It takes only two things to keep people in chains:
The ignorance of the oppressed
And the treachery of their leaders
.
All over the country — actually, all over the world — politicians, media commentators, and economists disseminate completely false economic ideas to an innocent public.
Then, having received these false ideas, the public facilitates the dissemination process by telling friends, relatives, students, and strangers.
It happens every day. Do you remember when you thought stomach ulcers primarily were caused by emotional stress? Do you remember when you thought margarine was more healthful than butter? Do you remember when you tried the latest fad diet?
Why did you believe? Because you heard it or read it, so you repeated it.
Each day I am reminded of this phenomenon and today, once again, I was reminded, this time by Terry Savage’s article in the Chicago Tribune.
Terry Savage’s own website says:
“Terry Savage is a nationally recognized expert on personal finance, the economy and the markets. She writes a weekly personal finance column syndicated in major newspapers by Tribune Content Agency.
“She is the author of four best-selling books on personal finance. The Savage Truth on Money was named one of the top ten money books of the year by Amazon.com in its first edition. Her other recent book is: The Savage Number: How Much Money do You Really Need to Retire?
“Terry appears frequently on national television and radio programs, commenting on the financial markets and current economic events. She is featured on WGN Radio and WGN-TV in Chicago, with a weekly personal finance segment. And in days past you saw her often as a money expert on Oprah!”
Yes, Terry is an “expert,” one of a multitude of “experts,” who repeatedly feed you false information, and who when challenged, defend their false positions with false claims and fake statistics.
Today, being in the mood to butt my head against a wall, I wrote to Terry, the following letter concerning her today’s column:
Hi Terry,
It’s been a long time since we last corresponded, and I see you still have not learned the differences between a Monetarily Sovereign government and a monetarily non-sovereign entity.
Here are some excerpts from your Social Security article, with a few comments:
“We can’t repay our debt. Everyone knows it, and no one is willing to say it. But the United States is awash in debt that can’t possibly be repaid.”
If you’re talking about the federal debt, this is 100% false. The so-called federal debt is the total of deposits in T-security accounts. The government could pay off the entire “debt” if it chose to, simply by returning the dollars that exist in those accounts, back to the account holders.
“Perhaps a spurt of economic growth could put a dent in our massive debt, but at this stage, we are piling on new debt at rates far higher than reasonable expectations of growth.”
Reducing the “debt” (i.e. running a federal surplus) would cause a depression, or at best, a recession.
U.S. depressions tend to come on the heels of federal surpluses.
1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807.
1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.
1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.
1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.
1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.
1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.
1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.
1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. Recession began 2001.
“And the burden has grown, despite record low interest rates. As rates start rising, or as tax revenues fall during the next recession, the problem will overwhelm us and we will be forced to face the truth. We have made promises we cannot keep.”
This would be true of state and local governments, which are monetarily non-sovereign, but it is not true of a Monetarily Sovereign government, which cannot run short of dollars. It can keep any promise denominated in dollars.
“And we can’t just print money to pay the bills, as that will only result in devaluing our currency. Who would want dollars as they flood the market?”
In 1940, the federal “debt” was $40 Billion. Today the “debt” is $15 Trillion – a 37,500% increase. The government has “printed” all those trillions of dollars, yet everyone still wants them, and inflation has been low, averaging close to the Fed’s target rate of 2.5%.
Federal debt = blue line. Inflation = red line. Massive debt growth has yielded low inflation.
“The government would have to pay higher interest rates as a bribe to get the world to lend to us to finance our deficits.”
The federal government, unlike state and local governments, does not borrow. Having the unlimited ability to create dollars, why would it need to borrow? The purpose of T-securities is not to obtain spending funds but rather to:
1. Provide a safe, interest-paying “parking place” for dollars, to help stabilize the dollar, and to
2. Help control interest rates.
“And those higher rates would only add to our debt burden. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that a one percentage point increase in interest rates adds $1.6 trillion to our 10-year budget deficit. Higher rates just dig a deeper hole.”
The interest on T-securities is not a burden – not on the government and not on taxpayers. The federal government pays interest by creating dollars, ad hoc. It never can run short of dollars to pay its bills.
“According to the ticking debt clock at http://www.TruthinAccounting.org., the U.S. national debt now stands at slightly more than $21 trillion. And we are in the process of adding another half a trillion dollars to it through the budget deficit predicted for 2018.”
Every year, since 1940, the federal debt has been called a “ticking time bomb” (see: From ticking time bomb to looming collapse), and still no explosion. That’s 78 years of false claims, but the debt Henny Pennys still have learned nothing.
“But the real issue is all the promises we’ve made to pay future benefits like Social Security and military retirement benefits. According to TruthinAccounting,org, adding those promises over the coming 30 years bring the total U.S debt to more than $104 trillion. The mind boggles at the thought.”
Unboggle your mind, Terry. That fearsome $104 Trillion is 7 times the current level. But, thirty years ago, the “debt” was $2 Trillion. Now it is 7.5 times that level, and the economy looks pretty good. What does that tell you?
“That brings us to the Social Security trustees report that was recently released. It hardly made a splash in the headlines. The trustees report says the Social Security trust fund will be exhausted in 2034. It will happen at the height of the baby boomer longevity spurt.”
Total nonsense. There is no “trust fund.” (See: Fake federal trust funds). As even the Peter G. Peterson Foundation admits:
“Although many believe that the existence of trust funds guarantees the sustainability of programs in the future, trust funds are simply accounting mechanisms that are part of the way the federal government keeps its books.
“The actual cash inflows and outflows of the programs are combined with all other federal programs and therefore contribute to federal surpluses and deficits.
“If a program is in surplus, the federal government’s overall deficit balance improves because it uses the additional receipts from the program to fund costs of other programs.
“In effect, the government is conducting transactions with itself but keeping track of inflows and outflows of funds through trust funds.
“Ultimately, trust fund income and outlays are not separate from the rest of the federal budget, and the sustainability of trust fund programs, like Social Security, depends on the overall sustainability of the federal government.”
Terry, everything you wrote about the federal government finances is true of state and local government finances. And it is true of business finances. And it is true of your finances and my finances. We all are monetarily non-sovereign.
But it is not true of the Monetarily Sovereign federal government’s finances.
If you wish to learn the difference, I’ll be glad to teach you.
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:
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.
“Deutschland Uber Alles”“Make America Great, Again”
.
.
.
Here is the final solution to the immigration problem: Torture the children.
Separate the terrified, innocent children from their mothers, load them into boxcars, and ship them off to concentration camps.
Mommy!
Don’t allow them to know where their parents are, keep them in windowless buildings, preferably in cages, or house them in tents in hot, dusty, southern Texas. And above all, don’t let them play.
To be a child is to play and to know joy, to create happy memories. But not these children. No, you must increase the misery in their already miserable lives.
Isn’t that what America stands for?
Oh, what is it you say? America already is doing that?
And it’s not a new idea? Other nations have shown this cruelty?
It all has had been done before?
Atty. General Jeff Sessionsblamed the parents for bringing their children in the first place, seemingly ignoring that many of them are fleeing violence in their home countries.
It’s not my fault. It’s the fault of their parents. I’m protecting children.
“They are the ones who endangered their own children on their trek,” Sessions said. “The United States, on the other hand, goes to extraordinary lengths to protect them while the parents go through a short detention period.”
Rev. Jennifer Butler, the CEO of Faith in Public Life, told the Daily News. “Ripping children from their mothers is not doing good to these families, or to any of us. It is cruel, wrong and sinful.”
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, one of the country’s most influential Christian organizations, also blasted the Trump administration policy.
“Our government has the discretion in our laws to ensure that young children are not separated from their parents and exposed to irreparable harm and trauma,” the group said in a statement. “Families are the foundational element of our society and they must be able to stay together.”
“(Sessions) should study the Apostle Paul more closely. In Galatians 6, Paul instructs Christians: ‘So then, as we have the opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith,’”
“It’s very biblical to enforce the law.”
The White House, on the other hand, sided with Sessions’ biblical interpretation.
“I can say that it’s very biblical to enforce the law,” press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said after she was asked about Sessions’ Thursday comments. “It’s repeated many times throughout the Bible.”
Sessions blamed the parents. Sanders blamed the bible. Trump blamed the Democrats. Hitler blamed the Jews.
They all knew evil, but still they defended the indefensible.
Note to Donald Trump’s religious followers: Trump is not your man.
He has no moral base; he has no ethics. There is no truth in the man. He has committed almost every sin, and does not even attempt to make amends.
He bends the law to enrich himself and to oppress the poor. He repeatedly commits adultery. He steals. He bears false witness. He covets his neighbors’ wife and belongings.
He is unrepentant.
Trump does not “make America great.” He is turning America into the world’s most despised nation.
Once, other nations looked to America for moral leadership. Now, they see what we do to immigrants — what we do to children — and they turn away from us in revulsion.
This is what Trump has brought. This is what you encourage by not speaking out against him. Your silence emboldens him. Your support inspires him.
He has sold his soul to the devil, and as he sinks ever lower, he pulls you down with him.
To torture children for political purposes — Children! What sin could be more terrible?
No church attendance, no amount of pious prayer, no amount of coins in the tray, no flag waving, can exonerate you in your God’s eyes. God will not “shed his grace on thee.“
What will you tell your children when they ask you what you did, and whom you supported?Will you excuse the sinner? Will you explain the torture of children because they were foreigners, whose crime was to seek refuge?
Will you pass the bigotry and hatred down to yet another generation?
To support the sinner is to be the sinner. You aided and abetted. His sins are yours.
Your God will not forget; you will not be forgiven.
The term “trade war” is used to describe a situation in which one country applies tariffs to imports from another nation, and the other nation retaliates with tariffs of its own.
But, a “trade war” is vastly different from a military war. In a military war, the enemy shoots at you, and you shoot at the enemy.
In a trade war, the enemy shoots at you and at itself, while you shoot at the enemy and at yourself.
A trade war is a suicide pact.
With every nation shooting at other nations and at its own people, how do you “win” a trade war? You don’t. All trade wars are lost.
The hypothetical purpose of a tariff is to protect local businesses from foreign competition. But a tariff hurts the entire economy.
One example: Taxing imported TV sets would raise the price of all TV sets, because domestic TV manufacturers would feel less pressure to hold prices down.
The two results — both adverse — would be:
The entire American public pays more money so that the relatively fewer American TV makers s can receive more money. The philosophy of tariffs is for many to pay more so the few can receive more.
Tax dollars are taken from the economy and sent to the federal government, which being Monetarily Sovereign, and not needing to receive dollars, destroys them. Reducing the money supply is economically recessive.
The arguments for any tariff generally fall into two kinds of goals:
To protect vital industries from extinction. Consider, for instance, computer processors. They constitute a vital defense product, and if there ever were a military war, the nation having a monopoly on computer processor manufacturing would have a distinct advantage.
To protect domestic jobs. Every industry that is depleted by foreign competition loses jobs.
Both types of protection — protecting vital industries and protection jobs –are reasonable goals, but neither needs to be costly to the economy. It is not necessary, or even wise, to “shoot” our own people, in order to protect them from enemy “bullets.”
Both goals of protectionism can be accomplished by our Monetarily Sovereign government via:
federal government purchases from domestic suppliers, even at higher than import prices.
federal tax breaks for selected industries
direct federal cash infusions to the selected companies.
A Monetarily Sovereign government has the unlimited ability to create its own sovereign currency.
It easily can fund any sort of protectionism without tariffs, which has the added value of stimulating the economy instead of depressing the economy, as tariffs do.
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Friday escalated a trade war between the world’s two largest economies, moving ahead with tariffs on $50 billion of Chinese goods and provoking an immediate tit-for-tat response from Beijing.
The president is battling on a global front, taking aim at allies and adversaries alike.
The United States has levied global tariffs on metal imports that include those from Europe, Canada, and Mexico, while threatening to tear up the North American Free Trade Agreement.
These countries are fighting back, drawing up retaliatory measures that go after products in Mr. Trump’s political base.
China’s response was swift on Friday, focusing on $50 billion worth of American goods including beef, poultry, tobacco and cars.
The trade actions could ripple through the global economy, fracturing supply chains and costing jobs at American companies that will be forced to absorb higher prices.
The tariffs are expected to drive up prices for American consumersas well as for businesses that depend on China for parts.
China is likely to back away from an agreement to buy $70 billion worth of American agricultural and energy products — a deal that was conditional on the United States lifting its threat of tariffs.
To say this is foolish would be an understatement. It is the work of a megalomaniac, who cares nothing about trade realities, but who wishes only to project to his base an image of “toughness.”
His base, being equally ignorant about trade realities, and who is more attracted to faux toughness than to facts, goes along with their self-punishment.
The penalties make good on a campaign promise by Mr. Trump to crack down on Chinese trade practices that he says have cost American jobs.
Weakening the American economy and costing Americans money surely is the worst way to protect American jobs.
Mr. Trump added, “These tariffs are essential to preventing further unfair transfers of American technology and intellectual property to China, which will protect American jobs.”
But the White House has lately vacillated between taking a tough stance on Chinese trade practices and declaring that the trade war was “on hold.”
In recent weeks, the administration had tried to defuse tensions with China ahead of a summit meeting with the North Korean leader. Mr. Trump extended a lifeline to the Chinese telecommunications company, ZTE, at the request of President Xi Jinping.
This constant vacillation signifies government by childlike impulse and ego.
If Trump sees something on Fox and Friends, immediately a policy emerges, until he sees something else, at which time a whole new policy rears its ugly head.
China said it would hit back with additional tariffs of 25 percent on about $50 billion of American-made products, the country’s Commerce Ministry said in a release.
The ministry said in a separate statement Friday that all other recent trade terms negotiated by the United States and China would also be declared invalid.
Years of trade negotiations will be lost to the petulant, emotional decisions by a man having scant knowledge about the subject of his decisions.
The Tax Foundation, a conservative nonprofit organization, found that tariffs on China and steel and aluminum could lower American employment by more than 45,000 full-time jobs in the long run.
“Imposing tariffs places the cost of China’s unfair trade practices squarely on the shoulders of American consumers, manufacturers, farmers and ranchers,” said Thomas J. Donohue, the president of the United States Chamber of Commerce. “This is not the right approach.”
The National Retail Federation, which represents grocers, chain restaurants and other stores, said the tariffs would not combat China’s abusive trade practices, but only “strain the budgets of working families by raising consumer prices.”
“Lower American employment,” “places the cost . . . on American consumers,” “strain the budgets of working families” — these are the results when ego meets ignorance.
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:
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.
Trump re. the murderous dictator, Kim: “He really wants to do a great job for North Korea. Excellent relationship.”
THE U.S. GOVERNMENT IS not considering any changes to ongoing military exercises it conducts on and around the Korean Peninsula with its allies.
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley dismissed as “insulting” the proposal that Beijing has touted for months and repeated at an emergency Security Council meeting Monday, held in response to another nuclear test that North Korea claims involved an advanced hydrogen bomb.
“When a rogue regime has a nuclear weapon and an [intercontinental ballistic missile] pointed at you, you do not take steps to lower your guard,” Haley said at the meeting. “No one would do that. We certainly won’t.”
A State Department spokesman confirmed Tuesday there is no intent to cancel or otherwise change military exercises.
Other officials have defended the exercises despite North Korean claims that they are provocative and dangerous.
“These are regularly scheduled. It’s an annual exercise that we do all the time,” State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said in late August. “It comes with many months of planning. But to suggest that our activity with our ally of the Republic of Korea is in any way equivalent to the DPRK’s actions is simply false.”
The Israeli foreign ministry report also says that the Trump administration backtracked on many of the demands it had said it would makein the run-up to the meeting with Kim.
“Regardless of the smiles in the summit many in Japan, South Korea and the U.S. Congress doubt that North Korea is sincere in its intentions.”
The report also noted that Trump’s decision to halt joint military exercises between the U.S. and South Korea while denuclearization, a proposal known as “freeze to freeze,” was a significant reversal of Washington’s previous position.
China had proposed this option last year and was completely rebuffed by the Trump administration.
Trump re. the murderous dictator, Duterte: “We’ve a great relationship. He is doing a great job.”
The assessment appears to be in line with that of many North Korea experts, who say that the agreement between the Trump administration and the regime of Kim Jong Un contained very few concrete plans of action. Experts also noted that the two regimes likely have very different ideas about what denuclearization means.
“Chairman Kim has told me that North Korea is already destroying a major missile engine testing site,” Trump said in the wake of the summit in Singapore on June 12, without detailing which site Kim had pledged to dismantle.
But an analysis by monitoring group 38 North revealed that there is still no evidence that North Korea is destroying anything.
“38 North has conducted a survey of the North Korea’s rocket and missile launch and engine test facilities using recent high-resolution satellite imagery and has not yet identified any activity associated with the dismantlement of facilities at Sohae or any other test sites in North Korea,” the report said.
Here is what history has taught everyone except Trump:
“We get along very well, we have a good chemistry,” Trump told Steve Doocy of “Fox & Friends.” “I agreed to meet. Of course, I agreed. You’ve got to agree to meet. If you don’t agree to meet, you’re gonna have nuclear war,” Trump said.
Trump re. the murderous dictator, Putin: “I have a relationship with Putin . . . he’s done a great job.”
“He wants to make his country great. He’s the head of a country. He’s a strong head,” Trump said. “He speaks and his people sit up and pay attention. I want my people to do the same.”
In summary:
The U.S. canceled the tests once before, in order to encourage North Korea to negotiate, and after the negotiations, North Korea developed atomic weapons and ballistic missiles.
Trump does have a plan: It is to have a “great relationship” with the murderous dictators of the world, whom he greatly admires.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/2696371-56a48d4b3df78cf77282efcd.jpg)
/https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F790571%2Ff8e3e7e0-eeaf-4b0e-bfd6-d6951c8a97ed.jpg)
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 