU sentiment is rising. An April survey found that 42 percent of Italians now favor leaving the bloc, up from 26 percent in November 2018.

Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte warns that the pandemic poses a serious threat to the already strained bonds holding the EU together. “It’s a big challenge to the existence of Europe,” he said.

The Meteorology of Economics, Speech at the University of Missouri, KC by Rodger Malcolm Mitchell, June 5, 2005

[Because of the Euro, no euro nation can control its own money supply. The Euro is the worst economic idea since the recession-era, Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The economies of European nations are doomed by the euro.]

More true today than even in 2005.

Most of Europe really is doomed. Being monetarily non-sovereign forces a nation into financial helplessness during financial crises.

But, the U.S. will be doomed too, if Congress fails to take advantage of its Monetary Sovereignty and deficit spend adequately — a minimum of $7 trillion new dollars, perhaps more.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell
Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

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 Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The false comparison: Lockdown vs. sickness. “Wear the mask; do the task.”

The current argument is about seemingly incompatible arguments: Should we “lockdown” society to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 while destroying the economy, or should we “open up” to reduce economic hardship while encouraging the spread of disease and death?

Images of Empty Cities Shouldn't Define This Pandemic
Eerily empty “COVID” streets are not necessary.

The belief seems to be that we can’t do both, that is, we can’t prevent the spread of COVID-19 and simultaneously reduce economic hardship.

We can’t have our cake and eat it, too.

I claim this belief not only is wrong, but it actually causes both the disease and economic hardship.

Currently, it seems we can’t have our cake, and we can’t eat it, either.

The burden of proof lies with economic lockdown proponents
By Heather MacDonald, the Thomas W. Smith fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and contributing editor at City Journal — 05/07/20

Who has the burden of proof regarding the economic lockdowns: Those who argue for continuing them or those who want to lift them?

In litigation, allocation of the burden of proof often determines the outcome of a case.

If the advocates of continued lockdown had that burden, they would have to answer the following questions, now kept off stage:

—What have the lockdowns accomplished so far and what will they accomplish in the future?
—What are the public health consequences of a global depression?
—Do the benefits of keeping people from working outweigh the costs in lost and stunted lives?
—How will herd immunity be achieved under lockdown conditions?

Sweden has been as successful in controlling the virus as most other nations, though its businesses remain open; its death rate is lower than those of the most hard-hit U.S. states that locked down relatively early.

Laos and Cambodia practiced no social distancing but have had no outbreaks. An analysis published in The Wall Street Journal found no statistically significant connection between the rapidity with which a state in the U.S. shut down its economy and its subsequent death rates.

On Wednesday, Cuomo announced the “shocking” news that 84 percent of all hospital admissions were either people sheltering at home or nursing home residents.

He shouldn’t have been surprised. The risk of coronavirus infection occurs overwhelmingly indoors.

Researchers in China identified only one outdoor outbreak of infection among over a thousand cases studied. Most transmissions occurred at home, rendering the close-down-all-businesses-and-shelter-in-place rule contraindicated.

Reading the above argument might tempt one to believe that lockdowns not only are useless, but actually harmful, not only to the economy, but also harmful to human health — and that lockdowns actually cause COVID-19 to proliferate.

But then there’s this:

Brazil is letting the coronavirus run wild with little intervention, and the results are strikingly bad
Business Insider, Kelly McLaughlin, May 1, 2020 

Brazil is facing an extreme surge in COVID-19 cases after the government left the virus to spread virtually uncontrolled for weeks, all while the country’s president mocked stay-at-home policies and pushed against directives from the World Health Organization.

As of Friday evening, Brazil, which has a population of 209 million, had 91,589 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 6,329 deaths from the virus, according to Johns Hopkins data. That makes the country’s per-capita death rate 3.02 deaths per 100,000 people.

Experts told The Associated Press that the numbers of cases and deaths could be much higher because Brazil does not yet have widespread testing.

And this:

Sweden’s coronavirus results don’t make the case for reopening the American economy
By James Pethokoukis, Editor, AEIdeas; DeWitt Wallace Fellow, April 7, 2020

Skeptics of America’s (mostly) national lockdown say Sweden’s lighter-touch approach is far superior. 

Unlike many other advanced economies, the Swedish government has not imposed a strict quarantine on its population.

As I write this, Sweden has reported 7,693 total cases and 591 deaths. Its fatality rate per capita is higher than in the United States or any other Scandinavian country.

And while Sweden’s total cases per million residents (762) are fewer than Nordic neighbors Norway (1089) and Denmark (875), they are more than Finland (417). Sweden has also conducted fewer tests per million than those other nations.

Switzerland, which is on a tight lockdown and so far has more than three times as many cases per million and nearly twice as many deaths (as Sweden).

(But),  Switzerland’s population density is pretty much the same as neighbor Italy’s, also a high outbreak country, and 10 times as high as Sweden’s.

Moreover, Sweden has one of the highest shares of one-person households in the world (24 percent), far higher than Norway (19 percent), Denmark (17 percent), Finland (15 percent), and Switzerland (14 percent). Perhaps this helps prevent the virus from spreading. 

The economic impact of the Swedish strategy is also unclear. The government certainly thinks it’s going to be pretty bad.

According to the National Institute of Economic Research, its baseline scenario has Swedish real GDP growth declining by 3.4 percent this year, worse than its 2.9 percent forecast for the United States.

I always caution against mindlessly extrapolating what works in Scandinavia to also be successful in the US. 

So both Sweden’s lack of lockdown and America’s (mostly) lockdown fail to prevent death and disease and fail to protect their economies. By any reasonable measure, neither system can be considered a success.

If it’s not either/or with regard to lockdown, what is it?

Consider this article:

Schools Risk Drowning in Red Ink
By Max Eden, Manhattan Institute, May 08, 2020

Schools are funded by a combination of local, state, and federal dollars.

In an effort to decrease financial inequities across school districts of disparate means, state policymakers in the last decade substantially increased the share of school funding that comes from state income and sales taxes.

With unemployment clams at 22 million and rising, retail sales currently illegal, and a major recession on the horizon, school districts are going to take a shellacking.

Schools will have to get creative and aggressive in order to balance their books. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos could look to perhaps the best speech given by her Obama-era predecessor, Arne Duncan.

He warned that the cushion of the stimulus act would soon be running out, and that states and districts were about to face a “funding cliff.”

Duncan urged school leaders to resist the temptation to lay off teachers and eliminate arts programs. Rather, he insisted that they look to reduce administrative costs.

He noted that school districts paid about $8 billion each year in bonuses for teachers with masters’ degrees, despite little evidence that they provide any benefit to students. 

Unfortunately, despite his own advice against “reform by addition,” Duncan’s tenure was defined by his “Race to the Top” initiative, which foisted the Common Core and test-based teacher evaluation on the states.

From 1992 to 2009, teaching staff increased by 32 percent, whereas administrative staff increased by 46 percent.

During the great recession, teachers got the short end of the stick, with 3.7 percent losing their jobs compared to 2.2 percent of administrative staff.

Aside from favoring teachers over administrators, there is plenty of other school spending that is either unproductive or even counter-productive.

[“Restorative justice,” “professional development,” and “pre-k” programs are given as examples.]

Education in America is largely funded by the monetarily non-sovereign state and local governments, which do not have the federal government’s unlimited ability to create dollars and to fund everything.

Unquestionably, lockdowns injure the economy and today’s young generation, educationally, emotionally, and financially.

But do we want our children to sicken and die?

Finally, we have this article, which at first glance may not seem to be related to the “lockdown/no lockdown” argument, but in reality is central to it.

New Bill Would Give Americans $2,000 Per Month Until Coronavirus Pandemic Is Over
HuffPost Igor Bobic, May 8, 2020
A new bill seeks to dramatically increase financial relief for struggling American families amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic by extending the government’s stimulus checks months after the crisis is over.

The Monthly Economic Crisis Support Act, introduced Friday by Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.), would provide a monthly $2,000 check to every person with an income below $120,000 throughout the public health crisis and for three months after it officially ends.

In late March, the Senate passed a $2 trillion package called the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, but the trio of progressive senators believes it’s insufficient.

“The CARES Act gave Americans an important one-time payment, but it’s clear that wasn’t nearly enough to meet the needs of this historic crisis,” Harris said in a statement.

“Bills will continue to come in every single month during the pandemic and so should help from the government.”

The plan stands a poor chance of passage in the Republican-controlled Senate, which has soured on spending.

But with more than 30 million people unemployed over the last seven weeks and no end to the pandemic in sight, Democrats are aiming to up the pressure on congressional leaders as they begin discussions over another fiscal relief package that is expected sometime this month.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Much money, time, and effort is being expended to develop a cure and a human preventative (vaccination) for COVID-19.

Accomplishing either is felt to be many months off, and either or both may prove to be impossible.

And Congress is losing its desire to spend at just the moment when the economy needs more money, and a great deal of it.

Face masks: What health experts say - CNN
Wear the mask; do the task.

Having neither the cure nor human preventative, the “lockdown” vs. “no lockdown” argument continues to rage.

With the President’s sole concern being his re-election, he is betting that the public is more concerned about money than lives, so he repeatedly urges the states to do what he tweets (in all caps), “LIBERATE.”

This argument really revolves around just two questions:

  1. How best to prevent disease and death?
  2. How best to preserve the economy and our way of life?

In a previous post, “The surprisingly simple way to open America in 14 days and avoid a depression,” we show that national mask usage would create a quasi “herd immunity,” in which neither a cure nor a vaccine is the primary goal.

Rather, the primary goal is to prevent the transmission of the disease. 

This goal, when accomplished, ultimately destroys the disease, with minimal negative economic effects.

When people wear masks, virus transmission among them is inhibited. And the masks don’t necessarily need to be of the N-95 type. Even simple cloth masks will do, if everyone wears them.

National mask usage is:

–Affordable (Our Monetarily Sovereign federal government can afford anything),
–Physically possible (easily and quickly produced with easily available materials), and
Psychologically possible (a combination of legal requirements, disease fear, and social non-conformance stigmatizing would have a powerful motivational effect.)

Businesses, where mask usage is possible, should be allowed to open. There would be no reason to destroy them and their employees by forcing them to close.

“Wear the mask; do the task.”

Additionally, for businesses where mask usage is not appropriate, i.e. restaurants, and entertainment activities where masks impede performance (sports, swimming, singing, some musical instruments, plays, and movies, etc.)  the government should be prepared to focus full financial support to the business owners and the employees.

And, of course, there are some people who, for health reasons, cannot wear masks. They should be allowed special privileges, just as the physically impaired have parking privileges.

Rather than illogically dragging its feet about supporting everyone (which the federal government actually could do, but resists), the government should produce, mandate, and distribute the masks, while financially supporting those who cannot use them.

Thus, with universal mask rules, the U.S. government can accomplish everything it wishes — disease prevention and economic growth — even without ever finding a cure or a vaccine, and without closing the vast majority of American enterprises.

And of course, implementing the Ten Steps to Prosperity would assure economic growth and a more equitable distribution of wealth, income and power.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell
Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

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 Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

A photo of dummies setting a deadly example for other dummies

Trump tours a mask factory, setting an example for his followers not to wear masks or to social distance. (“Hey, if Donald Trump doesn’t wear a mask or social distance, why should I?”)

 

Trump had said he would be willing to don a face mask if the factory was “a mask environment,” but in the end he wore only safety goggles during a tour of the facility. Nearly all Honeywell workers and members of the press as well as some White House staff and Secret Service agents wore masks, but not senior White House staff.

See, it’s like this. Trump is not concerned that he may be spreading the virus. He is positive he is not carrying the virus, though there is no test in existence that can provide that information.

Also, the senior White House staff is not concerned about spreading the virus or about setting an example for the nation.

Only you Trump-hating peons spread disease.  Trump, Breitbart, and Fox and Friends do not.

 

 

 

 

The surprisingly simple way to open America in 14 days and avoid a depression

Published May 5, 2020

MY MASK PROTECTS YOU; YOUR MASK PROTECTS ME. WEAR A MASK.

COVID-19 transmits primarily through the air by droplets. Stop the droplets and you stop the transmission. The incubation period is 14 days. If everyone wore a mask, even just a simple cloth mask, the virus would cease to be transmitted in two weeks.

We wouldn’t have to wait for a vaccine or a cure. We all could go back to work.

BACKGROUND:
When we have:

I. A President screaming, in all capital letters: “LIBERATE MICHIGAN,” “LIBERATE MINNESOTA,” “LIBERATE MICHIGAN,” while simultaneously criticizing Georgia for opening too soon . . .

II. And when the same President who formerly declared that the virus was “under control,” and will disappear “like a miracle,” but now claims the death toll could reach 100,000, while scientists estimate up to 174,000 . . .

III. And when experts predict a vaccine might become available by mid-2021, which would be in record time,

IV. And when no one knows whether a vaccine is even possible — ever — because vaccines don’t work against some viruses . . .

V. And when millions of people refuse vaccination for themselves and their children . . .

VI. And when we have the Majority Leader of the Senate dragging his feet about future economic stimuli to prevent a depression . . .

VII. And when many people believe we will charge right through recession into a full-blown depression . . .

. . . Perhaps we need a new plan to stave off disaster — something faster, cheaper, more accepted, and with longer-term anti-viral benefits.

So here is one: While the world’s scientists labor to find ways of killing or disabling the virus, or energizing the human immune system to fight the virus, or preventing the damage the virus does in the body, perhaps the real solution lies in preventing the transmission of the virus.

The real solution is to prevent transmission of the virus.

According to the Harvard Medical School Corona Virus Resource Center, “The time from exposure to symptom onset (known as the incubation period) is thought to be three to 14 days, though symptoms typically appear within four or five days after exposure.

“A person with COVID-19 may be contagious 48 to 72 hours before starting to experience symptoms. Emerging research suggests that people may actually be most likely to spread the virus to others during the 48 hours before they start to experience symptoms.”

Unfortunately, the quarantine method has powerful, economic disadvantages, causing some to declare, “The cure is worse than the disease.”

But there is another way to prevent transmission.mask fashion statement.png

THE VIRUS IS TRANSMITTED BY:

Droplets. When an infected person coughs, sneezes, or talks, droplets with the virus fly into the air from their nose or mouth.

Anyone who is within 6 feet of that person can breathe those droplets into their lungs.

Airborne transmission. Research shows that the virus can live in the air for up to 3 hours. When you breathe air that has the virus floating in it, it gets into your lungs.

Surface transmission. Another way to catch the new coronavirus is when you touch surfaces that someone who has the virus has coughed or sneezed on. You may touch a countertop or doorknob that’s contaminated and then touch your nose, mouth, or eyes.

The virus can live on surfaces like plastic and stainless steel for 2 to 3 days. To stop it, clean and disinfect all counters, knobs, and other surfaces you and your family touch several times a day.

View image on Twitter
The next fashion: Designer masks.

The least expensive, easiest to use, most immediately effective way to prevent virus transmission is face masks. Better than social distancing. Faster than waiting for a cure or a vaccination.

The incubation period for COVID-19 is up to 14 days.

COVID-19 would end in 2 weeks if everyone wore a face mask .

.

.

COVID-19 would end in 2 weeks if everyone wore a face mask.

Face masks, even those that are not the gold standard N-95s, can prevent the virus from circulating through the air.

Face masks also would help prevent the virus from landing on surfaces. The virus does not live long on human skin, so an infected person merely touching a surface would have only a transient effect. It’s the coughing, sneezing, and breathing that transmits the virus to surfaces upon which it can live a long time.

The N-95s protect the wearer and those nearby. The “lesser” masks offer less protection for the wearer, but still are effective in protecting those nearby.

If everyone would wear a mask whenever outside their own home, the transmission line of the virus would largely be cut, and even being in large crowds would be much safer.

In a sense, face masks have a similar effect as “herd immunity” whereby not everyone is protected, but enough people are protected so that the virus loses its ability to find victims.

Universal mask usage would cause a quasi “herd immunity” effect.

THE SOLUTION:
People should:

  1. Be required by law to wear masks in public, and
  2. Be able to acquire masks, easily and inexpensively.

The federal government should fund the mighty manufacturing capability of the United States to:

–Produce trillions of masks that meet medically approved standards (Even cheap, cloth mask would help prevent the broadcast of droplets.)
–Distribute the masks free or at negligible cost, and pay every food, drug, clothing and other retail stores, and online retailers for inclusion in all shipments, plus airlines, busses and other transportation methods.
–Create kiosks in busy areas for free distribution

Masks and Gloves

Based on what we know now, this all could be done faster and perhaps even more effectively than the creation and distribution and use of a vaccine, that might or might not be effective for any given length of time, or adopted by enough people.

Wearing a mask could become the life-giving, fashion statement of 2020.

Wearing a mask would be patriotic (for the right wingers),  and it would help the poor (for the left wingers), and it would have a minimal cost (for the debt hawks) and be far less inconvenient and intrusive (for the libertarians and the ultra-religious).

You even could attend a movie wearing a mask (for those suffering from island fever).

When enough people do it, social pressures will compel the rest. Not wearing a mask would be akin to defecating on the sidewalk — bad manners in the worst possible way.

Wear a mask. Wear a mask. Wear a mask. If you do, we can open the country.

COVID-19 would end in 2 weeks if everyone wore a face mask.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell
Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Cough Germs
Your mask protects them from your droplets and also protects you from their droplets. When each person wears a mask, protection doubles.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is mask-up.png

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

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

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 Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY