All you ever wanted to (but wish you didn’t need to) know about Donald Trump

This is it: All you ever wanted to (but wish you didn’t need to) know about Donald Trump:

‘Bury Trump in a Landslide’:

Daily News goes nuclear on GOP

nominee

Colin Campbell October 21, 2016

This says it all.

Well, almost all. There also is this: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/perils-of-eroded-civic-knowledge-forewarned-790540867791?cid=eml_mra_20161021

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

The 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

Why Tax Cuts Worked for Russia, But Not Kansas

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

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
 

“Why Tax Cuts Worked for Russia, But Not Kansas” is the title of a 10/18 article in Bloomberg View.

The article was written by: “Leonid Bershidsky, a Bloomberg View columnist. He was the founding editor of the Russian business daily Vedomosti and founded the opinion website Slon.ru.”

It is a typical, though still infuriating, article about economics by someone who either doesn’t understand economics or intentionally is deceptive.

Here are some excerpts:

Donald Trump may lose the presidential election, but the idea of major tax cuts as a way of boosting the economy is likely to remain a central tenet of Republican ideology long after he’s gone.

Opponents say that if you want to see why such programs don’t work, you need look no further than Kansas, where the Republican governor, Sam Brownback, put in place radical tax cuts four years ago.

Overall, federal tax cuts are economically stimulative. However, the latest iteration of Trump’s proposals indicate the cuts mainly would go to the rich, thereby widening the Gap between the rich and the rest.

“Such programs don’t work” (meaning, “tax cuts don’t stimulate an economy”) is, as a general statement, false. But there is a gigantic difference between state (monetarily non-sovereign) tax cuts and federal (Monetarily Sovereign — MS) tax cuts.

To lump the two is a sign of economics ignorance, and that is the problem with Bershidsky’s entire article.

The ignorant/deceptive equate tax cuts with the need for spending cuts.  True for state and local governments; false for the U.S. federal government.

The most effective economic initiative undertaken by President Vladimir Putin in his 16 years in power was to replace a progressive tax scale with a 30 percent top rate in favor of a 13 percent flat tax.

Putin’s 2001 tax reform saved the Russian budget from chronic underfunding and a woeful dependence on high-rate borrowing.

Replacing a progressive tax with a regressive tax is a gift to the rich, and widens the Gap. In the U.S., for instance, sales taxes and FICA are the two main regressive taxes.

One thing tax cuts do not do is save a budget from “chronic underfunding” and/or a “dependence on borrowing.” Cutting taxes to increase total tax collections works only in special circumstances (the “Laffer curve.”)

The Laffer curve is based on a simple premise: Because zero taxes would be collected if the tax rate was 0% or 100%, there must be some place between 0% and 100% where the maximum tax is collected.

The problem: No one ever can know where that place is, because it varies according to a multitude of ever-changing circumstances.

“The Trump tax plan is the Brownback tax plan,” says Duane Goossen, the state’s former budget director. Under a Trump administration, “what’s happening here would happen to the whole country.”

Whether Trump’s plan is a good plan or a bad plan, one thing is certain: The effects on Iowa and on the U.S. would be markedly different.

It’s like saying that feeding manure to animals would have the same effect as feeding manure to plants. That is how different Monetarily Sovereign governments are from monetarily non-sovereign governments.

To the supporters of Hillary Clinton, who wants to raise taxes on the wealthy, Kansas’s problems  — a big budget shortfall and anemic growth — are the natural result of any broad tax-cutting strategy.

Absolutely, 100% false as regards to anemic growth. While tax cuts can cause a budget shortfall, this is no burden at all for MS governments, which create money ad hoc, by paying creditors.

The U.S. government has run “budget shortfalls” during all but a handful of its  240 years. No problem. We still are solvent.

The federal government can (should) run budget shortfalls every year in the future, to achieve economic growth.

Putin’s reforms immediately increased personal income tax revenue to 2.9 percent of gross domestic product in 2001, from 2.4 percent the previous year.

Why does the author consider this a good thing?  Every nation has three financial sectors: The private sector, the federal government sector, and the foreign sector.

Money flows between sectors. In order, for instance, for the federal sector to have an inflow of money, that money must flow out of the private and foreign sectors.  Why would it be beneficial to any nation for net money to flow out of the private sector?

It wouldn’t be beneficial.  It would be harmful.

Since the income tax cuts, Kansas has raised its sales tax twice.

Of course, it has.

Brownback is a Republican. Republicans support the rich vs. the rest. Sales taxes are regressive, punishing the rich far less, and widening the Gap.

Brownback was mainly concerned with his home state’s population outflow to other states and the subsequent loss of Kansas’s political power.

The governor’s analysis of the migration flows gave him the idea that Americans were fleeing to states with lower taxes.

(But) Kansas lost almost 6,000 people to outward migration last year, many of them to higher-tax states. “I don’t have oceans and I don’t have mountains,” the governor told me. “Just got mountains of grain.

Right. People move for many reasons, but taxes are not high on the list, especially for the middle and lower income groups.  Jobs and weather are far more important.

Kansas’s gross domestic product grew 4.8 percent from the end of 2012 through the first quarter of 2016, less than half the national rate.

Nor have the cuts resulted in a job boost.

“Kansans treasure their schools, and I do, too,” the governor says. Schools are responsible for more than half of the state’s spending. At the school level all people see are painful cuts.

Classroom assistants have been moved to a 29-hour week, stripping them of benefits and making them hard to hire at $7.50 an hour.

While six years ago, there were 22 students in the average class, there are 27 to 28 now.

The privatization of school transport has resulted in more crowded buses and longer routes.

Ah, yes, privatization — the rich love it. But contrary  to what the rich claim, privatization almost always results in poorer service and ultimately higher costs.  See: Privatization scam.

Republican politicians and the governor’s office contend that the cuts should make the public school system more efficient, not weaker.

“Every time the schools need more funds,” O’Neal, the former speaker, says, “They say, oh, we’re going to lose this chemistry teacher. But why not a janitor or a third vice-principal?”

Or why not privatization? That usually is the recommendation.  Fire the janitors and hire an outside maintenance company. That is what the rich love to recommend.

“We’re broke,” Goossen says. “There’s no money in the bank.”

And there it is, the answer to the question. Kansas, being monetarily non-sovereign, is broke.  The United States, being Monetarily Sovereign, never can be “broke.” It has the unlimited ability to pay its bills.

Tax cuts are like a train that cannot back up.

Even Teflon Putin rebuffed his technocratic advisers this year when they suggested going back to a progressive income tax.

Putin did it because he caters to the rich, who do not like taxes (except a regressive tax like sales tax). The rich despise progressive income taxs.

The danger of Trump’s Brownbackian proposals is not inherent in tax-cutting as such.

It’s that Trump and congressional Republicans might cut taxes for the wrong reasons, with the wrong expectations and in the wrong way.

The U.S. federal  government neither needs nor uses tax dollars. Federal taxes do not fund federal spending.

That being the case, even if all federal tax collections fell to $0, the government could continue spending forever, and the economy would grow markedly.

Though all federal tax cuts are stimulative, tax cuts done “the wrong way,” i.e cuts that benefit the rich more than the rest, widen the Gap and so, damage the economy.

Sadly, the Kansas tax cut experience will provide false grounds for claiming that “tax cuts don’t work,” without consideration of the differences between the federal government and state/local governments.

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

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

•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

 

My letter to AARP explaining the purpose of FICA

I mailed the following letter on October 18, 2016:

Robert Love
Editor in Chief
AARP The Magazine
601 E St. NW
Washington, DC 20049

Dear Mr. Love:

It is only proper that you and your magazine call for not just the survival, but the strengthening of Social Security, a call you have made many times over the years.

Ironically, in making that call you strengthen the myth that has been the cause of attacks on Social Security benefits and the increases in qualifying ages.

In your editorial titled, “Let’s Strengthen Social Security” (August/September edition), you say among other things:

“.  . . preserve Social Security, not only for those of us who have paid into the system for decades but also for our kids and grandkids.

     “ . . . fiscal and demographic challenges are bearing down on the program. Every day, 10,000 Americans turn 65, a surge that will continue for years.

     “Unless something is done, Social Security benefits could be automatically reduced in less than two decades.

     “That’s why AARP launched a Take a Stand – a national campaign to press the presidential candidates to tell voters how they’ll keep Social Security strong and solvent.

     “ . . .If our nation’s leaders don’t act, future retirees could lose nearly 25 percent of their benefits. . . the sooner the problem is fixed, the less drastic the fix will have to be.”

I emphasized the words “strong and solvent,” because they symbolize the myth that FICA funds Social Security.

The United States government is Monetarily Sovereign. It is sovereign over the U.S. dollar. The U.S. federal government never can run short of its own sovereign currency, the dollar.

The federal government creates dollars by paying bills. Every time SS pays a benefit, it sends instructions to the benefit recipient’s bank, instructing the bank to increase the balance in the recipient’s checking account. When the bank does as instructed, new dollars are created.

This has nothing to do with FICA or any other tax. Even if FICA collections were $0, and the U.S. population tripled, the federal government could continue paying SS benefits forever.

State and local governments, and you, and I are monetarily NON-sovereign. We all can run short of dollars. We can become insolvent. But, the U.S. government cannot become insolvent.

No only is the U.S. government 100% immune from insolvency, but all federal agencies are similarly immune.

There is no FICA for the White House, no FICA for Congress, no FICA for the Supreme court – all federal agencies – yet they cannot become insolvent. No federal agency can become insolvent unless Congress and the President will it.

Social Security and Medicare are federal agencies. They cannot run short of dollars unless the politicians want to reduce benefits.

And now you can see the real purpose of FICA. The real purpose is not to fund Social Security (and Medicare). The real purpose of FICA is to limit Social Security and Medicare.

The real purpose is to make Americans believe SS and Medicare are, or soon will be, short of dollars, so benefits must be reduced.

The real purpose is to widen the income/wealth/power gap between the rich and the rest.

Take just 15 minutes to read more on this subject at: “Monetary Sovereignty: The key to understanding economics” and at “I just thought you should know. Lunch really can be free

I urge you, beg you, to please read those two short papers, familiarize yourself with Monetary Sovereignty, and tell your members the facts about Social Security: FICA can be reduced; benefits can be increased;

Only then will you be able to fulfill the generally understood purpose of AARP.

Sincerely,

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

P.S. If you would like some “Washington-based” affirmation of what I have told you, contact Professor Stephanie Kelton. She not only is the Chair of the Economics Department at UMKC, but she is the Chief Economist for the Democratic Minority Staff of the Senate Budget Committee.

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

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

–Donald Trump’s secret religion

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

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Donald Trump has a secret.

I read an article written by one of the trainers who teaches airport dogs how to signal the presence of drugs.

The dog repeatedly is given a reward for success. But you knew that, didn’t you?

What you may not have known is (according to this trainer) the best reward is not food. The best reward is play.  The best reward is fun. The best reward is approval.

The trainer carries a ball, and each time the dog does what is wanted, the trainer tosses the ball in a game of “fetch.” Apparently, dogs love play, fun, and approval so much, they will choose fetch over food treats.

People are like that, although in a special “people” way. We genetically are predisposed toward fun, excitement, competition, and victory.

Visualize the fans at a football game. They feel powerful emotions.  They are elated or very angry. They scream themselves hoarse.

People don’t do that over food.

If you were floating above the stadium, and looking down, you saw people screaming and flailing their arms, you might have thought they are stupid or insane.

And you would be right. They have, in fact, lost their rational minds. Their rational minds know that the game’s results will have little effect on their lives. But their irrational mind cares greatly.

Or think about a rock concert and the screaming fans. They barely can hear the music, but they are “there,” in the presence of “the man.” They are part of a special group.

The rapper grabs his crotch and the people think — no, “think” is the wrong word — the people feel as though in the presence of God, and His word is truth.

They not only have lost their ratonal minds during the event, but later they still will have powerful, illogical beliefs about the band and the star. Their love for him might be the greatest love they ever have felt.

Now visualize the “fans” at a Donald Trump event. The people are elated or angry, and always highly emotional. They lean on his every word, his every gesture.

Trump gives them what they crave. He gives them enemies to hate. He gives them hope. He sneers. He mugs for them. He gestures like a rock star, and they scream in appreciation for being “in” on his “special” message, just for them.

He speaks to them in a special, private code.

They don’t care about the words or even the “music.” They crave the experience of being in the cult.

Logical argument does not have the same impact. A professor, speaking to a class, does not generate the same emotions.

No sane person believes Trump emotionally, experientially, or intellectually is qualified to be President of the United States. He has every bad attribute — a liar, a womanizer, ignorant, inexperienced, egomaniacal, hate-mongering, emotionally immature, bigoted.

Like a rock star’s fans, Trump’s fans simply don’t care. 

Provide absolute proof of his deceptions and incompetence, and they will grow angry. They don’t want to hear it. Even when Trump himself admits to groping women, and later denies it, his fans believe his denials. No logic there.

Trump said it, “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” He is right. His fans would created excuses for his actions.

When a rock star takes drugs, gets drunk in public, trashes hotel rooms, beats his girlfriend, fires a gun, or commits other atrocities, he retains much of his fan base, because he makes them part of his game. They are “in” and the rest of the world is out.

They love belonging to his special faction. They cannot leave the sect, for to do so would make them empty, alone, and friendless, bereft of the approving society they desperately need.

These followers are, what Eric Hoffer termed, “true believers.”

Wikipedia: Hoffer states that mass movements begin with a widespread “desire for change” from discontented people who place their control outside their power and who also have no confidence in existing culture or traditions.

Believing there is no hope for advancement or satisfaction as an individual, true believers are ripe to participate in a movement that offers the option of subsuming their individual lives in a larger collective.

Leaders are vital in the growth of a mass movement, but for the leader to find any success, the seeds of the mass movement must already exist in people’s hearts.

The “New Poor” are the most likely source of converts for mass movements, for they recall their former wealth with resentment and blame others for their current misfortune.

Example: The  working-classes in Germany who passionately supported Hitler in the 1930s after suffering years of economic hardship.

While mass movements idealize the past and glorify the future, the present world is denigrated: “The radical and the reactionary loath the present.”

Thus, by regarding the modern world as vile and worthless, mass movements inspire a perpetual battle against the present.

True believers respond to the slogan “Make America great, again,” because it perfectly idealizes the past and glorifies the future. 

Mass movements aggressively promote the use of doctrines that elevate faith over reason and serve as “fact-proof screens between the faithful and the realities of the world.

Reasonable people wonder why Trump’s followers seem immune to facts. Almost every day Trump says something blatantly untrue, or completely outrageous. Yet he is Teflon.  His followers ignore his lies, and tell themselves “what he really meant.”

They are true believers.

To spread and reinforce their doctrine, mass movements use persuasion, coercion, and proselytization.

Persuasion must be thrilling enough to excite the listener yet vague enough to allow “the frustrated to… hear the echo of their own musings in the impassioned double talk.

“I was going to say ‘dummy’ Bush; I won’t say it. I won’t say it,” Trump said in January.

“I promised I would not say that Carly Fiorina ran Hewlett-Packard into the ground, that she laid off tens of thousands of people and she got viciously fired. I said I will not say it, so I will not say it.

I refuse to call Megyn Kelly a bimbo, because that would not be politically correct. Instead, I will only call her a lightweight reporter!”

“Unlike others, I never attacked dopey Jon Stewart for his phony last name. Would never do that!”

Trump’s followers love the joke.  They howl in laughter. They are “in” with him.

Donald Trump’s secret is that he taps into the needs and hungers of true believers.

Trump’s followers, like the airport dogs, need to be thrilled — and double-talked.

At a recent rally in Fresno, Trump stated that, despite five years of low rainfall in California, “There is no drought. They turn the water into the ocean. If I win, believe me, we’re going to start opening up the water so that you can have your farmers survive.”

Now, this is a very confusing statement. What could he mean? Go ahead and choose your answer to this multiple-choice problem.

If you click the above link, you will find different answers to what Trump might have meant with his double-talk.

But it doesn’t matter what Trump “really” meant, or whether he meant anything at all. Each of his true believers hears what he wants to hear. That is the magic of double-talk.

Successful mass movements need not believe in a god, but they must believe in a devil. Hatred unifies the true believers, and “the ideal devil is a foreigner” attributed with nearly supernatural powers of evil.

For Trump, such “foreigners” as Muslims, Mexicans, immigrants, all Latinos and “the media” are devils — all to be hated. He also termed Hillary Clinton “the devil.”

Most recently, the Mexican billionaire, Carlos Slim, joined the vast ranks of Trump’s hated devils.

There is no logic to Trump — he is all emotion — so logic cannot defeat him. That is why his comments about groping women had a significant impact. These comments are illogically important.

Being a groper and a cheater does not logically affect one’s ability to run the country. But his words affected women emotionally. Too many of them have suffered from boors like Trump.

And his words affected men, who feel protective of their women. They visualize with disgust, Trump’s dirty hands on their wives and daughters.

So despite all the real, logical reasons Trump is unqualified to be President, his groping of women became the most important reason.

True believers are followers, and one thing a follower wants is to follow a winner. When the leader begins losing, the movement grinds down.

Remember what happened to Benito Mussolini, after Italy was defeated in WWII? He was shot, and his body was hung upside down in the public square. The passions he fomented turned against him.

Trump’s passionate fans will turn against him when the sanity sets in and they realize they have been conned by a man who promised much, but lied, lied, lied.

They will realize he cared only for himself, and that they were part of nothing. The “belonging” was an illusion,

And it finally will end when his true believers decide he has committed the worst sin of all: He just isn’t interesting or fun anymore. And worst, he’s a loser.

Then, they will despise him for it, and turn to another religion.

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