My dear fellow Americans
It’s not like we haven’t done this before.
We church-going folk began this nation by murdering the people who had befriended us, then herding the survivors from their lands into miserable Indian reservations, where we repeatedly have broken treaties with them.
We church-going folk brought black people here in chains, many of whom died in the stinking holds of ships and under the lash of masters.
We kept them in slavery for years and, to this day, treat them as second-class citizens, except for the few who amuse us with their athleticism and other entertaining skills.
We church-going folk continued the two-thousand-year hatred of Jews, barring them from restaurants, clubs, and schools while conveniently forgetting that Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and their descendants, whom we worship as gods, all were Jews.
None of us know why we hate them, but we do, so ingrained is hatred in our bones.
We church-going folk denied women the vote, then reluctantly gave it, only to deny them healthcare during their times of greatest physical stress. As this is written, young American women are refused aid on the doorstep of a hospital or die in labor, in this the year 2024,
We church-going folk sent yellow-skinned American citizens to concentration camps during WWII because they physically resembled people from another nation we warred with. We stole their lives with bigotry.
During Operation Wetback, until then, the worst mass deportation in United States history, 1.3 million people were swept up in the Eisenhower campaign with a racist name to purge undocumented Mexicans from American society.
The Monster
And now, we plan the ultimate cruelty.
While Hitler killed “only” about seventeen million people — mostly Jews, but also political prisoners, the disabled, Romani people, and others deemed undesirable by the Nazis — the Monster has made clear that he will destroy the lives of anywhere between twelve and twenty million innocent men, women, andchildren.
The Monster envies Hitler’s record and wishes to exceed it with your help.
He boasts he will undertake “the largest mass deportation in American history.” (His words.)
Why?
Why would this be a source of pride to any normal human being?
These immigrants are not criminals.
The criminal immigrants already have been and continue to be deported.
No, these are people whose only crime is to lack a piece of paper saying they are citizens.
These are hard-working, tax-paying men, women, and children — CHILDREN! — who live here peacefully, contribute to America’s economy, and often work difficult jobs that benefit the rest of us.
(Yes, they pay taxes, despite not receiving many benefits these taxes supposedly provide.)
The Monster will rip them from their homes onto busses and trains- “cattle cars?” — and send them God knows where.
Why? How does that make America better, safer, richer, or more envied by the world?
He claims, as Hitler once did, that undocumented immigrants “are poisoning the blood of our country.”
Really? Has your blood been poisoned by an immigrant because he is not a citizen?
Would youdrag even one child from his home to satisfy the hate-filled blood lust of a Monster?
Visualize going to a door, grabbing a child, and pulling her, screaming, onto a crowded bus for transport away from home.
Does that give you a feeling of pride? Satisfaction? Does that “cleanse” your blood of poison?
No?
Yet, Edison Research exit polls showed 39% of voters said most immigrants in the U.S. illegally should be deported.
Why? How would those 39% benefit? How do your children benefit from seeing this cruelty?
Imagine the pain, the horror. What benefits you and America from this abomination?
Children are not born evil. They become evil by being exposed to evil. They become cruel by being exposed to cruelty.
Is that what your child will become? A Monster?
Tom Homan, a former acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) expected to join the new administration, said in a late October interview that the scale of the deportations would hinge on potential officers and detention space.
“It all depends on what the budget is,” he said.
The greater the budget, the more misery he will cause.
That should shiver a chill down the spine of even the most callous human being.
A deportation operation targeting millions would require many more officers, detention beds, and immigration court judges. American Immigration Council, an immigrant advocacy group, estimated the cost of deporting 13 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally as $968 billion over a little more than a decade.
And that doesn’t count the cost of millions of lost workers and millions of lost customers for American businesses.
And the cost of our lost morality.
Why? Why the abject cruelty? How will we benefit from this abomination– this new stain on America’s history?
When Pontius Pilate presided over Jesus’ trial, he reportedly washed his hands to signify that he was not responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion.
Do you object to this crucifixion of innocent men, women, and CHILDREN?
Or do you simply wash your hands?
Oh, the children. Can you visualize it? Dragged from their homes and sent weeping into misery.
Why? What will your children learn when they see this happening to other children? Will they learn the hatred you have been taught?
“Bleeding Heart Lib”
You church-going, self-proclaimed religious folk, don’t you dare kneel and cross yourselves before God while you stand by and say nothing, do nothing, even aid and abet the Monster.
Don’t you dare pray to Jesus, Joseph, and Mary while you countenance evil.
In Luke 10:25-37, Jesus tells the story of a Samaritan who helps a man who is beaten by robbers while others pass by without offering aid.
The parable emphasizes loving your neighbors, regardless of their background or status.
It calls us to show mercy and compassion to all, including strangers.
Even back then, there were monsters, which is why Jesus specifically spoke of kindness to strangers.
Pew Research says that 82% of White evangelical Protestants, 61% of White Catholics, and 58% of White nonevangelical Protestants support the Monster.
How can this be?
What do you tell your minister about why you don’t object to the abomination?
Do you fail to mention it because you’re embarrassed by the perfidy?
Or do you attempt to justify the torture of innocent people?
Do you sneer at “bleeding-heart libs”? Do you sneer at God?
Why has the Monster’s hatred infected you? Was it ill-treatment by your parents?
Did your schoolmates bully you? What twisted your mind free of compassion and made you seek to punish innocent men, women, and children?
Unsurprisingly, the Monster doesn’t plan to finish with his deportation horror. He wants to expand it to include legal American citizens — children born here in America to immigrant parents, who by law are citizens.
Today, a significant portion of the U.S. population, young and older, comprises birthright citizens.
The Monster wishes to repeal the 14th Amendment and deport them all.
Why? How will you benefit?
And then you Latinos, you Jews, you other children of immigrants. A special place in hell is reserved for you who support the horror, knowing how your own kin suffered from hatred.
Have you seen the devil incarnate and embraced him? Will that be part of your prayer to God?
Are we now CINOs (Christians in name only), JINOs (Jews in name only), and other religious frauds? Have blacks, yellows, and reds departed from morality while forgetting that elections have consequences?
Has America fallen so far that we no longer may even claim to be the shining city on a hill and a beautiful example to the world?
Have we become so tainted by the Monster’s hatred that we no longer can find our morality?
When you pray to God for the safety of your spouse, your children, your dear friends, yourself, will God remind you of your cruelty to innocents?
The world is watching. God is watching, Hell is waiting as we willingly descend, down, down, down into the black hole of dictatorship.
Are we lost as a people?
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell
Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;
MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell;
https://www.academia.edu/
……………………………………………………………………..
The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.
This is a kind note to all of you who voted for Donald Trump.
AMERICA
First, you will be pleased, perhaps surprised, to see that there will be a peaceful and lawful, civil transfer of power.
Unlike in the previous election, the losing leader will not urge followers to deny the results, install fake electors, and attack Congress; this election transition will be calm.
You may be amazed to see no riots, false claims, lies, or denials.
The loser will not plot revenge and retribution.
She will congratulate the winner, and democracy will continue into the new administration.
If you voted for Donald Trump, and you are a woman, pregnant or might become pregnant, a black, brown, yellow or young person, gay, Latino, Mulsim, Jew or other Non-Christian, or a union member, poor or middle-income, or hoped for a college education your family can’t afford, do not be disappointed at what happens during the next four years.
That is the way democracy works. Not everyone gets what they want.
President Trump has been quite clear about his plans to increase your taxes via import duties while giving tax cuts to the rich, deport millions of good working families, and install judges to approve his own and his followers’ criminality.
Expect convicted criminals to be pardoned.
So please do not cry, “Gee, I didn’t realize he would do that.” Yes, you did. It’s why you elected him.
He was quite honest in that regard.
Have patience. It’s only four years, and he’s old, so perhaps less. This will be a good learning experience for America. The compassionate among us will welcome you back to kindness and normalcy with open arms.
Meanwhile, sorry, but ignorance has its penalties.
Be good to each other. Ultimately, we all live in the same house.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary SovereigntyTwitter: @rodgermitchellSearch #monetarysovereigntyFacebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell; https://www.academia.edu/
……………………………………………………………………..
The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.
There are penalties for ignorance, and America pays them every day:
Almost Half of Medicare Patients Can’t Afford a Single Hospital StayNew University of Pennsylvania research highlights growing health care affordability crisis.By Huey Freeman
Read that headline again. Digest it’s meaning.
You have original Medicare. You are sick. But you can’t afford to go to the hospital. And you are not rare. Almost half of Medicare patients are just like you.
What the hell??
Americans who rely on Medicare to pay for hospital stays are often unable to pay the cost of the standard deduction,sometimes producing a financial shock.
I’m Uncle Sam. I have the infinite ability to create dollars. Even if you don’t pay me one penny in taxes, I could keep spending forever. But don’t ask me for money to pay for your healthcare. I tell everyone I’m broke.
Think about it, more. The federal government is Monetarily Sovereign. That means:
It never can run short of dollars.
It neither needs nor uses tax dollars to pay its bills. It just creates new dollars, every time it pays someone.
Those FICA dollars that are deducted from your pay, supposedly to fund Medicare, don’t fund anything. The govenment destroys them upon receipt, and creates new dollars to pay doctors, nurses, hospitals, etc.
But for some reason, which I’ll explain later, the government insists that you pay 20% of the bill.
Three years ago, my wife died in the hospital after a 2-week stay.
The bill was somewhere over $400,000 in total. Medicare paid $320,000. Fortunately, I paid for supplementary insurance, which covered nearly all the rest.
But for most people, that $80,000 would have landed them in bankruptcy court.
Why? Why does Medicare not pay the entire cost?
And so long as we’re asking questions, why do we have an alternative called Medicare Advantage that covers some things Medicare doesn’t, but with restriction original Medicare doesn’t have.
Why doesn’t original Medicare simply cover everything? Remember, the federal governmennt, being Monetarily Sovereign, cannot run short of dollars.
Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine found that almost half of such patients have insufficient funds to pay the $1,600 payment, the standard out-of-pocket cost.
Why, the out-of-pocket cost? Here are reasons given:
Medicare doesn’t cover 100% of costs for several reasons:
Cost Control: Having beneficiaries share in the cost helps control overall healthcare spending and prevents overuse of services. (The false beliefs are that the government can run short of dollars and people will visit the doctor too much.)
Sustainability: Given the rising healthcare costs, partial coverage helps ensure the program’s financial sustainability. (Same false beliefs as #1)
Incentive for Supplemental Insurance: Encourages beneficiaries to purchase supplemental insurance(Medigap) to cover the remaining costs, providing additional financial protection. (Apparently, the profits of private insurance companies are more important than the people’s finances.)
Budget Constraints: Full coverage would require significantly higher government spending, which might not be feasible given budget constraints. (Unnecessary budget constraints).
And now for the real reason:
5. The politicians are bribed by the rich (via campaign contributions and lucrative jobs) to widen the income/wealth Gap between the rich and the rest. The Gap is what makes the rich wealthy, and the wider the Gap, the wealthier they are.
Federal funding for health care narrows the Gap, so politicians invent excuses to claim it can’t be done.
Even beneficiaries with incomes above the federal poverty level sometimes cannot meet this expense after depleting their savings, according to the study results published in the Annals of Internal Medicine.However, the financial burden extends far beyond just the poorest Americans. “Many Medicare beneficiaries with modest incomes are at risk for financial hardship from costs of a single hospital stay,” the researchers wrote.
Think of yourself as a billionaire, and one of your kids can’t afford medical treatment. Would you allow him to go bankrupt? The federal govenment would.
“Nationally, 36 percent of beneficiaries report difficulty paying medical bills or delaying care due to cost concerns, and those with multiple chronic conditions and serious illnesses are at particular risk for high out-of-pocket costs and economic hardship,” they noted.While Medicaid (not Medicare) and private supplemental insurance can help cover these costs, qualifying for such assistance often requires proving extreme financial hardship.
First, you must be destitute and prove it.
Patients must prove that their income is at or below the federal poverty level—currently set at $15,060 for individuals and $20,440 for couples in 2024. There are also asset limits of $2,000 for individuals, and $3,000 for couples.
However, some (red) states have set higher thresholds, extending Medicaid limits to 138 percent of the federal poverty level.
Why is there a need for Medicaid. Why not Medicare for All?
Additionally, access to full Medicaid benefits, including long-term care, depends on income criteria that varies by state—typically ranging from 75 to 100 percent of the federal poverty level.
Why should there be income criteria? Why must people go broke to be healthy?
Compounding the problem, fewer Medicare beneficiaries now carry supplemental insurance compared to previous years.
It’s too costly because it’s private, for-profit insurance
Among the 4,881 beneficiaries included in the Medicare study, 45 percent lacked sufficient funds in their checking and savings accounts to pay the Medicare hospital deductible.
Intolerable for the United States of America, a Monetarily Sovereign nation that acts like a 3rd world nation.
Seniors face many hardships resulting from health challenges that extend beyond just medical bills, according to Helen Levy, associate professor at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research. Levy’s research identifies three main channels that lead to lower quality of life for seniors: decreased income, increased medical expenses, and the direct effects of health symptoms themselves.“The first two of these—lower income and higher medical spending—are much less quantitatively important than the third; in a nutshell, poor health makes it harder to get by with less,” Levy wrote in her article on the effects of poverty on older Americans.
“How dare you people ask for free health care like I get. Do you think the government is made of money?” Uh, well . . .
And then, what follows, is a clear expression of the ignorance that punishes us:
The key question that arises from this new study is how to respond to this insight, Dr. Chad Savage, an internal medicine physician, told The Epoch Times.“A common reaction is to expand insurance policies or government programs to cover an ever-growing range of medical costs,” said Savage, a member of Samaritan Ministries Inc., a group whose members share medical expenses.“However, this approach would increase the cost of coverage, thus, diverting more of the patients’ limited resources toward taxes and insurance premiums, and ultimately, depriving them of the funds they could have used for direct medical expenses.”
Dr. Savage’s comments are based on the wrong claim that the Monetarily Sovereign federal government cannot afford to fund a comprehensive Medicare for every man, woman, and child.
“The real issue, however, is why Americans remain so unprepared for medical expenses when they inevitably arise,” Savage added. “A legislative solution to address this could involve incentivizing proactive savings for medical costs that will inevitably occur as part of life.”“By creating incentives for Americans to contribute to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) or Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs), they could gradually build up funds to cover out-of-pocket expenses for their own medical care when needed,” he said.
Dr. Savage is totally divorced from reality.
Many people are unable to meet all financial obligations of food, rent, and clothing, much less contributing to HSAs
For most Americans, saving enough in an HSA to cover major or recurring health issues would be impossible.
With infinite funds, the federal government can and should pay all medical expenses. The whole purpose of a government is to protect and improve the lives of the people.
What is the purpose of a government that can’t or won’t do it?
Here is what we need:
Free comprehensive Medicare for All.
Cover everything that Medicare Advantage covers, but do it in original Medicare. One program for all health needs.
No FICA payroll tax deductions. No fake “trust funds” (that aren’t trust funds). More generous payments to providers to attract more people into the field and more hospitals and clinics.
The federal government not only can afford it without collecting one additional penny in taxes, but the money spent by the government would grow Gross Domestic Product. And no, it wouldn’t cause inflation. See why.
The Dr. Savages of the world seem to reverse reality. They think people’s purpose is to improve and protect the government, while the government’s desires come first.
It’s nuts.
But as I repeatedly have said, there is a penalty for ignorance, and the people of America are paying it.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary SovereigntyTwitter: @rodgermitchellSearch #monetarysovereigntyFacebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell; https://www.academia.edu/
……………………………………………………………………..
The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.
One suggestion in the previous post, titled “Is the federal government too big? Will Medicare become insolvent? What can we do better?” was #4. Create and fund Social Security for all Americans of all ages at generous enough levels to end poverty in America
It’s functionally the same as UBI, Universal Basic Income.
I call it “Social Security for All” partly because we already know how to do Social Security, so setting it up won’t be intimidating.
There are a few differences from what UBI backers suggest, most importantly, paying it to everyone, not just the poor.
I’m Monetarily Sovereign. I am the wealthiest government in the world. I never can run short of dollars. It’s a disgrace that some of my people don’t have enough money, food, clothing, housing, or education. I easily can solve that problem.
Recently, I read a Scientific American article that I would like to discuss with you.
But before getting into the article, I asked my AI to give me the pros and cons of UBI.
PROSReduces Poverty: UBI can help lift people out of poverty by providing a guaranteed income, ensuring everyone has enough to cover basic needs.
Improves Health: Studies have shown that UBI can improve physical and mental health outcomes by reducing stress and anxiety.
Simplifies Welfare: UBI could replace or streamline complex welfare systems, reducing administrative costs and eliminating the stigma associated with receiving benefits.
Encourages Entrepreneurship:With a financial safety net, individuals might be more willing to take risks and start new businesses.
Supports Unpaid Work:UBI can provide income for non-working parents and caregivers, recognizing the value of traditionally unpaid roles.
CONSHigh Cost: Implementing UBI could be extremely expensive, potentially requiring significant tax increases or reallocation of funds from other programs.
Potential Work Disincentives: Some argue that a guaranteed income might reduce the motivation to work, although studies suggest this effect is minimal.
Inflation:There is a concern that UBI could lead to inflation, as increased purchasing power might drive up prices.
Political Feasibility: Gaining political support for UBI can be challenging, as it requires a significant shift in public policy and mindset.
Implementation Challenges: Integrating UBI with existing social programs and infrastructure could be complex and difficult to manage.
Here are excerpts from the Scientific American (11/2024) issue. The article discusses the “Pros” without addressing the Cons, which I will do at the end of this post.
Basic Income Gives Money without Strings. Here’s How People Spend ItPilot programs across the U.S., including new research funded by OpenAI, offer a glimpse of how a universal basic income could improve livesBy Allison ParshallIn 2020, amid widespread layoffs and economic turmoil brought on by the COVID pandemic, 1,000 low-income people in Texas and Illinois were selected to receive $1,000 per month—with no strings attached—for three years as part of a study on guaranteed income by OpenResearch, a nonprofit research organization funded in part by OpenAI and its founder, Sam Altman.Sara Kimberlin, executive director of the Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality said Founding father Thomas Paine advocated for it in The Rights of Man. Martin Luther King, Jr., called it the solution to poverty. Even economist and free-market capitalist Milton Friedman suggested basic income in the form of a “negative income tax.”Kimberlin says, pointing to a “large body of research” that participants increased spending to meet their basic needs and to help family and friends. A separate study published online in July in the Journal of the American Medical Association also found that cash benefits reduced emergency room visits.Evidence suggests that when people’s most basic needs are met, they start to build a firmer financial foundation for themselves and their family. If you don’t have access to stable, safe housing, health care or food, that interferes with your ability to be a productive workeror to take care of your family. And if you’re a child, that interferes with your ability to concentrate in school.When food stamps are introduced in a particular area, the outcomes for the families improve. Children whose families received the Earned Income Tax Credit when they were young had more positive long-term educational outcomes.Why provide cash, as opposed to food stamps or rent assistance?Cash is flexible. People can use it to meet whatever their most pressing need may be.It’s an efficient way of addressing people’s needs, and it also gives people a lot of dignity and autonomy in deciding how they’re going to use it.
Rather than having a Washington bureaucrat determine the needs of strangers living far away, trust the people to understand their needs and address them if they can.
It helps to avoid situations where someone may already have resources designated to pay for food but needs, for example, emergency child care. If they don’t get it, then they can’t get to their job, which could cause a lot of disruption down the line by making them miss a paycheck, then miss the rent. You can look at unconditional cash as a potentially very promising way of approaching social support because it streamlines the administrative costs and makes it easier for people to access the support they are eligible for.The most common uses of the funds were to cover basic needs such as housing, food and transportation. (There) was a significant increase in people spending money to help their friends and family.There are some effects of this program that are not fully captured in the results.There’s a ripple of positive effects that are going out beyond the direct recipient.Is just giving people money really a viable solution to poverty?
One factor that could change results is the amount of money given as basic income.
I suspect there would be vastly different results if everyone was given, say, $10.000 a month rather than $1,000.
ADDRESSING THE CONS
Every support program has been criticized for supposed high Cost, Potential Work Disincentives, Inflation, Political Feasibility, and Implementation Challenges.
Franklin D. Roosevelt faced these objections when he instituted Social Security, and Medicare has faced the same objections.
These objections were why Social Security was unnecessarily tied to the FICA tax, which doesn’t fund the program but limits it.High Cost: The federal government has infinite money to pay for infinite benefits. This is Monetary Sovereignty.
In fact, the higher the cost, the more growth dollars the federal government will pump into the economy, benefitting the entire nation, not just the poor.
Potential Work Disincentives: The rich love to ascribe this to the poor. You never hear about someone making $100,000 a year not getting a raise because it would disincentivize him from working.
Only the poor are accused of being so lazy that no longer faced with grinding poverty, they will decide to quit work, perhaps loll about, sleep late, and take drugs.
It’s a phony insult that has had no basis in fact. It has not been the result of other anti-poverty measures.
Inflation:We have discussed this many times before. Contrary to popular myth, inflation is not caused by too much spending. Inflation is caused by shortages of crucial goods and services, mostly oil and food.
The most recent inflation was due to COVID-related shortages of oil, food, computer chips, shipping, metals, lumber, labor, and other essentials. As these scarcities end, so does inflation.
The notorious Zimbabwe hyperinflation was a food-shortage situation. (The government stole farmland from farmers and gave it to people who didn’t know how to farm.)
Political Feasibility: The rich hate any program that narrows the income/wealth/power Gap between them and the rest of us.
So they bribe the politicians (via campaign contributions and lucrative non-political income), the economists (via university endowments and jobs with think tanks), and the media (via ownership and advertising revenue) to spread disinformation about anti-poverty efforts.
The solution is to know the truth, tell the truth, and to find an effective leader to promulgate the truth.
Implementation Challenges: There are no challenges. We already know how to administer Social Security and Medicare (which is a huge challenge) and have already sent checks to the public.
COVID-19 Pandemic (2020-2021): The government issued three rounds of Economic Impact Payments to help individuals and families cope with the financial impact of the pandemic. These payments were part of the CARES Act, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, and the American Rescue Plan Act.
2008 Financial Crisis: Under the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, the government issued tax rebates to stimulate the economy during the financial crisis.
2001 Economic Stimulus Act: The government issued tax rebates to boost consumer spending in response to the economic downturn following the dot-com bubble burst.
SUMMARYSocial Security for All (aka Universal Basic Income), paid to every man, woman, and child in America, regardless of income, is an easily affordable, easily administered program that would address such problems as Poverty and Health while Simplifying Welfare, Encouraging Entrepreneurship, and Supporting Unpaid Work.
It would not exacerbate unemployment, underemployment, or inflation and would stimulate economic growth throughout the nation.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary SovereigntyTwitter: @rodgermitchellSearch #monetarysovereigntyFacebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell; https://www.academia.edu/
……………………………………………………………………..
The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 