Should we build a moral computer?

The human brain can do far more, using less energy and with less mass, than any known computer.

No computer, from your little Apple Watch to Japan’s huge Fugaku (the world’s fastest computer, which can perform more than 415 trillion computations a second), can compare to what the human brain can accomplish. Man vs. machine: Is there a place for traditional media strategists amid programmatic tech? - Features - MM&M - Medical Marketing and Media

So far as we currently know, and excepting certain past and present political leaders, your brain is the most complex and sophisticated object in the universe.

Yes, the mechanical monsters can do math really fast, and they almost never forget where their keys are, but still, they don’t have the power to operate every function of the human body, as well as the brain-body interface, does.

Consider just your 20 square feet of skin that your human brain oversees. Your skin, which is just one of the many organs in the human body, contains about 300 million cells, of which 30,000 die and are replaced every minute.

While all this creation, destruction, and replacement are happening, every inch of your skin senses the exact location of heat, cold, several kinds of touch, and pain, all of which are interpreted, every second, by your brain. Try to visualize a machine able to accomplish this.

Visualize driving your car at top speed, while thousands of parts are being replaced every minute.

And that’s just your approximately 8 lbs. of skin. Consider the rest of you. Various types of sight, sound, touch, heat, pain, and taste receptors are springled throughout your body, all monitored by your brain, and all with multiple functions. (Yes, there are taste receptors all over, even in your lungs.)

And though no computer in existence could handle even your body’s sensing and response needs, that is child’s play compared to your more sophisticated psychological tasks your brain handles.

What computer can feel fear, hatred, loneliness, joy, empathy, compassion, love, greed, disgust, etc., etc. How many different kinds of love can your brain feel?

And even that is child’s play compared to your more sophisticated brain tasks: Self-consciousness, pride, sangfroid, the creation of quantum mechanics, general relativity, evolution, math, and other sciences.

With all that computing power tucked in your skull, still you use computers for specialized tasks. Your brain was designed specifically to help you survive here, in this tiny environment you know as “earth,” in the year 2021.

But your brain includes desires, so you wish to do more than just survive in the here and now.

You wish to survive the new diseases that may come your way, and the meteors, and the comets, and the storms and the solar storms, and the global warming and cooling.

As a species, we wish to survive long term on our moon and on other moons and on other planets. And of course, we wish to survive our own foibles — the wars and prejudices our brains instigate.

And to accomplish that long-term survival, we will have to become smarter, and not just smarter, but better.

By “better,” I mean moral.

The purpose of morality is group survival, but morality is a mixed survival mechanism.

Short term, the least moral among us may have advantages. A crook acquires; a murderer eliminates competition. Even long-term, immorality can benefit the individual, though morality can support the survival of our species.

To accomplish all of our short- and long-term needs, we have two alternatives: Improve our brains or augment/replace our brains.

Nature has not improved our brains for millennia, so we currently focus on augmentation/replacement, which involves the use of computers.

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

Discover Magazine: The Singularity Might Redefine What It Means to Be Human and Machine
Ever since computers took shape — first filling rooms, then office desks, then pockets — they have been designed by human minds. Over the years, plenty of people have asked: What would happen if computers designed themselves?

Someday soon, an intelligent computer might create a machine far more powerful than itself. That new computer would likely make another, even more powerful, and so on. Machine intelligence would ride an exponential upward curve, attaining heights of cognition inconceivable to humans.

This, broadly speaking, is the singularity.

The singularity is a formidable proposition. Superintelligent computers might leap forward from nanotechnology to immersive virtual reality to superluminal space travel.

Instead of being left behind with our cell-based brains, humans might merge themselves with AI, augmenting our brains with circuits, or even digitally uploading our minds to outlive our bodies.

The result would be a supercharged humanity, capable of thinking at the speed of light and free of biological concerns.

Philosopher Nick Bostrom thinks this halcyon world could bring a new age entirely. “It might be that, in this world, we would all be more like children in a giant Disneyland — maintained not by humans, but by these machines that we have created,” says Bostrom, the director of Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute and the author of Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies.

There’s the classic sci-fi nightmare of a robot revolution, of course, where machines decide they’d rather be in control of the Earth.

But perhaps more likely is the possibility that the moral code of a superintelligent AI — whatever that may be — simply doesn’t line up with our own.

An AI responsible for fleets of self-driving cars or the distribution of medical supplies could cause havoc if it fails to value human life the same way we do.

There are ways we might teach human morality to a nascent superintelligence. Machine learning algorithms could be taught to recognize human value systems, much like they are trained on databases of images and texts today.

Or, different AIs could debate each other, overseen by a human moderator, to build better models of human preferences.

But morality cuts both ways.

There may soon be a day, Bostrom says, when we’ll need to consider not just how an AI feels about us, but simply how it feels. “If we have machine intelligences that become artificial, digital minds,” he continues, “then it also becomes an ethical matter [of] how we affect them.”

In this age of conscious machines, humans may just have a newfound moral obligation to treat digital beings with respect.

Call it the 21st-century Golden Rule.

One problem: Teaching morality to a machine becomes a question of “whose morality.”

For instance, consider this man’s moral beliefs:

Indian police have arrested a man and accused him of decapitating his own teenage daughterin a rage over her relationship with another man he didn’t like

In what appears to be the latest gruesome case of so-called “honor killing” in the Asian nation. Police in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh said Sarvesh Kumar was arrested as he walked toward the local police station carrying his daughter’s head.

Honor crimes are a major problem in India, neighboring Pakistan, and other countries where family members — most often women and girls — are attacked and even killed by their relatives for bringing perceived shame onto the family.

Such crimes are more common in rural communities where centuries-old traditions and deep-rooted cultural norms still dictate the rules of everyday life.

While that murder may seem immoral to you, and definitely seems immoral to me, what would you call turning off a computer that is so advanced it is sentient? How different is that from murder?

We humans face an infinite number of moral dilemmas some of which are addressed by laws and some of which are addressed ad hoc. The fact that there are dilemmas indicates the absence of “right-or-wrong” answers.

Machines, by their very nature, can be physically much stronger and have more physical survivability than we humans have. If we also make them smarter and more imaginative who will rule whom?

Won’t it be vital to give them a moral imperative, while we still can?

But again, whose moral imperative? If there becomes a choice between killing a human vs. turning off a computer, which choice will a sentient computer make. And by the way, when exactly does a computer become sentient?

Fortunately, the human brain operates on a completely different system from the electronic artificial brain. So even with quantum computers being developed, I suspect computers will, for at least several human generations, continue lag well behind us in their overall capabilities.

That suspicion could change suddenly, however. Science does not work in a straight line.

Previously, the fastest vaccine ever created was the mumps vaccine, which required four years of development. Yet, months, perhaps years of developing the COVID-19 vaccine were eliminated via the evolutionary shortcut of CRISPR-Cas 9.

Tomorrow, a new way to create a superior artificial brain could be announced, and we immediately would be faced with the possibility of sentient computers, and all the dilemmas they would bring, from turning them on, ruling them, putting them into hazardous or unpleasant situations, and turning them off.

For instance:

The First Steps Toward a Quantum Brain: An Intelligent Material That Learns by Physically Changing Itself

An intelligent material that learns by physically changing itself, similar to how the human brain works, could be the foundation of a completely new generation of computers.

Radboud physicists working toward this so-called “quantum brain” have made an important step. They have demonstrated that they can pattern and interconnect a network of single atoms, and mimic the autonomous behavior of neurons and synapses in a brain.

Says project leader Alexander Khajetoorians, Professor of Scanning Probe Microscopy at Radboud University, “This requires not only improvements to technology, but also fundamental research in game-changing approaches.

Our new idea of building a ‘quantum brain’ based on the quantum properties of materials could be the basis for a future solution for applications in artificial intelligence.”

For artificial intelligence to work, a computer needs to be able to recognize patterns in the world and learn new ones.

Today’s computers do this via machine learning software that controls the storage and processing of information on a separate computer hard drive. “Until now, this technology, which is based on a century-old paradigm, worked sufficiently. However, in the end, it is a very energy-inefficient process,” says co-author Bert Kappen, Professor of Neural networks and machine intelligence.

The physicists at Radboud University discovered that by constructing a network of cobalt atoms on black phosphorus they were able to build a material that stores and processes information in similar ways to the brain, and, even more surprisingly, adapts itself.

An intelligent material that learns by physically changing itself, similar to how the human brain works, could be the foundation of a completely new generation of computers. Radboud physicists working toward this so-called “quantum brain” have made an important step. They have demonstrated that they can pattern and interconnect a network of single atoms, and mimic the autonomous behavior of neurons and synapses in a brain.

Science, human survival, and morality march to different drum beats. We developed atomic energy first. Since then we have struggled to use it without destroying ourselves.

From corn to cows to trees to your pet dog, almost every living thing we touch has been subject to some measure of our evolutionary tinkering. But our evolutionary tinkering required years of trial and error, and sometimes didn’t work at all.

Now, with CRISPR-Cas9, we can do in a day what formerly took years. It has given us the power to eliminate malaria simply by eliminating the Anopheles Stephensi mosquito via what is known as a “gene drive.”

But should we eliminate that species? We already have, many times. But should we do it intentionally? That question is addressed in the New York Times Magazine, here.

The elimination of an entire species is no small decision. No one can say for certain what the side effects will be, what other animals will be affected and how?

And if we intentionally eliminate one species will we eliminate another unpopular species the same way?

But then, in reality, there is no question at all. If it’s possible to do it, someone will do it, and then someone else will do it. And the question will have been answered.

The title of this post is: “Should we build a moral computer?”

But in reality, a better title might be, “When will we build a moral computer, and how will we survive it?“

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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

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

The most important problems in economics involve:

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

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics. Implementation of Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The economics scare-mongers defy facts. Were you fooled?

Since 1981, the CRFB (Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget) has been scaring you about a “soon-to-come economic doomsday.”

The fiscal apocalypse always is imminent — always just around the corner.

Does the fact that it never arrives embarrass the CRFB? Apparently not,

If you made the same wrong predictions every year for the past 40 years wouldn’t you be a bit hesitant about doing it yet again? And if you were one of the CRFB’s readers, wouldn’t you have learned long ago not to trust anything these people say?

It seems that being wrong again and again and again, doesn’t cause them any embarrassment, nor does it cause their followers any second thoughts.

The CRFB keeps peddling the same nonsense every year, using exactly the same words. Only the numbers change.

Today, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its March 2021 Long-Term Budget Outlook, confirming that the federal budget is on an unsustainable long-term trajectory.

Let us pause to examine the word “unsustainable.” What does it mean? The CRFB never says.

Does “unsustainable” mean the federal government will go bankrupt? No, that cannot happen.

It can happen to monetarily non-sovereign entities like U.S. states, counties, and cities. It can happen to euro nations because they are monetarily non-sovereign. It can happen to businesses, and to you and to me.

But it cannot happen to the U.S. government. It is Monetarily Sovereign. It creates U.S. dollars by the very act of paying creditors.

[To pay a creditor, the federal government sends instructions (in the form of a check or wire) to the creditor’s bank. The instructions say, “Pay to the order of________”

When the bank receives those instructions, it does as it is told. It increases the numbers in the creditor’s checking account. At the moment that happens, a money measure known as “M1” increases.

The bank then clears the instructions through the government’s own Federal Reserve Bank, which always approves government instructions. In short, the government approves its own instructions.

That is the way the federal government creates dollars.]

Because the government never can run short of instructions, it never can run short of dollars.

Does “unsustainable” mean the federal government will be unable to pay its debts? No. Clearly having unlimited money gives the government unlimited ability to pay its debts.

Does “unsustainable” mean countries or people will begin to reject payment in dollars? No. The U.S. has a massive economy. Long after people begin to reject euros, and the money of smaller economies like those of Japan, Canada, Australia, England, China et al, they still will accept U.S. dollars.

Does “unsustainable” mean that one day, China will demand a return of all the dollars it has lent the U.S.? No. China has not lent the U.S. any dollars. (The U.S. government, having the unlimited ability to create dollars, has no need to borrow dollars.)

What erroneously is termed “borrowing” actually is China making deposits of U.S. dollars into its own T-security accounts held at the Federal Reserve Bank. There the dollars remain until China wants them back. The U.S. government has no need for them.

Whenever China wants those dollars returned, the Bank merely transfers them to China’s own checking account, at any bank in the world. This is a simple money transfer that is no burden on the U.S. or on taxpayers. It happens every day of the week.

Does “unsustainable” mean we will have uncontrolled inflation? No, our Monetarily Sovereign government has unlimited control over the value of the U.S. dollar, a control it has exercised many times over the years.

It formerly was accomplished by arbitrarily changing the dollar’s exchange value with gold or silver. Today, it is accomplished by arbitrarily changing the interest rates paid on Treasury Securities. Raising the rates makes the dollar more valuable (i.e., decreases inflation).

So what does “unsustainable” mean? It means, “We want you to be worried, frightened even, about some unknown thing lying in the shadows.” But folks, the only thing lying is the CRFB, and they do it every day:

Analysis of CBO’s March 2021 Long-Term Budget Outlook | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (crfb.org)

Under current law, CBO projects federal debt held by the public to rise from less than 80 percent of GDP at the end of FY 2019 to 202 percent of GDP by 2051.

Under a more realistic scenario, debt could reach nearly 260 percent of GDP by 2051.

Why is it bad that the total of deposits into T-bill, T-note, and T-bond accounts (wrongly called “debt”) will be more than double Gross Domestic Product?

It isn’t. One has nothing to do with the other. It’s like announcing that the number of blond-haired people will be double the number of fire-plugs in Chicago. The “debt”/GDP ratio is an irrelevant apples/oranges comparison.

So-called “federal debt” is the total of deposits into T-security accounts, similar to bank savings accounts. In today’s federal bookkeeping system, it also is the net total of federal deficits run by the federal government in the 240 years since the U.S. began.

By contrast, GDP is a one-year total of spending by the U.S. public and private sectors. Increases or decreases in deposits do not correlate with increases or decreases in spending. The U.S. government has the power to stop accepting dollars in T-security accounts, while continuing to spend, forever.

Japan, which has a ratio exceeding 250%, long ago proved the meaninglessness of that meant-to-be-scary debt/GDP fraction.

Perhaps, that is why the CRFB never specifically says what problems the ratio supposedly causes — just a vague reference to “unsustainable.”

Deficits Will Explode. Under current law, CBO projects annual budget deficits will grow to 13.3 percent of GDP by 2051.

While this is lower than the COVID-driven deficit of 14.9 percent of GDP in FY 2020, it will be nearly three times higher than the 2019 deficit of 4.6 percent of GDP, roughly four times as high as the 3.3 percent of GDP average seen over the past 50 years, and higher than any point in modern history outside of World War II and the current crisis.

Ooooh, “explode”! How frightening. The CRFB fails to mention that 2020, 2019, the past 50 years, and World War II, all were periods of large deficits and of economic growth.

And what are those terrible “deficits” the CRFB wants to scare you with? Deficits are times when the federal government pumps more stimulus dollars into the private sector than it removes via taxing.

Not only does federal deficit spending stimulate economic growth, but the economy could not grow without federal deficit spending. In fact, when federal deficit spending is reduced, we have recessions and depressions.

When the growth in federal deficit spending is reduced (red line), we eventually have recessions, which are cured by increases in deficit spending. Other than that, there is no relationship between deficit spending and federal “debt” (blue line).

Is a growing economy something that should frighten you??? The idea is laughable.

Spending Will Continuously Outpace Revenue.

CBO projects spending will grow from 21.0 percent of GDP in 2019 to 31.8 percent of GDP by 2051, while revenue will grow from 16.3 to 18.5 percent of GDP.

Over the long term, rising health care, retirement, and interest costs will cause a significant increase in spending. Revenue will also grow under current law, but only modestly.

In the above paragraphs, the CRFB confuses federal finances with personal finances.

You and I, and indeed all monetarily non-sovereign entities, use income (“revenue”) to fund spending. Without some form of income, we can’t spend.

The Monetarily Sovereign government, which creates dollars, ad hoc, from thin air, whenever it spends, needs no income. In fact, the federal government destroys all income upon receipt.

When, for instance, your tax dollars reach the U.S. Treasury, they cease to be a part of any money measure (M0, M1, M2, M3). Your tax dollars effectively no longer exist.

While comparisons between revenue and spending are important for you and me, they are meaningless for the federal government. The CRFB intentionally confuses the two.

Major Trust Funds Are Headed Toward Insolvency.

CBO projects Highway Trust Fund (HTF) insolvency in FY 2022, Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund insolvency in FY 2026, Social Security Old Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) trust fund insolvency in calendar year 2032 and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) trust fund insolvency in calendar year 2035.

On a theoretical combined basis, the Social Security program will be insolvent in calendar year 2032.

The major “trust funds” are not really trust funds (See “The phony ‘trust fund’ controversy”), and whatever one wishes to call them, they are not “headed for insolvency.”

Given that the federal government has the unlimited ability to create dollars, no federal agency can become insolvent unless the government wishes it to be insolvent. The federal government could (and should) end collection of the FICA tax, and still pay Social Security and Medicare benefits, forever.

The Long-Term Outlook is Similar to Last Year.

Ultimately, high debt levels will slow income and wage growth, increase interest payments, place upward pressure on interest rates, reduce the fiscal space available to respond to a recession or other emergency, place an undue burden on future generations, and heighten the risk of a fiscal crisis.

Once the current crisis ends, policymakers must work to get our long-term fiscal house in order.

It’s all a lie.

**Increased debt levels (red line) have not slowed personal income growth (blue line).**

As for “increased interest payments,” they stimulate economic growth by adding dollars to the private sector

**There has been no “upward pressure on interest rates” which instead are at historic lows.**

And because the federal government has the unlimited ability to create dollars, by definition it always has infinite “fiscal space” to respond to a recession or other emergency. It has demonstrated this infinite fiscal space by repeatedly passing multi-trillion dollar stimulus packages.

There is no burden on future generations. Future taxes will not fund today’s spending. The only burden on future generations would be a poverty burden if the government had not spent trillions to stimulate the economy.

And finally, “fiscal house in order” is a word-salad meaning nothing with regard to our Monetarily Sovereign federal government.

In Summary

The CRFB article is one gigantic lie, designed to scare those who do not understand the workings of a Monetarily Sovereign entity. It makes false claims that are contradicted by easily seen facts.

These are people who insist you are standing in the midst of a thunderstorm while you plainly can see the sun shining.

Michigan mansion once owned by Eminem is back on the market — **Maintaining the Gap**

Why does the CRFB lie about the economy? Because they are paid by, and controlled by, the very rich, who because of Gap Psychology, want you to accept higher taxes and lower federal benefits.

[“Rich” is a relative term. If you have $1,000, and everyone else has $1, you are rich.; The wider the Gap between you and those who are poorer, the richer you are.

“Gap Psychology” is the desire to become richer by widening the income/wealth/power Gap below, while narrowing the Gap above.

Being funded by the rich, the CRFB spreads lies that will influence you to believe the federal government can’t afford social benefits.

They want you meekly to accept your lower station in life, so that the rich can maintain or increase their control over America.]

This is the same motive behind the repeated, claims that federal deficit spending is the dreaded “socialism.” It isn’t. “Socialism” is government ownership and control. Though all governments are partly socialistic, most federal spending involves neither ownership nor control.

But the rich know that the word “socialism” has pejorative implications, so they apply it to such federal benefits as Medicare, Social Security, SNAP programs, etc.

It is all a lie proxies for the rich continually repeat until the false ideas are implanted so deeply into the public consciousness, that obvious facts are doubted.

Because of liars like the CRFB, the rich own you, and only the truth can set you free.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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

The most important problems in economics involve:

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

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

How intelligent is America? How intelligent are you? Here is one simple test

Intelligence can be measured in many ways, depending on what is being tested, the nature of the test itself, the method of scoring, the testing experience of the tester, and the testing experience of those being tested.

That said, two reasonably good criteria for intelligence are:

The ability and willingness to evaluate data, and
The refusal to accept opinions from proven liars and charlatans.

Here is one small example of what one might consider to be a test of intelligence:

Percent who say they are unsure or will not take the COVID-19 vaccine
Survey of U.S. registered voters, Nov. 9, 2020, to Feb. 23, 2021

Reproduced from Civiqs; Chart: Axios Visuals

Now let’s view the extremes. First the bottom:

Do you plan to take a coronavirus vaccine if it becomes available?
Refined by: Party: Republican; Gender: Male; Age: 18-34; Race: White; Education: Non-College Graduate

The people least likely to take the vaccine are White, Republican males, age 18-34, who have not graduated college.

Then the top:

Do you plan to take a coronavirus vaccine if it becomes available?
Party: Refined by: Party: Democrat; Gender: Male; Age: 50-64; Race: White; Education: College Graduate

The people most likely to take the vaccine are White, Democrat males, age 50-64, who are college graduates.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

The single biggest variable is Party, with only 2% of the Democrats saying they will not take the vaccine, while an astounding 64% of the Republicans saying they will refuse.

That comprises a massive number of Americans angling to receive Darwin Awards.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Unfortunately, those having low intelligence are not intelligent enough to understand that their opinions are based on low intelligence. So they follow others of low intelligence or others who will do them harm.

The clearest symptoms of low intelligence are acting indefensibly and defending the indefensible — for example, the people who encouraged, participated in, or defend the attempt to overturn the American elections by force, and/or who now speak longingly of secession from the United States.

Because truth and logic seldom penetrate the minds of the unintelligent (who usually prefer to believe and repeat rumors, conspiracy theories, and outright lies), the only hope is that these unintelligent people do not cause irreparable harm to the world.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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

The most important problems in economics involve:

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

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Another example of taxing the poor more than the rich, and why the cities struggle

The rich have tax shelters, tax deductions, tax loss carryforwards, tax avoidance schemes, secret off-shore bank accounts, tax-deferred trusts, and high-powered accountants to see that they pay only a tiny portion of their earnings in taxes. Rauner's 'toilet' attack on Pritzker is a real loo-loo - Chicago Tribune

(The governor of Illinois, who lives in Chicago, took the toilets out of an empty mansion he owns, to take advantage of a law that lowers taxes for buildings without toilets.)

The rich have businesses to provide “platinum” health care policies along with “diamond” retirement programs.

President Trump is an example of that “most-favored-person” scam.

As I recall, this self-proclaimed billionaire hasn’t paid taxes in a decade.

Have you thought about the fact that you paid more taxes last year alone than Donald Trump paid in the past ten years, total?

The poor, on the other hand, are saddled with regressive, unnecessary FICA, exorbitant sales taxes, and other government fees and taxes that are difficult if not impossible to avoid.

On average, the lower-income groups pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes and government fees than do the rich.

And even those “friends of the poor” Democrats continue to pile it on, as this article in today’s Chicago Tribune can attest:

City’s 6 mph speeding ticket rules start Monday, and they’re looking lucrative
By John Byrne Chicago Tribune

(Democrat) Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s new stricter speed camera rules start Monday and, if the early warnings are any indication, they’re looking expensive for Chicago drivers.

As the city prepares to start ticketing drivers in Chicago going as little as 6 miles per hour over the posted speed limit, warnings mailed to people caught exceeding the new threshold show the change promises to be hugely lucrative for the city and a significant burden for residents already struggling to pay fines.

In the first week of the grace period that started in January, 52,498 warning notices were sent out, according to the Finance Department. The notices were intended to get people used to the fact they’re going to receive $35 tickets for being caught by any of more than 100 speed cameras around the city going from 6 to 9 mph too fast, according to the Finance Department.

Over a full year, such numbers would work out to over 2.7 million $35 tickets, with total revenue to the city of $95.5 million.

Under existing rules, cars caught by a camera going 10 mph over the limit get a $35 ticket, while those traveling 11 miles per hour and up above the posted speed get tagged for a $100 fine.

Now guess who will pay those fines. Will it be the wealthy suburbanites who ride to work downtown on comfortable, air-conditioned trains, or the poor slob who drives to work in the city, while hoping not to get carjacked on Chicago’s mean streets?

And with the available warning data pointing to more than 2.7 million tickets being issued annually under the new rules, the goal supposedly is not to cite drivers, but to promote safer driving.”

In order to avoid a speeding violation, drivers simply have to observe the speed limit.

Yes, it’s so simple to avoid going 6 miles per hour above the speed limit, that is, unless you drive in the real world, or on the Kennedy Expressway or Chicago’s Lake Shore Drive during the day or night, when the average speed is about 20 miles above the limit. Would you like to be a taxi driver who’s trying to get his impatient passenger to the airport on time?

Yes, you can drive the speed limit and get honked, fingered, rear-ended, or shot.

An now here’s the real knee-slapper:

With the new speed rules set to kick off Monday, the Lightfoot administration this week characterized the move as part of its larger “Vision Zero” plan to reduce car crashes.

“With the impacts of COVID-19, Chicago and many other cities experienced reduced traffic volumes that were accompanied by a surge in speeding and traffic deaths.

According to provisional data, 139 people died in traffic crashes in Chicago in 2020,” a news release read in part.

For perspective, compare that 139 figure to Chicago’s population of 2,700,000 and to the 725 people who died, and the nearly 4,000 who were injured, by gun violence in Chicago in the same year.

And sure, the purpose of those fines is to “promote traffic safety.” Believe that, and I’ll sell you one of the bridges over the Chicago River.

The real problem is, the monetarily non-sovereign cities, counties, and states don’t have enough money.

They can try to soak the rich with property taxes and wealth taxes, but the rich simply will move out and build their property where the taxes are lower.

That begins a cycle of exit, then urban decay, then more exit, especially in the cold-weather cities that don’t have as many tourists bringing in money, as do the southern areas. And ultimately, the poor get hammered.

So what is a mayor to do?

The answer, the only answer, is for the Monetarily Sovereign federal government to subsidize the big cities.

Too many politicians wrongly claim those big-city financial problems are due solely to mismanagement. Yes, there is plenty of waste in big-city government, as there is in all large enterprises.

But waste is not the real culprit. The real problem is the inevitable result of monetary non-sovereignty, which means that:

The main source of money is taxes, fees, and fines
The need for which goes up every year
And mostly are paid by the lower-income groups

It’s a built-in, structural problem, that only can be solved via money coming from the Monetarily Sovereign federal government.

Unfortunately, Illinois, Chicago’s state, runs a $15 billion negative balance of payments with the federal government, so even the monetarily non-sovereign state can’t do much to help Chicago. Money is flowing out instead of in.

And while our cities and their lower-income residents struggle, we have economic know-nothings whining about the meaningless federal debt, a number that has increased nearly every year for 80 years, with no adverse effect.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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

The most important problems in economics involve:

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

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: