The party of the rich is at it, again. Making life more difficult for the disabled.

Do you support the GOP? If so, you must be very rich, very mean, and/or very stupid. Sorry, but there are no other alternatives.

As if life isn’t difficult enough for the disabled, the Trump administration wants to make it even more difficult — and for no good reason. That’s known as “Making America Great, Again” compassion.

While you read the following, keep in mind three facts:

  1. Contrary to popular belief, Social Security is not funded by FICA or any other taxes. Even if all FICA collections totaled $0, the federal government could continue paying Social Security benefits, forever.
  2. It isn’t the very rich who need Social Security benefits. They can fund all their financial needs personally. Social Security, and especially its disability benefits, are most needed by the middle-income and the poor.
  3. The GOP, the party of the rich, expends all its efforts toward widening the Gap between the very rich and the rest. Cutting Social Security, Medicaid, poverty aids, and other programs that help the not-rich, all are part of the GOP’s Gap-widening plan.
Image result for bernanke and greenspan
It’s our little secret. Don’t tell the people we don’t use their tax dollars.

Ben Bernanke: “The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost.”

Alan Greenspan: “Central banks can issue currency, a non-interest-bearing claim on the government, effectively without limit. A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency.”

St. Louis Federal Reserve: “As the sole manufacturer of dollars, whose debt is denominated in dollars, the U.S. government can never become insolvent, i.e.,unable to pay its bills. In this sense, the government is not dependent on credit markets (borrowing) to remain operational.

Here are excerpts from two articles describing the latest GOP war on the less fortunate.

A National Disgrace’: Trump Proposes Social Security Change That Could End Disability Benefits for Hundreds of Thousands
Posted on December 17, 2019 by Yves Smith, (By Jake Johnson, staff writer at Common Dreams)

The public comments period on the proposed rule change to make it more difficult to remain eligible for Social Security disability benefitsis open till January 31, 2020.

It is so depressing to see how mean-spirited the US has become. First imposing more stringent and often impossible-to-meet work requirements for SNAP beneficiaries, and now this.

Activists are working to raise public awareness and outrage over a little-noticed Trump administration proposal that could strip life-saving disability benefits from hundreds of thousands of peopleby further complicating the way the Social Security Administration determines who is eligible for payments.

Alex Lawson, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Social Security Works, told Common Dreams that the rule change “is the Trump administration’s most brazen attack on Social Security yet.”

When Ronald Reagan implemented a similar benefit cut, it ripped away the earned benefits of 200,000 people,” Lawson said. “Ultimately, Reagan was forced to reverse his attack on Social Security after massive public outcry—but not before people suffered and died.

Patient advocate Peter Morley, who lobbies Congress on healthcare issues, called the proposal “a national disgrace.”The process for receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is already notoriously complicated, and the Trump administration is attempting to add yet another layer of complexity that critics say is aimed at slashing people’s benefits.

As The Philadelphia Inquirer reported last week, “those already receiving disability benefits are subject to so-called continuing disability reviews, which determine whether they are still deserving of compensation for an injury, illness, or other incapacitating problem as their lives progress.”

Currently, beneficiaries are placed in three separate categories based on the severity of their disability: “Medical Improvement Not Expected,” “Medical Improvement Expected,” and “Medical Improvement Possible.” People with more severe medical conditions face less frequent disability reviews.

The Trump administration’s proposed rule would another category called “Medical Improvement Likely,” which would subject beneficiaries to disability reviews every two years.

According to the Inquirer, “an estimated 4.4 million beneficiaries would be included in that designation, many of them children and so-called Step 5 recipients, an internal Social Security classification.”

Step 5 recipients, the Inquirer noted, “are typically 50 to 65 years of age, in poor health, without much education or many job skills [and] often suffer from maladies such as debilitating back pain, depression, a herniated disc, or schizophrenia.

Jennifer Burdick, supervising attorney with Community Legal Services in Philadelphia, told the Inquirer that placing Step 5 recipients in the new “Medical Improvement Likely” category and subjecting them to reviews every two years would represent “a radical departure from past practice.”

Lawson of Social Security Works said “Donald Trump and his advisers know that this will kill people, and they do not care.

The proposal, said Democrat Sen. Bob Casey, “appears to be yet another attempt by the Trump administration to make it more difficult for people with disabilities to receive benefits.

Boyle said the “changes seem arbitrary, concocted with no evidence or data to justify such consequential modifications.”

“This seems like the next iteration of the Trump administration’s continued efforts to gut Social Security benefits,” Democrat Rep. Brendan Boyle added.

The GOP endlessly tries to “save money,” by cutting benefits to the not-rich.  “Saving money” is unnecessary for a Monetarily Sovereign nation (which creates unlimited money at the touch of a computer key), but it is a bald-faced lie for a party that supports tax breaks for the rich.

Here is another commentary:

Trump administration proposes Social Security rule changes that could cut off thousands of disabled recipients
by Alfred Lubrano, Updated: December 12, 2019

The Trump administration is proposing changes to Social Security that could terminate disability payments to hundreds of thousands of Americans, particularly older people and children.

The new rule would change aspects of disability reviews — the methods by which the Social Security Administration determines whether a person continues to qualify for benefits.

Few recipients are aware of the proposal, which is open for public comment through January.

Critics of the plan liken it to the administration’s efforts to cut food stamps, among other entitlement programs, with insufficient information offered to explain curtailing benefits.

Social Security officials declined to comment. For years, Republicans have argued that Social Security benefits need to be reined in to save money.

The new rule, advocates for low-income Americans say, is just a way to push people off the disability rolls.

To the Republicans, any benefit to the not-rich is too much., They use words like “socialism,” or “unaffordable,” or “unsustainable,” or “promoting laziness,” or many other excuses for making the poor poorer and the rich richer.

There is not a single, valid reason to cut benefits to the disabled. In fact, a “great” America would increase benefits to these unfortunate, suffering people.

But despite red baseball caps and vague promises, this nation has moved a considerable distance from greatness, unless one counts being mean-spirited, hate-mongering, and serial lying as signs of greatness.

So yes, if you support the GOP and Donald Trump. you must be very rich, very mean, and/or very stupid.

There are no other alternatives.

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

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

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. 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:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

This is the one question you should ask your Republican Senator

This is the one question you should ask your Republican senator:Image result for trump university

“Do you honestly believe that the man who owned the corrupt Trump University, which cheated thousands of innocent students out of their time and money, and the man who owned the corrupt Trump Foundation, which cheated contributors and the U.S. government – do you honestly believe that same man was concerned about corruption in Ukraine(!)?

“Is that what you honestly believe?” 

 

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

The biggest problem facing Americans: Airline seat reclining

We American’s find the future of our nation just too, too boring.

So we have become immune to the impeachment hearings along with hourly news about bribery, violation of campaign laws, perjury, conspiracy, contempt of Congress, violation of the emoluments clause, obstruction of justice, abuse of power, bank fraud, tax fraud, misappropriation of funds, extortion, adultery, coercion for personal benefit, cheating workers, abusing children, and fundamentally being a rotten human being. (See this list.)

And we find the future of our children and indeed the entire human species to be just too, too boring.

So we pay no attention to warnings about what we are doing to the world, including climate change and toxins in the air, water and earth. We accept the Washington freak show featuring the removal of anti-pollution, anti-carbon, and anti-corruption rules.

Image result for crowded airplane
Next step: No seats or aisles.

But if there is one thing that gains our attention is our butts, and the comfort thereof, as evidenced by these takes from an article in the December 13, 2019 THE WEEK Magazine.

Air travel: Should you recline your seat?
The Week (US)13 Dec 2019

As millions of Americans take to the skies this holiday season, allow me to settle one of the longest-standing debates associated with air travel, said Christopher Elliott in USA Today.

You may have the ability to recline your seat on an airplane, but you shouldn’t. “It’s rude—and it’s wrong.” That’s because passengers are “officially out of space.”

Decades ago, many economy-class seats offered “a generous 36 inches of ‘pitch,’” which is a rough measure of the space between seats.

But over the years, “greedy airlines” have whittled us down to “as little as 28 inches” so that they can pack passengers into the cabin “like cargo.” This means that should you recline your seat, “you’ll end up in someone’s lap.” So please stop. It’s irritating, self-indulgent, and even immoral.

Nonsense, said Stacey Lastoe in CNN.com. Reclining your seat “is a right,” since airlines equip seats with a recline button. Besides, how else is one expected to sleep on an airplane? While sitting erect? No.

In the end, “I recline, you recline, we all recline for increased comfort.” Agreed, said Ben Lucky in OneMileAtATime .com, although reclining works best “when everyone is on the same page” and eager to sleep, as is usually the case on a red-eye.

Yes, but sometimes strong measures are demanded, said Josh Ocampo in LifeHacker.com. Let’s say, for instance, that the very tall person in front of you has committed the unforgivable sin of reclining during meal service, forcing your tray into your chest. Then no one could blame you if you turned up the air conditioner located directly above your seat to full blast and angled it directly upon the recliner’s forehead, forcing him or her “to endure the wrath of your freezing-cold airplane air.” If that doesn’t work, I might suggest a sudden bout of restless legs syndrome that compels you to kick the seat back—hard—every few minutes. That “might earn you an extra inch or two.”

Here’s what I think. Don’t punish the person in front of you for using his/her seat in exactly the way it was designed by the airlines, to be used.

Punish the airlines who care so little about your comfort they created a situation guaranteed to make passengers uncomfortable and angry.

The person ahead of you is uncomfortable, because realizing that reclining his seat might make you uncomfortable, he doesn’t recline.

Or if he does, he wonders what you’re thinking about him and are you going to be in a “seat-battle” with him. And anyway, the scant 2 inch recline isn’t enough to make anyone relax.

You are uncomfortable, because the person ahead of you has reclined, so you can’t even reach the barf bag if needed, and his dandruff is falling into your drink. And you yourself, either will or will not recline, and either way, you lose.

So don’t blame the passengers who are sharing with you a claustrophobic space created by the designers of Auschwitz or the children’s cages at our southern border.

Blame the rotten airline for putting you all in this position.

NO. Don’t blame the airline.

Blame yourself for going to Travelocity or Kayak, and booking on “El Cheapo Airlines and Stormdoor Company,” so you can save a few bucks while enduring several hours of inhumane conditions, relieved only by standing in line to use the one working, smelly toilet, while praying the “take-your-seat, NOW!” sign doesn’t go on.

It is you, yes YOU, Mr. Bargain Basement, who trained the airlines that you would rather save a few bucks than receive human comfort.

So the next time you are racing through the airport, with your pants falling down, because you forgot your belt and wallet at security, and you hear the announcement, “All passengers must rwjqelor dfqwoper 349 asas, IMMEDIATELY, or else,” and then you sit in the middle of two huge, fat guys with bad breath, one of whom says, “Would you mind holding my emotional support bee hive,” remember this:

There once were airlines that served real food, had real bathrooms, the seats were two abreast, not ten, only humans flew, and the there was plenty of room to lie back and enjoy.

But that was before cheaptickets.com.

And you have only yourself to blame.

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

OMG! Would you think the editor of the Wall Street Journal understood finance?

Yes, I’m talking about the great Wall Street Journal, the veritable bible of the finance class, the paper that money-dealers read before breakfast, quote at lunch, then rely on during the day as they invest billions — that Wall Street Journal.

Matt Murray, Editor in Chief

And I’m talking about an editor, not just a reporter or copy boy — an editor!

Well, if you think the editor, whoever he/she may be, understands finance, you can disabuse yourself of that belief. The following was reprinted in THE WEEK Magazine, December 13, 2019.

How Europe pays for its welfare state
Editorial, The Wall Street Journal

Some Democratic presidential candidates “insist that America could afford a European-style welfare state if only it taxed the rich more heavily,” said The Wall Street Journal.

But a close look at Europe’s taxation policies shows that countries have “learned the hard way that the rich aren’t rich enough to pay for their entitlements,” and balance their budgets by heavily dunning the middle class.

Germany, for example, imposes a 42 percent rate on married households earning $124,000, whereas in the U.S., such a couple pays 22 percent.

Sweden’s top rate of 55 percent kicks in with individual earnings as low as $47,000, and in the U.K., taxpayers earning just $64,000 pay a 40 percent rate.

Governments also slap workers with hefty payroll taxes they call “social insurance contributions” that are far higher than America’s Social Security and Medicare deductions, and impose a Value Added Tax of 21 percent on all consumer purchases, regardless of a buyer’s income.

As a result, Europe’s tax system takes more than half of most people’s wages and is far less progressive than the U.S.’s.

Beware politicians who claim they can finance free college, day care, and health care for all by taxing billionaires. “The middle class will pay, because that’s where the real money is.”

Oh, dear lord, where does one begin to address such ignorance?

The headline, “How Europe pays for its welfare state,” is thoroughly misleading. “Europe” does not pay for anything. Individual nations pay for different things under different circumstances.

And Europe is not a “welfare state.” It is not even a state. But the WSJ uses the term “welfare state” for its pejorative effect. It’s a not-so-subtle attempt to tell you, “Don’t ask for anything from the government. Only the rich are entitled to benefits.”

The Wall Street Journal editor clearly does not understand, or does not want to understand, the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty.

Germany is monetarily non-sovereign. It has no sovereign currency. It uses the euro, which is the sovereign currency of the European Union (EU).

Germany voluntarily surrendered its most valuable asset — its Monetary Sovereignty — in exchange for . . . what? Financial submission to the non-elected bureaucrats of the EU? Permanent austerity for its people?

Being monetarily non-sovereign, Germany’s government resembles the U.S. state and local governments, and you, and me, all of which also a monetarily non-sovereign.

Not having a sovereign currency, all we monetarily non-sovereign types cannot create our own currencies, and so we can run short of whatever currency we use.

You and I, and our cities, counties, and states all can run short of dollars. Germany can run short of euros.

We all need income in order to spend. That is not true of such Monetarily Sovereign entities like the U.S., Sweden, and the UK, which have the unlimited ability to create their own sovereign currencies.

“But wait,” you might object. “If the U.S., Sweden, and the UK have the unlimited ability to create their own currencies, why do they levy taxes on their citizens? And especially Sweden and the UK — why do they levy such high taxes?”

For Monetarily Sovereign entities, taxes do not fund spending, but taxes do have other purposes.

  1. Taxes help a government control the economy by taxing things the government wishes to discourage and by giving tax breaks to things it wishes to encourage. For example, U.S. homeowners receive tax breaks that renters do not receive. For whatever reason, the federal government wishes to encourage homeownership.
  2. Because the very rich run America, they receive tax breaks that the middle- and lower-income people do not receive. These breaks help widen the Gap between the rich and the rest. (It is the Gap that makes the rich rich.
  3. Levying taxes provides the illusion that federal taxes are necessary to fund federal spending. This illusion helps prevent the populace from demanding more federal benefits.
  4. Mandatory tax collections add to the demand for a currency.

Point #3 is exemplified by the controversy over Medicare-for-All. What sane person would not want free, no deductible medical services for life? Yet nearly half of Americans object to receiving this marvelous benefit, because of the false belief that taxes will have to pay for it.

Sweden and the UK, which easily could pay for their healthcare without levying taxes, constitute a combination of monetary ignorance and wilfulness — items #3 and #4, above.

Apparently, Sweden and the UK want to hide this fact from their citizens. And speaking of Sweden, glance at this article from Wikipedia:

Sweden and the euro
According to the 1995 accession treaty, Sweden is required to join the eurozone and therefore must convert to the euro once the convergence criteria are met.

Notwithstanding this, on 14 September 2003, a consultative Swedish referendum was held on the euro, in which 56% of voters were opposed to the adoption of the currency, out of an overall turnout of 82.6%.

Some of Sweden’s major parties continue to believe it would be in the national interest to join, but all parties have pledged to abide by the results of the referendum, and none have shown any interest in raising the issue again.

As of 2014, support for Swedish membership of the euro among the general population is low. In September 2013, support fell as low as 9%. The only party in the Riksdag that supports Swedish entry in the euro (as of 2015) is the centrist Liberal Party.

For whatever good reasons, the people of Sweden have chosen not to surrender their Monetary Sovereignty. Despite paying high taxes, at least they control their money.Image result for same wall street journal story different headlines

The editors of the Wall Street Journal surely must know all this. They simply must.

But the very rich want to widen the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest, and they find the tax code a convenient way to accomplish their goal.

So they support wrong-headed articles that dissuade the populace from demanding healthcare and other social benefits.

As a result, millions of Americans cannot afford healthcare, millions of Americans suffer needlessly, and millions of Americans die too young.

It is a national disgrace, exceeded only by the misinformation campaign being conducted by America’s media, politicians, and economists.

Shame on you, Wall Street Journal. You should know better and if you do, shame on you even more.

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

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

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. 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:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY