Author: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

MBA Northwestern, business turnaround expert, economist

The Presidential Election Campaign fund con job

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Every year, you fill out a form that looks something like this:

The form changes annually, but for more that 40 years, there has been a line that has remained essentially the same.  It’s titled “Presidential Election Campaign.”

It gives you the option of directing $3 out of your taxes to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. Like all federal “funds,” it is completely mythical. There is no “fund.”

Here is what the federal government says about this “fund:”

The 3$ Tax Checkoff

When you check “yes,” three of your tax dollars are placed in the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. During each of the last five years, approximately 33 million taxpayers have checked the “yes” box.

That comes to a total of $500 million taken out of your tax dollars and deposited into this fake “fund.” How do I know it’s a fake fund?

Here is what the government says, in small type at the bottom of the page:

The Fund is not a separate account but is actually part of the U.S. Treasury.

Get it? The fund is not a “separate account.” In short, it’s not a “fund” at all.

Like the mythical Social Security Trust “Fund” and every other federal “fund,” it’s a charade. The purpose is to make you believe federal accounting is similar to private sector accounting, where dollars are deposited into special funds, to pay for specific programs.

Why does the government want you to believe that? So you will think federal spending is limited by federal income, in the same way private spending is limited.

But federal spending is not limited by income — not by taxes, not by borrowing (which isn’t really borrowing) and not by fund balances. Federal spending is limited only by what Congress and the President wish to spend.

Even without collecting any taxes at all, the federal government could continue spending, forever.

Why Did Congress Adopt the Public Funding Law?
Congress set up the checkoff in the early 1970’s as an alternative way of funding Presidential elections. Candidates that choose to accept public funds can reduce their dependence on large contributions from individuals and groups.

In the general election, the public funding system places the two major-party nominees on an equal financial footing in the campaign.

The Republican and Democratic nominees in the general election receive a fixed amount of checkoff dollars. Nominees from other political parties may qualify for a smaller, proportionate amount of checkoff funds if they receive over five percent of the vote.

In order to qualify for matching funds, a candidate in the primary elections must first raise over $5,000 in each of 20 states (i.e., over $100,000), consisting of small contributions ($250 or less) from individuals.

Have you ever read such nonsense? ” . . . reduce their dependence on large contributions” . . . “places the two major-party nominees on an equal financial footing“

Have you noticed any reduction in dependence on large contributions? And are the two major parties ever on equal financial footing?

And if, as the right wing Supreme Court ruled (“Citizens United”), money is speech, by what Constitutional right has the federal government decided how much “speech” to allow each party?

Why do the Republicans and Democrats receive more “speech” than do other parties?

  • Checkoff dollars are given only to Presidential candidates who demonstrate broad national support.
  • General election nominees must agree not to accept any private contributions (from individuals or PACs, for example).
  • Candidates must promise not to spend more than $50,000 of their own money on their campaign.
  • Recipients of public funds must adhere to a limit on total spending.

” . . . not accept any private contributions”  But the PACs can spend as much as they wish.

“. . . not spend more than $50,000 of their own money.”  Is this an unconstitutional limitation on “free speech”?

” . . . limit on total spending.”  Another unconstitutional limitation on free speech?

The  Presidential Election Campaign Fund, and like all federal funds, is not only absurd, but it is a lie. Here is why:

Before America existed, there were no U.S. dollars. Then, a few men came together and arbitrarily created new laws from thin air.

These laws created dollars also from thin air. These laws could have created any number of dollars — a thousand, a million, a billion — any number at all.

The U.S. dollar is wholly a creation of laws, which in turn are creations of the federal government. The laws can say anything the government wants them to say.

The dollars in the Presidential Election Campaign “Fund,” and all federal “funds,” are nothing more than numbers in government bookkeeping accounts. The federal government has total control over the numbers in those accounts. It can increase or decrease the numbers at will.

If the numbers happen to be too low to justify some expenditure, the government simply can increase the numbers by pressing a computer key.

If, for instance, the account shows $1,000,000 and the government wishes to spend $2,000,000, the government can change the “1” to a “2,” and complete the spending operation.

No tax dollars needed. No borrowing needed. The U.S. government has complete control over its books.  That is the reality of Monetary Sovereignty.

So, the next time someone tells you:

*the Social Security Trust “Fund” will be insolvent unless taxes are raised or benefits decreased,
*or the Presidential Election Campaign “Fund” is deficient,
*or that Medicare is running short of dollars,
*or that your tax dollars pay for federal spending,
*or that the federal “debt” and “deficit” are unsustainable
*or that you and your children will have to pay for the federal “debt”

Know this: That person either is ignorant of federal financing or is lying.

U.S. dollars do not exist in any physical form.  They are accounting numbers. By the laws arbitrarily created by the federal government, these accounting numbers are under the government’s complete control.

So if you are one of the 33 million taxpayers who checked off that $3 mythical contribution to that mythical Presidential Election Campaign “Fund,” I hope it gives you some feeling of satisfaction.

Just understand that the whole federal tax process is a gigantic con, perpetrated by the very rich, and meant to make you believe the Big Lie, the lie that says the federal government cannot afford to narrow the Gap between you and the very rich.

Think about it the next time you pay your federal taxes. or Medicare won’t cover a medical expense.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

==================================================================================================================================================================
LAWS

•Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.

•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.

•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes..

•No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.

•Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.

•A growing economy requires a growing supply of money (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)

•Deficit spending grows the supply of money

•The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.

•The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

•Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.

•The single most important problem in economics is the Gap between rich and the rest.

•Austerity is the government’s method for widening the Gap between rich and poor.

•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.

•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Which is worse: You lack money or the federal government lacks money?

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Which is worse: Your lack of money or the federal government’s lack of money?

Answer: The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, cannot lack its own sovereign currency, the dollar.

It is absolutely, positively, 100% impossible for the U.S. federal government to run short of dollars, unless Congress and the President wish it.

Even if federal taxes fell to $0, even if federal spending tripled, no matter how large the federal deficits, it is impossible for the federal government to lack dollars.

And that is why the FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) tax is unnecessary and harmful, and Medicare is unnecessarily inadequate.

Because the federal government never can run short of dollars, no purpose is served by your making “insurance contributions” to FICA. You might as well make a water contribution to the Pacific ocean.

In the same vein, Medicare is unnecessarily inadequate because it doesn’t cover some of the most common health problems facing America: Dental, hearing, vision, and long-term care.

Why?

Scientific American Magazine: Why won’t Medicare cover dental, hearing or vision expenses?

Phil Moeller: The failure of Medicare to cover most dental, hearing, and vision expenses is perhaps its greatest failing.

Other critics might point to the fact that it does not cover long-term care expenses either.

And my favorite personal rant is reserved for its failure to cover nearly all medical expenses incurred outside the United States.

Huge and growing numbers of seniors face substantial dental, hearing and vision expenses. Failure to receive adequate care in any of these areas will have a big impact on overall health care and thus on health claims that Medicare does cover.

Unfortunately, nearly all of the talk in Washington these days is about how to restrain Medicare expenses, not add to them.

Why restrain Medicare expenses? After all, the federal government cannot run short of money. So why restrain medical care for Americans?

Because the rich don’t need Medicare. They can pay for all of the best medical care.

By keeping medical care from the middle and the lower-income groups, the rich widen the Gap between them and the rest — and widening the Gap is the primary goal of the rich.

The Gap makes them rich. Without the Gap, no one would be rich (We all would be the same) and the wider the Gap the richer they are. The rich widen the Gap by increasing their income or by reducing yours. Either will do.

Medicare pays for doctors and hospital care. Is dental care all that important?

Scientific American: Oral Health Goes Modern

We are amidst a global oral disease epidemic, and the statistics are startling: nearly 100 percent of adults have had cavities.

About one-fifth of middle-aged adults have gum disease so severe that they could lose their teeth—and about a third of the world’s elderly citizens no longer have any of their original teeth.

Periodontitis—the swelling, bleeding, receding gums caused by some species of bacteria in our mouths—may raise the risk of a number of serious health conditions.

That list includes stroke, respiratory illness, and cardiovascular disease, adult-onset (type 2) diabetes, and premature birth.

Mouth pain from cavities is among the leading reasons that children are absent from school. Bacterial invaders in gum tissue can slip into the bloodstream, settling into the arteries around the heart, or may be inhaled into the lungs, causing pneumonia.

In answer to the question, “Is dental care all that important?” we only can ask, “Are stroke, respiratory illness, heart disease, diabetes, pneumonia, pain, and school absences all that important?”

Scientific American Magazine: The Case for Oral Health

Former Surgeon General David Satcher: “Children who live in poverty in this country and around the world don’t get good oral health care.

“80 percent of oral health problems affect about 20 percent of the population—the poor and minorities in this country.

“We still have the only health system [among developed countries] that doesn’t provide universal access to care.

“I’m supportive of the Affordable Care Act but critical of the fact that while…it improves oral health care access for children, it does not for adults.

“Our health system has to incorporate easy access to oral health care.”

Think of it. The great United States of America has the only health system [among developed countries] that doesn’t provide universal access to care.

In effect, you have been made a second-class citizen of a second-class country.

Why? Because you have been told the government can’t afford comprehensive Medicare, an outright lie, promulgated by the rich.

And it’s not just young people who receive inadequate dental health care:

Scientific American Magazine: Attention on Prevention

In the U.S., about 10,000 baby boomers turn 65 each day—and many who have dental insurance lose it when they retire.

One-fifth of people over 75 haven’t seen a dentist in five years.

The nonprofit Center for Oral Health is currently assessing dental problems among California’s elderly. Preliminary results show that 38 percent of people in the state’s long-term care facilities have lost all of their original teeth; nearly half have at least one untreated cavity; and about one in seven need urgent care.

In the U.S. alone, nearly 30 percent of 15,000 adults surveyed said life is “very often” or “occasionally” less satisfying because of the condition of their mouth or teeth.

The authors urged policymakers to re-evaluate the separation of the mouth from the rest of the body in healthcare policy—and to consider the growing data linking oral health to physical, social and economic well-being.

Bottom line: We lead worse lives because of a lie: The Big Lie that very simply says federal taxes are needed to fund federal spending, so the federal government is running short of dollars.

The big truth: The federal government never can run short of dollars, with or without taxes. The government can pay for anything, including comprehensive Medicare for every man, woman, and child in America.

The rich want you to believe otherwise, because they want to widen the Gap between them and the rest.

Don’t fall for the con-job. Contact your Senator or Representative. Tell them you know the secret, and will not be fooled. Demand a fully paid, comprehensive Medicare for all.

Who needs money more: The federal government or you?

Contact your Senator or Representative. Tell them you know the secret, and no longer will be fooled. Demand a fully paid, comprehensive Medicare for all.

Demand fully paid, comprehensive Medicare for all. America deserves nothing less. You deserve nothing less.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the rich and the rest.

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 afford better health care than 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 AN ANNUAL ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) 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 EVERYONEFive 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 benefiting 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 CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from 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 corporate taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

What does it take to convince people of a truth that will benefit them?

As I sit here before my laptop, I wonder yet again, what does it take to convince people of such beneficial truths as:

*The federal “debt” is not “unsustainable,” nor is it owed by taxpayers

*Social Security and Medicare cannot run short of dollars unless Congress and the President will it.

*FICA and all other federal taxes do not fund federal spending. The federal government can spend forever, even without collecting taxes.

I just finished torturing myself with the latest absurdity from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), the self-proclaimed “nonpartisan” group composed primarily of rich, old, white, male, right-wingers.

Nonpartisan? Don’t you believe it. 

They claim to be “an authoritative voice for fiscal responsibility and an educational resource for policymakers and the general public.” Yet, among their comments are:

“Unfortunately, neither (Presidential) candidate has a plan to make Social Security solvent.”

Fact: Social Security, being a federal agency, cannot be insolvent, any more than other federal agencies — the White House, Congress, the Supreme Court and the U.S. itself  — can be insolvent.

CRFB “regularly meets with members of Congress and their staff, and offers practical solutions that can achieve bipartisan support and put the country on a sustainable fiscal course.

The U.S. is 240 years old. In all but a handful of those years, the country has run a deficit. Yet, we have sustained. What then is the meaning of “sustainable”? The CRFB never defines this term, because doing so would reveal the nonsense of it.

“The budget is increasingly being taken up by mandatory programs, crowding out investments in other areas of the budget. Lawmakers should enact both entitlement and tax reforms to return our nation to a fiscally sustainable path.”

“Entitlement and tax reforms” is a euphemism for: Cut Social Security, cut Medicare, cut Medicaid and cut poverty aids, while increasing FICA and other taxes.

The U.S., being Monetarily Sovereign, never can run short of its own sovereign currency, the dollar. Its ability to spend is unlimited, no matter what taxes are collected.

Therefore, federal spending cannot be “crowded out.”

Maya MacGuineas, president of CRFB: “We Can’t Borrow Our Way to Prosperity.  Assuming our creditors continue to allow these (high) levels of debt, the CBO estimates that within three decades this will reduce average income by $4,000 per person compared to what it would be if debt were on a declining path. “

Think about it.  Do you really believe the CBO (another similarly “nonpartisan” organization)  can see 30 years in advance?  Let’s get real, here.

See how MacGuinneas spreads the ignorance CBO provided:

  1. So-called federal “debt” actually is the total of deposits in T-security accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank, similar to savings account deposits. In short, bank deposits.
  2. Because the U.S. government, never runs short of its own sovereign currency, it neither needs nor uses these T-security deposits for anything.
  3. T-securities do not benefit the government. They are investments provided to the public. The government could stop selling T-securities (i.e. “borrowing”) tomorrow.
  4. All T-securities could be redeemed instantly, simply by transferring existing dollars from T-security accounts back to the checking accounts of owners. No new dollars needed.
  5. In any event, the Federal Reserve Bank has demonstrated its ability to buy all T-securities (via Quantitative Easing). Thus, there is no legitimate concern about “creditors continuing to allow these (high) levels of debt. The government does not need creditors.

Those are the facts. Now visualize this scenario: 

You are a member of a sect. Your rich leader tells you to give her all your belongings and to climb the sacred mountain, to watch the world end at midnight.

So you give her your house, your clothing, and all your personal items, and you climb and wait. Midnight passes, and nothing happens, so you climb back down, naked and impoverished.

A year later, your leader tells you the same thing. You give her what you have left, and you climb again, and again nothing happens. So you climb down again, naked.

This repeats itself, year after year, for more than 75 years.

Think now. At what point in those 75 years will you finally figure out that your rich leader doesn’t know what she is talking about? Or more likely, that your rich leader is taking you for a sucker to steal all you own.

How many times will you allow yourself to be fooled?

We’ve published posts showing that since 1940, and surely earlier, the bribed politicians, media, and economists have been calling the debt and deficits “unsustainable,” a “ticking time bomb,” and a “death spiral.”

Yet, in those 76 years, despite all the false warnings, the debt and deficit have grown, and the economy has grown, and everything is “sustainable” and there is no death spiral, and that “time-bomb” still ticks.

But you have given away your belongings via unnecessary, regressive taxes and benefit cuts, that widen the Gap between the rich and you.

The graph shows that as recently as 1970, the federal “debt” (blue line) was $275 Billion. In just 46 years the debt has risen to $14 Trillion — a gigantic 50-fold increase.

And still, we’ve “sustained” that 50-fold increase. No “time-bomb” has exploded. And we aren’t in a death spiral. In fact, GDP has risen substantially.

So what does it take for the public to awaken?

Will the public continue to believe the rich sect leader, and continue to trudge up and down that mountain, year after year, waiting for the end of the world — meanwhile giving her what they own?

Will the people continue to grow angry at anyone who dares to tell them they are being taken for suckers by the rich?

People, listen: You can have fully funded Social Security and Medicare, while FICA can  be eliminated. Student debt and hunger can be eliminated. Housing, medical research, the infrastructure and the ecology all can be improved, and taxes can be cut. The gap between you and the rich can be narrowed. (See the Ten Steps to Prosperity, below.)

Why would you prefer to believe otherwise? The rich rely on you being so beat down you will believe good news always is too good to be true for you.

Don’t let it happen. You deserve what our Monetarily Sovereign government can provide. The rich already take more than their share.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

=================================================================================================================================================

The single most important problem in economics involves the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the rich and the rest.

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 afford better health care than 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 AN ANNUAL ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) 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 EVERYONEFive 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 benefiting 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 CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from 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 corporate taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

A promise from Donald Trump

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
=======================================================================================================================================================================
Here is an Email I received today from that “news organization,” Breitbart News Network, now openly soliciting money for Trump (Isn’t that what news organizations do?)

If you believe that Donald Trump, the guy who won’t even give to his own charitable foundation, but instead has been fined for “self-dealing” (illegally paying himself charity money) — if you believe what this letter says, I have some costume jewelry I’d like to sell you.

====================================================================================================================================================
==================================================================================================================================================================

From: newsletters@breitbart.com
To: Rodger Mitchell

Breitbart Latest News

Friend,

With 12 days left until Election Day, there’s no time to waste.

I believe so deeply in the impact this election will have on America’s future that I am triple matching every contribution made between now and the end of October.Please contribute what you can afford because I am going to triple match your contribution to make sure it goes 3 times as far.

$250 Check

Friend, this election will impact you, your family, your friends, and everyone you know.

America needs a strong leader as its President. A leader who knows how to balance a budget, keep a payroll and create jobs like I’ve done for many, many years.

I’d be humbled and honored to be your President and I promise you on November 9th, I’ll roll up my sleeves and get to work making America a country we can all be proud of again.

But without your support today, I won’t be able to get that chance.  Help me get the chance to make America great again by contributing $250, $100, $50, $25 or $5 right now.

Thank you, Donald Trump

Breitbart Latest News

=====================================================================================================================================================================
========================================================================================================================================================================

Donald Trump, the guy who bragged he is so rich he would self-fund his campaign, instead lent (not gave) money to his campaign. He will be paid back by you who actually gave your money, and now are being asked to give more — by a “news organization.”

As the letter claims, Trump is “A leader who knows how to balance a budget, keep a payroll and create jobs” (except when he’s repeatedly going bankrupt, stiffing creditors, and not paying low-wage workers for the work they have done.)

A promise from Trump is good as gold (fool’s gold).

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

………………………………………………………………………………..

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the rich and the rest.

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 afford better health care than 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 AN ANNUAL ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) 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 EVERYONEFive 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 benefiting 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 CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from 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 corporate taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY