Debt nonsense from The Week Magazine

You must wonder why something so simple and obvious is so widely and regularly misunderstood. I’m talking about the federal debt, which simultaneously is two things:

The total of deposits into Treasury bill, note, and bond accounts.
The net total of all past federal deficits, i.e. the difference between federal spending and federal taxing.

Here is an article from page 17 of The Week’s June 6, 2025 issue.

National debt: Why Congress no longer cares

Rising interest rates, tariffs and Trump’s ‘big, beautiful’ bill could sent the national debt soaring

Immediately, you may be reminded of our post titled “Historical bullshit about federal “debt.” From Sept. 26 to May 30, 2025.” where we give examples, beginning 1940, of smart people saying dumb things about the federal debt.

“Now would be a very good time for Washington to bring back its debt obsession,” said Rogé Karma in The Atlantic. That’s because the perfect storm for turning the federal deficit into a “genuine crisis” has arrived.

The above-referenced “Historic bullshit . . .” article was based on the warning, “ticking time bomb.” Now, we must face not a bomb but a “genuine crisis.” Same idea. Same bullshit.

In recent years, the Federal Reserve has “raised interest rates dramatically in an effort to tame inflation.” Since that means the federal government has to pay higher interest on its bonds, “government payments on debt interest soared to $881 billion in 2024.” That’s more than the U.S. spent last year on national defense.

For reasons unknown, the frightening comparison of the federal debt vs. the amount spent on national defense has become de rigueur for debt freaks these days.

Gone are the days when the debt was compared to the cost of 200 airliners or something equally meaningless.

At the same time, President Trump’s tariff policies have led “almost every credible” forecast this year to anticipate slowed economic growth.

When the tariffs take effect, money will be taken out of the economy and sent to the federal government. Taking money out of the economy is recessionary.

Then there’s Trump’s “big, beautiful,” and bloated budget bill, which would add “more than $3 trillion to the deficit over the next decade.”

Translation: Then there’s Trump’s “big, beautiful,” and bloated budget bill, which would add “more than 3 trillion growth dollars to the economy over the next decade.”

(It’s not clear whether the author meant “debt” or “deficit” because deficits usually are calculated annually, and not over 10-year periods. Either way, the shrieking is meaningless. Both deficits and their resultant debt are necessary for economic growth.)

Trump’s bill is a horrible bill, for many reasons, but one of those reasons is not its contribution to the deficit or debt.

According to the formula for economic growth—Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Nonfederal Spending + Net Imports—it is clear that deficit spending boosts both Federal Spending and Nonfederal Spending.

There is only one way for the federal government to avoid a deficit, and that is by running a surplus.

All U.S. depressions have come on the heels of federal surpluses.

1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807.

1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.

1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.

1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.

1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.

1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.

1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.

1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. Recession began 2001.

The warning signals are flashing red, and if Washington continues to ignore them, “very bad things can happen,” from 1970s-style stagflation to a panicked flight from U.S. Treasuries and a global financial meltdown.

“Stagflation” is a combination of stagnation (or, more troubling, a recession) and inflation. Recessions are caused by reduced (not increased) deficits and are cured by increased (not reduced) deficits.

**When debt growth (red line) is reduced, we have recessions (vertical gray bars), which are cured by increased debt growth**

As for “panicked flight from U.S. Treasuries,” there are three responses:

The federal government always can pay interest on its obligations simply by creating dollars.
When the U.S. economy is in trouble, there is a “panicked flight” to U.S. Treasuries, because they are the safest investment from a principal standpoint.
Who cares? The federal government does not need to offer Treasuries. Even if the public deposited $0 dollars into T-Security accounts, the government could continue to pay its bills forever.

Back to stagflation, the cause of inflation never has been federal spending but rather the lack of federal spending. Inflations are caused by shortages of crucial goods and services — most often oil and food — and cured by increased federal spending to reduce those shortages.

Lastly, there is concern about a potential “global financial meltdown.” It is unclear what type of “meltdown” the author means. Is he talking about a recession, which would be caused by reduced deficit growth? Or is he talking about a COVID-style recession that would be caused by shortages of virtually everything, and cured by federal deficit spending?

Or is he talking about the federal government being unable to pay its bills, which never has happened and cannot happen to a Monetarily Sovereign government.

So far, bond markets are showing concern but not panic, said Victoria Guida in Politico. The credit rating firm Moody’s slightly downgraded the safety of U.S. bonds, and investor unease pushed interest rates on those bonds above 5%.

That was Moody’s “performance” downgrade. No knowledgeable person believes the Federal government will be unable to pay interest on the securities. As for the principal, it’s locked safely away, never touched by anyone but the depositors.

The government could pay off all the so-called (misnamed) “debt” today, simply by crediting all the depositors’ checking accounts. A few computer keystrokes should do it.

Still, if Congress doesn’t heed these warnings and “shift the trajectory” of the budget bill—which would add trillions of dollars in tax cuts “without also making politically painful spending cuts”—”something more painful” than a mild Moody’s downgrade could occur.
Don’t bet on lawmakers acting responsibly, said Clive Crook in Bloomberg. The 2008 bank bail-outs and Covid-related spending under both Democrats and Republicans ballooned the national debt to previously unimaginable levels—it’s now $36.2 trillion.

Oooh, “unimaginable.” Is that worse than a “ticking time bomb,” “a perfect storm,” or a “genuine crisis”? Or is that closer to, “I have no idea what I’m talking about, so I’ll use scare words to pretend I do.”

Rather than confront debt of that magnitude, all but a few remaining deficit hawks “just stopped thinking about it.” Facing it would mean huge spending cuts and major tax increases, both of which are very unpopular.

Uh, perhaps it’s because “huge spending cuts and major tax increases” would cause a depression, like they always have.

Here, the author proves they don’t understand the fundamental differences between a Monetarily Sovereign entity like the U.S. government, and monetarily non-sovereign entities like state & local governments, businesses, euro governments, and individuals.

The U.S. has absolute control over the supply and value of its sovereign currency, the dollar. That is what “sovereignty” means. The non-sovereigns do not use a sovereign currency. They spend some other sovereign’s currency, so they have little, if any, control.

State and local governments use the dollar, over which the U.S. government is sovereign. You, I, and American businesses also use the dollar. We, too, are not sovereign, so we all can run short of dollars.

By contrast, euro nations use the euro over which the European Union is sovereign. So France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, et al can and do run short of euros.

Canada, Australia, the UK, and Japan are Monetarily Sovereign, so they cannot run short of dollars. It’s a reason why Japan has no difficulty supporting a so-called “debt” that is massively greater than the size of its economy. If the U.S. debt is a ticking time bomb, Japan’s debt would be an atomic bomb — but somehow, it isn’t.

One wonders how the debt nuts explain it.

Instead, Republicans are now trying to hide the bill’s “unfathomable cost” from voters, said Jessica Riedl in MSNBC.com. But it’s the voters who will suffer as a result.

“Unfathomable cost” — is that ever worse than “unimaginable,” “a ticking time bomb,” “a perfect storm,” and a “genuine crisis”?

I’d prefer “a pseudo-crisis invented by those who either are ignorant about Monetary Sovereignty, or want you to be ignorant so you don’t demand services from the government.”

That way, they have a “good” excuse to cut your Social Security, cut your Medicare, cut you Medicaid, and to deny you all the benefits the government easily could provide. The purpose: To widen the income/wealth/power Gap between you and the very rich political contributors.

The rapidly growing debt and massive interest payments create “economic drag,” diverting wealth “away from the investments that would start businesses, create jobs, and raise incomes.”

The massive interest payments go FROM the government TO the economy, where the added dollars allow for “the investments that would start businesses, create jobs, and raise incomes.”

As Washington continues to take an ostrich-like approach to the national debt, something large and unpleasant is bearing down on all of us.

Yes, that time bomb has been ticking for at least 85 years. It’s still ticking and still “bearing down.” If you can’t learn from 85 years of experience . . . Wow.

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/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

There are lies, damned lies and then there is . . .

There are lies, damned lies, and then there is the federal budget.

Here is an article that appeared in the 6/19/2025 Florida Sun Sentinel:

Trump’s spending bill threatens democracy and federal deficit

By Steve Corbin, The Fulcrum

As a lifelong marketer and Consumer Behavior professor, it’s interesting to observe how people’s opinions change as details of an issue become more apparent.

That’s what we refer to as “learning,” Mr. Corbin.

Behavioral change – once information and knowledge increase – is common among people who are open-minded, educated, and critical thinker.

The author, Steve Corbin, clearly identifies himself as one of those individuals who values open-mindedness, education, and critical thinking. I believe he thinks that those who agree with him embody these same qualities as well. This sentiment is likely shared by many others.

It’s called “human nature.”

But I wonder how he feels about those who view much of his article as nonsense.

Here are additional excerpts from his article, along with my thoughts on the implication that the disapproval rating of the “Big Beautiful Bill” increased as citizens became more informed about its contents.

I consider that to be mostly nonsensical. The disapproval rating increased because Elon Musk and many economists criticized it. The masses followed where the leaders directed them.

Conduct your own survey by asking the next person you meet, “Do you like the bill? Why or why not?” You will likely receive vague responses such as, “It increases the debt,” or “It’s bad for the poor.”

These general statements only loosely relate to the specifics of the bill and are often more reflective of the individual’s feelings toward Trump than an informed understanding of the bill itself.

Besides the megabill projecting to increase America’s budget deficit by $2.4 trillion, citizens’ top 10 concerns are noted below.
The most disconcerting aspect of the omnibus bill is listed last, as it undermines the checks and balances system that ensures separation of powers between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches Americans have revered for the past 250 years.

“Increasing the budget deficit by $2.4 trillion is more properly stated,” “Increases the federal government’s support for economic growth by $2.4 trillion.”

Without federal deficit spending, the economy would enter a recession, and even more likely, a depression.

In either case, recession or depression, the ONLY cure would be massive federal deficit spending.

Corbin fails to challenge the common myth about deficits, and his mention of it as a concern only spreads misinformation.

1) Medicaid: At least $600 billion will be cut from Medicaid, which will strip health care coverage from an estimated 10-15 million low-income Americans and close down over 300 rural hospitals (CHOPR).

True, the bill mandates it, but Corbin implies that it is necessary. Without collecting a penny in taxes, the federal government could fund comprehensive, generous Medicare (not just Medicaid) for everyone in America.

Congress and the President could achieve this simply by voting. Two votes, one from the Senate and one from the House, followed by the President’s signature, and the necessary funds would be available.

2) Taxes: The measure has a reverse-Robin Hood scenario that extends and expands tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, while lower-income earners would see reduced benefits or a net income loss; the estimated cost is around $3.8-$4.3 trillion during the 2025-2034 time period.

Mr. Corbin neglects to mention that while federal taxes can be a burden on the economy, they do not fund federal spending. The primary purposes of federal taxes are:

To control the economy by penalizing what Congress and the President want to discourage, and by rewarding those they want to help. No federal tax dollars are used for spending. In fact, they are destroyed the instant they are received at the Treasury.
To assure demand for the U.S. dollar by requiring that taxes be paid in dollars.

The major function of federal taxes today is to widen the income/power/Gap between the rich donors and the rest of us. Let me put this in bold, all-caps, so there will be no misunderstanding.”

FEDERAL TAXES DO NOT FUND FEDERAL SPENDING

State and local taxes fund state and local government spending, so Mr. Corbin is either unaware of this fact or dishonest. There are no other possibilities.

3) SNAP: Spending on SNAP, America’s food assistance program for low-income earners and the disabled, will be slashed by $267 billion, affecting the food security of 7.4 million people (Center on Budget and Policy).

In this context, we discuss morality. Many individuals who do not rely on SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) tend to lack concern for low-income workers. Those who are better off often view those in need as lazy or irresponsible, thinking they seek free handouts to spend on drugs and weapons.

Too many people who identify as Christians are CINOs (Christians In Name Only). They often contradict Jesus’s teachings and misquote the Bible to justify selfishness, harshness, and bigotry.

If it cost you nothing, would you help a starving, poor child? SNAP is a program that costs you and your fellow taxpayers nothing and helps millions of the starving poor. Mr. Corbin never mentions that.

4) Estate Taxes: The estate tax exemption would be raised and indexed for inflation, allowing wealthy families to pass on up to $30 million tax-free to their heirs, resulting in $200 billion in lost revenue to the U.S. Treasury.

The estate tax is a woefully inadequate, poorly designed, quasi-attempt to mollify the masses by pretending to punish the rich.

It mostly doesn’t work, but in the few cases it does work, it punishes the private sector by removing dollars from the economy.

Instead of making insincere efforts to penalize the wealthy, a more effective approach would be to support those who are less fortunate. Funding initiatives like Medicare for All, Education for All, Food for All, and Housing for All can ultimately improve the lives of everyone.

That, after all, is the purpose of government — the reason why we voluntarily submit ourselves to the government’s rule-making.

5) Clean Energy:The elimination of tax incentives for solar, wind, and electric vehicles ($561 billion) will affect approximately 250,000 Americans working in these sectors (CNBC).

The government is utilizing tax laws as intended: to regulate the economy. Unfortunately, the oil and coal industries contribute more money in bribes to Congress, leading Congress to favor fossil fuels over renewable energy sources, which exacerbates global warming.

To make their position more acceptable to the general public, right-wing individuals often deny the existence of global warming. If they do admit that it exists, they argue that humans are not responsible for it. Even if they acknowledge human responsibility, they claim that there is nothing we can do to address the issue due to the actions of China.

And anyway, the election was stolen.

6) Private Education: A new tax credit for donations to private school voucher programs expands federal support for private education. FYI: The majority of Americans, both Democrats and Republicans, support increasing funding for public schools over private school vouchers (Center for American Progress).

Most funding for education comes from sources that do not have monetary sovereignty, such as states, counties, cities, villages, businesses, and private individuals. As a result, funding is limited, which, not coincidentally, contributes to the growing gaps in income, wealth, and power between the rich and others.

As though that Gap were not wide enough, there is another Gap-widening effort. The Christion-right’s continual attempts to widen the Gap between them and everyone else, even those not among the Christian-right.

Let Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, agnostics, and even non-fundamentalist Christians beware.

The money solution lies in the source of money, the federal government. Federal financial support for all education — Pre-K through advanced degrees.

America’s current system creates dramatically underpaid teachers and administrators, which results in excellent schooling for the wealthiest few, and terrible schooling for the rest. That, of course, is all part of the Gap-widening plan.

7) State and Local Tax (SALT):The tax deduction cap would be raised to $40,000, benefiting wealthier households in high-taxed states for $916 billion (Reuters).

Federal taxes should be reduced, but increasing tax deductions for the wealthy is not the solution. Instead, the federal government should make direct payments to all.

Consider it this way: If a wealthy individual falls into the 36% tax bracket, they effectively “benefit” from 36% of the $40,000 SALT deduction, which amounts to about $14,000. Instead of giving each affluent family $14,000, the government should provide every family with $14,000, tax-free.

8) Post-Secondary Education:Federal subsidized loans for college students will be eliminated and Pell Grant eligibility tightened, making post-secondary education less accessible for many, especially for students from low- and middle-income families (Atlanta Journal-Constitution).

Education is essential for the future of Americans, which is why the founders of this nation established free primary education for most citizens, a practice that continues today.

However, the current world needs our nation to provide more than primary and even secondary education.

The rich don’t need the loans. The poor can’t pay them back.

The federal government has infinite dollars and destroys all the dollars it receives. Paying the government back does nothing for the government, but it impoverishes millions of Americans.

Instead of doing the right thing — i.e. cancel all the debt and fund college for every student — the government does exactly the wrong thing. It continues to collect on the loans, but cancels future financial support.

Why? Because the current administration is more focused on widening the Gap between the rich and the rest than any in history. And Mr. Corbin goes along with the Lie.

Is it ignorance of malevolence? You decide.

9) Environment:The proposal expands leasing of public lands for drilling, mining, and logging and authorizes the sale of public lands, reversing environmental protectionssupported by the majority of Americans.

Hey, who cares about our environment when there’s money to be made? Mr. Corbin is correct to mention this disaster.

10) Judicial Oversight (Section 70302): This provision, described in a single paragraph buried about halfway through the act, restricts judges’ ability to enforce court orders and weakens judicial authority over the executive branch.
The impact on democracy of the 10th identified component of Trump’s legislation justifies further explanation.

This provision restricts the ability of federal courts to enforce their rulings against the government and impose contempt of court citations.

This is significant because this clause means judges would have a much more difficult time holding Trump and his appointees, as well as future presidencies, in contempt for defying preliminary injunctions or temporary restraining orders, thereby severely impacting the rule of law.

I’m not sure why Mr. Corbin is so shocked about this. The Supreme Court already has opened that barn door by ruling that Trump can do any damn thing he wants so long as he can claim it’s part of his job.

Arrest a Congressperson? No problem. Handcuff a mayoral candidate? OK, so long as the candidate is a Democrat. Lie, cheat steal, violate the Emoluments clause and make billions from the Presidency? Who cares?

We already have a convicted felon for a President, so why does Mr. Corbin think contempt of Congress would be a deterrent, or even possible with this Congress and SCOTUS?

Legal experts warn that this provision significantly undermines judicial authority and renders many existing and future court orders unenforceable. This stipulation undermines America’s checks and balances between the three branches of government, a cornerstone of the U.S. Constitution.

“Checks and balances”? Mr. Corbin must be kidding.

Section 70302 alone in the measure says that democracy is in jeopardy for you, your children, and your grandchildren. If the bill passes with section 70302 intact, an authoritarian, totalitarian, and fascist-oriented America is almost assured in perpetuity.

You get what you vote for. Trump made no secret about who and what he is. And still he won the election. CAPITAL IDEAS: What, Me Worry? - The Berkshire Edge

Are people going to complain about “authoritarianism, totalitarianism, fascism,” and the misinformation surrounding Medicare, Medicaid, student loans, Social Security, the environment, global warming, and countless other problems that a wise government could address?

Nah. As long as we, the people, can stand by while ICE kicks in doors to deport innocent, valuable immigrants, and we, the people, bar anyone who isn’t a white Christian, why should we worry about unimportant issues like facts and voting?

Right, Steve?

Steve Corbin is a Professor Emeritus of Marketing, University of Northern Iowa, and a non-paid freelance opinion editor and guest columnist contributor to 246 news agencies and 48 social media platforms in 45 states.

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/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

If you can’t measure it, is it science? One more word on consciousness.

As an economist, I am concerned that, despite having access to vast amounts of data, economists often overlook it.

Instead, they seem to rely on the unpredictability and guesswork of psychology—a field known for its use of inference, attitudes, intuition, and bias rather than concrete evidence.

Thus, many economists ignore several facts:

Almost every post-WWII slowdown or recession coincides with fiscal drag, which is a decrease in the gro
GDP=Federal Spending+Non-federal spending+ Net Exports
wth of federal deficit spending.
When the federal government reduces the growth of the deficit, whether through spending cuts, tax increases, or a combination of both, it takes away net growth dollars from the economy.
Even a small “surplus bias” (deficit shrinking) can tip an economy into contractions. Federal surpluses drain growth dollars from the private sector (aka, the “economy).
The FRED series on “Debt Held by the Public” shows that when the growth rate of government debt slows or becomes negative, the aggregate demand in the economy tends to decrease, generally resulting in recessions.
If policymakers aim to prevent worsening economic downturns, they must understand that running Federal surpluses—or even significantly reducing deficit growth—can be contractionary. Historical evidence consistently supports this.

Federal Debt Growth Rate (FRED ID 1JvO8) — When federal deficits decline (red lines and blue lines), fewer dollars are added to the economy. The result: Recessions, which are cured by increasing federal deficits. Federal deficits —>GDP growth. This is a repeating and predictable pattern.

Instead of seeing economists following the data, what do we see? Almost universal proclamations that federal debt and deficits are too high, and federal deficit spending is unaffordable and unsustainable — exactly the opposite of what all the data show.

So we ask the title question: If you can’t measure it (or if you ignore the measurements), is it science? As it currently is practiced, economics is far less a science than it could and should be.

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

And this returns me to the question we have asked and answered in previous posts, “What is consciousness?” Can consciousness be measured scientifically, or is it doomed to remain an art form?

If you can’t even suggest, let alone implement, a data-driven way to measure your concept, it should be considered art, not science.

I suggest a definition and a way to use measurable data, not intuition, to measure consciousness:

Let us term consciousness is the response to stimuli. It can be measured by measuring the stimuli and the response:

“Consciousness is the rate at which an entity transforms all stimuli—external (light, sound, chemicals) and internal (hunger pangs, pain signals, homeostatic alerts)—into responses per unit of time.”

A Method for Measuring Consciousness

1. Entity: Any Bound System: A human, worm, tree, thermostat, stone or colony of ants—all are “entities.” Each has a boundary (skin, bark, casing) inside of which stimuli are converted into internal changes.

2. Stimulus Translation = Information Inflow: Every interaction (light, chemical gradient, pressure wave) is translated inside that boundary into a change in the system’s state. We quantify that translation as bits of information entering the system.

3. Internal Processing = Information Transformation: Once inside, that information is processed (neurons fire, cells shift biochemistry, circuits reroute). This step can also be measured in bits, i.e., how many bits are combined, compared, or stored.

4. Response = Information Outflow / Action: The system responds by changing — moving, secreting chemicals, growing roots, or updating an internal variable. That response itself can be translated back into bits (for instance, the choice among different motor programs, metabolic pathways, or output signals). Stronger stimulus —> Stronger response—> More response bits.

The Consciousness Measure: Total response bits per second by the entity: For example, a human, having trillions of neural and body-wide events, might provide trillions of response bits.

A worm might provide millions of response bits. A tree, with liquid responses, growth decisions, and chemical signaling, might provide millions of response bits, and a stone, with thermal fluctuations, physical erosion, and quantum state changes, might provide thousands of response bits.

Thus, we have a measure of consciousness that doesn’t rely on a “brain” or neural tissue, just on measurable state changes. You can add up all forms of processing and responses in any system. Entities can be ranked by their raw information-processing speed.

Consciousness can be measured, compared, and ranked, not in vague or romantic terms, and not as art, but as science.

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/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Space+Time+Consciousness: A foundational measure of the universe

In previous posts, we have defined “consciousness” as the response to stimuli. See, for instance, “‘What if,'” the way creativity begins and consciousness is measured.”

We also have discussed the possibility that time is a property like mass, charge, or spin, and not just a measure.

Recently, I read, “What If Consciousness Is a Universal Force? The Idea That Mind Comes Before Matter,” where consciousness is described as a field unto itself that could exist before there was anything that could be described as being conscious.

All of my articles about consciousness and time, and the latter article, were precipitated by quantum “weirdness,” the discovery that quantum particles can be in multiple states and places simultaneously and, when “entangled,” can affect each other’s states instantly, no matter how far apart they are.

The words “simultaneously” and “instantly” reveal the effect of time on quantum mechanics as well as on Relativity.

Welcome To The World of Consciousness: A Universal Hypothesis of Time and Response

For centuries, consciousness has been considered a uniquely human trait. It has been linked to self-awareness, language, and even morality.

But what if this assumption was never true? What if consciousness is not a binary quality possessed only by certain minds, but rather a universal property, evident wherever there are stimuli and responses?

This article proposes that a non-mystical, physically grounded theory of consciousness as the degree to which any system responds to stimuli over time.

In this view, consciousness is not owned. It is measured. It is not metaphysical. It is emergent. And it is not exclusive to humans. It is everywhere, even in things that are not recognized for having a brain.

Consciousness as Response

At its most basic, consciousness is the degree of responsiveness to stimuli over time. A rock, a worm, a person, and a computer each are exposed to stimuli and respond in some way. The difference lies not in kind, but in degree.

Humans may respond richly, a fly more simply, a stone infinitesimally—but all lie on the same spectrum.

This reframing strips consciousness of its mystical baggage. It no longer requires vaguely imagined properties. (“I can’t say exactly what it is, but I know it when I see it.”)

It requires only that a system change in reaction to its environment.

It answers such questions as, “Which of these is conscious?”

A sleeping person? A fetus? A newborn child? A person in a coma? A person with parasomnias? A chimpanzee? A dog? A bottlenose porpoise? A bee? An ant? A tree? A bacterium? A stone? The moon? The sum? The universe?

The answer is that all of them possess some degree of consciousness. It’s chemistry and physics, not metaphysics. The only questions one must answer are: “What stimuli does each receive and how does each respond?”

Of course, “only” is a word that makes the problem sound trivial when it is quite the opposite.

Awareness And Judgment

To respond meaningfully, a system must, at some level, be aware of the stimulus. A thermostat “notices” temperature and adjusts. A bee notices intruders and attacks. An artificial intelligence detects words and replies with a programmed meaning.

This basic form of awareness is structural, not sentient in the traditional sense, but it is awareness nonetheless.

Judgment then emerges as a pattern of selective response. The bee targets, the thermostat calibrates, and the AI ranks, filters, and generates. The tree bends toward the light and responds to chemicals in the soil.

Bacteria use quorum sensing to form a biofilm. They are aware of, and even can count, the number of similar bacteria surrounding them, and if a certain number is reached, they decide to form a biofilm.

The words “aware of,” “count,” and “decide” all imply some measure of consciousness.

The moon alters its orbit in response to the sun, the Earth, and meteors.

All are conscious of stimuli and respond. Conscious and respond in time. Humans do all this too, but with more memory and complexity, not with any unique capacity.

Speaking of “sentient in the traditional sense,” this, often falsely, is thought of as some indescribable capacity beyond physics and chemistry, a unique, otherworldly ability we humans have.

It is none of those. It is chemistry and physics, as the following excerpts from the May 10, 2025, issue of New Scientist Magazine demonstrate.

What are microplastics doing to your brain? We’re starting to find out
The average human brain contains around 7 grams of plastic, but it’s unclear how this affects us. Now, animal studies are revealing links to poor cognition and weird behaviour.By Marta Zaraska

Given a choice between two sea snail shells, hermit crabs know which will make a better home. That is, unless their thinking has been muddled by ingesting microplastics.

Then, they struggle with a decision that could be crucial for survival. They aren’t alone: across the animal kingdom, it appears, tiny bits of plastic change behaviours and mess up cognition.

Exposure to these particles makes mice more forgetful and less social. Bees have trouble learning. Zebrafish act more anxious.

“If you turn the top of your plastic bottle, you shower tiny pieces of plastic down into the water,” says Tamara Galloway, an ecotoxicologist at the University of Exeter, UK.

Thus, molecules of plastic affect knowledge, thinking, decision-making, behavior, cognition, memory, sociability, learning, and emotions, even in the “lowest” of creatures.

No magic to sentience, consciousness, awareness, or judgement. Just physics and chemistry to which everything responds.

Emotion As Distributed Reaction

Emotions are often cited as the barrier separating man and machine. But this only holds if we define emotions narrowly, as mysterious feelings rather than physical functions.

Redefined, emotion is just a non-local, distributed reaction to a localized stimulus.

You are stung by a bee and feel localized pain along with anger that affects your entire body. A dog hears a single tone and eagerly anticipates food; a wasp perceives a threat, and the swarm attacks.

These are not feelings in the poetic sense, but patterns of system-wide change triggered by inputs. Under this model, even artificial systems can manifest something like emotion: a wide array of state changes, cascading across modules in response to one small command.

If an AI were given a four-letter swear word and programmed to respond with the words, “Same to you,” then shut down, that would be a sign of emotion, indistinguishable from nature programming you to respond with anger.

Preference and Visualization

Preference is a structured tendency toward certain responses over others. Flies prefer rot; humans prefer perfume. A professor might prefer coherent logic to broken syntax.

These are not mystical tastes. They are responses, guided by chemistry and physics. A huge enough block of matter floating in space prefers to be round rather than angular.

Visualization, or the proactive response to imagined stimuli, is simply a higher-order function of memory and prediction. Animals do it. Humans do it more. AIs do it algorithmically.

And while a rock may not visualize in this sense, its weathering patterns represent time-mediated adaptation and time-shaped change.

Time: The Inducing Field

Consciousness is responsiveness, and time is the medium in which consciousness unfolds. Just as the Higgs field induces mass, the temporal field facilitates change, and thus responsiveness, and thus consciousness.

Time is not a passive backdrop but the enabler of variation. Without time, there is no change, no stimulus, no reaction, no consciousness.

The relationship between time and consciousness is suggested in the following excerpts:

What If Consciousness Is a Universal Force? The Idea That Mind Comes Before Matter

Could consciousness be the fundamental force that shapes everything?

This idea challenges the conventional view that matter came first, suggesting instead that consciousness might be the building block of reality itself.

Imagine if every thought and every emotion were not just personal experiences but were woven into the very fabric of the cosmos. Such a notion invites us to rethink what we know about the universe and our place within it.

Materialists argue that consciousness arises from physical processes within the brain, while idealists believe that consciousness precedes and gives rise to matter. The idea that consciousness might be a universal force offers a tantalizing twist, suggesting that perhaps both sides have been missing a crucial piece of the puzzle.

Quantum physics has long fascinated scientists with its mysterious and counterintuitive findings. Some interpretations of quantum mechanics suggest that consciousness might play a role in the behavior of particles at the smallest scales. The observer effect, for instance, implies that the mere act of observation can alter the outcome of a quantum event.

Einstein spoke of a four-dimensional universe, which he called “space-time,” three dimensions of space and one of time. Could there be one more dimension: Consciousness?

It would be consciousness-space-time.

All entities, macro and quantum, are measured in space, time, and consciousness. Depending on size, these three variables have different importance.

For the most massive objects — stars, black holes, galaxies — we tend to focus on the space-time measure. For the tiniest objects, we focus on consciousness-time.

We are accustomed to entities moving through space. It is how we move each day. We are less accustomed to entities moving through time — as Einstein revealed– because we do not sense that motion, except for barely detectable responses at near light speed and even tinier responses at slower speeds.

And we have recently detected objects changing via consciousness, which moderates the maximum amount of knowledge we can have about a quantum particle. Considered as a unit, consciousness+space+time tells us all we can know.

A Continuum, Not a Wall

The greatest error of human exceptionalism has been to draw a line where there is only a slope. From stones to stars, from bees to brains, from humans to machines—consciousness is not a switch, but a gradient, and time is the field in which they function.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

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/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY