–Isn’t it time for you to get angry?

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology. Those, who do not understand Monetary Sovereignty, do not understand economics. Cutting the federal deficit is the most ignorant and damaging step the federal government could take. It ranks ahead of the Hawley-Smoot Tariff.
==================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================

We depend on our doctors to understand medicine. When our doctors err, we are injured. So, wouldn’t you be angry if you learned your doctor never had studied medicine, never even wanted to understand basic medical procedures, and instead followed popular superstitions about curing illness?

We depend on our lawyers to understand the law. When our lawyers err, we are injured. So, wouldn’t you be angry if you learned your lawyer never had studied the law, never even wanted to understand basic legal procedures, and instead followed popular myths about laws, myths based not on legal rulings but on jailhouse rumor?

We depend on our politicians to understand economics. When our politicians pass a bad law, we are injured. It can cost our loved ones and us our fortunes, even our lives. So, wouldn’t you be angry if you learned your political representative never had studied economics, never even wanted to understand the basics of economics, and instead relied on popular myths about economics, based not on science, but on street myth?

Doctors and lawyers are jailed for practicing medicine or law without appropriate licences, which can be obtained only after years of difficult study based on strict criteria. But for politicians, there are no criteria. Any lazy, uneducated fool can be a politician, who once elected, can cast votes on bills that will ruin your life.

Politicians arguably have more impact on us than do doctors and lawyers, yet there are no minimum requirements for this vital responsibility. Able to read? Not necessary. Able to reason? No need. Unwilling to learn? No problem. Honesty? Are you kidding?

Monetary Sovereignty, is the very basis of economics. Anyone who does not understand the implications of Monetary Sovereignty, simply does not understand economics. Would you try to practice medicine without knowing what a germ is? Would you try to practice American law without knowing what precedent is? Yet, politicians vote on your economic future without understanding economics. Monetary Sovereignty, is to economics as arithmetic is to mathematics. It is impossible to understand the later without understanding the former.

I have seen no evidence that any of our Senators, Representatives and even the President has the slightest understanding of Monetary Sovereignty, nor willing to expend the energy to learn. Seemingly, they would rather rely on intuition and Tea Party wisdom than on science, as each day they make decisions that harm millions of us.

So we have the spectacle of ignorance threatening to shut down the government via a useless debt ceiling — no not useless, harmful — unless they are allowed to tax us more and/or reduce Medicare, Social Security, national defense, education, health care, medical research, energy research, the ecology, the infrastructure and indeed depress virtually every aspect of our lives. And why? Because these elected representatives either are too political, too lazy or too ignorant to understand the “federal deficit” is not at all like personal deficit, but rather merely is a synonym for “federal money created.”

These elected representatives either are too political, too lazy or too ignorant to understand the “federal debt” merely is the total of outstanding T-securities, which could be liquidated merely by crediting the bank accounts of the holders, a process requiring nothing more than the press of a computer key.

So we, our children and our grandchildren, must pay today, pay tomorrow and pay well into the future for political ignorance and laziness. And all the politicians need to do is read and understand one page at: Monetary Sovereignty,.

If that makes you angry, and you refuse to take it any more, contact them. Do it now.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.

Lest you think I’m alone, read this:

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology. Those, who do not understand Monetary Sovereignty, do not understand economics. Cutting the federal deficit is the most ignorant and damaging step the federal government could take. It ranks ahead of the Hawley-Smoot Tariff.
================================================================================================================================================================================================

Lest you think I’m alone, read what my friend Warren Mosler says.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.

Think piece: Can we imagine a future we scarcely can imagine?

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology. Those, who do not understand Monetary Sovereignty, do not understand economics. Cutting the federal deficit is the most ignorant and damaging step the federal government could take. It ranks ahead of the Hawley-Smoot Tariff.
====================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================

The most common view of the future has ever more work being done by ever more sophisticated computers, while ultimate direction and control remain with human beings. Computers continue to be increasingly competent slaves.

Yes, the computer named Watson did defeat the two best Jeopardy players in history, but that might have been expected. Simply pump enough data into that massive memory, and eventually you have a computer that “knows” almost every piece of information. If not this year, then next year, so it came this year.

Yet, there remain many things computers continue to struggle with:

-Understand the many nuances of written language (One of my favorite examples was, “British left waffles on Faulklands”)
-Combine the many nuances of oral language (the words themselves, tone, loudness, pitch, pause) with the many nuances of body language
-Have taste in all of the arts
-Feel emotion
-Empathize

Anyway, the alternative, computers bossing people, is a long way off, if ever. Or is it? An article in the Feb 5th NewScientist, titled “Silicon supervisor gets the job done,” describes exactly that – or well, close to it.

When it appeared on Mechanical Turk, an outsourcing website run by Amazon, Boris Smus’s request looked unremarkable. He wanted people to search the web and gather a few facts about New York City. Workers snapped up the tasks, and answers rolled in within minutes. . .

There was, however, something unusual about the job. It was not posted by Smus, a researcher at Carnegie Mellon University . . . but by software he had created. The same software also posted editing and writing jobs. As the results came in, it farmed the text back out for further checking and editing. The result was an encyclopedia entry on New York City, produced by humans but managed by machine.

This idea – a human assembly line overseen by a silicon supervisor– may change the way we work.

If the notion of machines controlling humans bothers you – if it seems like something out of the Terminator series – get used to it. Or maybe you already are, if you use a GPS. A voice says, “Turn right at the next road,” so you do. Visualize a computer hiring you as a driver, and all day long you drive exactly where the GPS voice tells you, and at the end of the day. The computer evaluates your driving — your speed, your braking, your turning, your lunch and dinner breaks. At the end of the day, you’re paid according to how well you did, according to a formula. The actual driving is hard. The directing is easy. You are the slave to the computer.

Castingwords, based in Seattle, uses software to manage a trained online workforce tasked with transcribing audio interviews and podcasts. The software splits the audio into 5-minute chunks and distributes each to a worker. Completed transcriptions are automatically routed to other workers for quality checks. The software then compiles the results and gives the transcription to one person for a final check before it is returned to the customer, all without the intervention of a human manager.

This post would be too long if I attempted to quote the entire article. But examples are given of computers that supervise the creation of a children’s chair, writing advertising and designing graphics. Given the complexity of the tasks already in experimentation, I easily foresee computers supervising many tasks currently beyond computer ability. And, they could fire and pay workers based on work quality and speed (they already hire workers), and even admonish those people whose work is not up to snuff. In other words, they can function as the boss, supervising every conceivable human activity.

I don’t know about you, but this gives me the creeps, not only because it’s “unnatural” and emasculating, but also because it makes so much economic sense. The workers are easy to find and easy to evaluate. They don’t need to be supplied with offices. Nature already has programmed the human brain to perform extraordinary feats. We can be remarkably effective slaves, so why not take advantage of that?

The computer bosses can be tireless, unemotional and cheap. They don’t need to feel sympathy or ambition; they have perfect recall and don’t require vacations. I suspect the “computers-direct-humans” concept will grow. In certain ways, it’s easier to be the boss than the underling.

As this process grows, the economic effects will be enormous. Toss out all the current theories and hypotheses. Much of economics is skewed by what we call “human nature”: Emotions, cognitive dissonance, false beliefs, desires, forgetting, fashion. What we think of as an economy or as a government or as a democracy may turn out to be something quite different for computers. Aside from the science-fictionesque notion of humans as an intermediate species between the homo genus and machines, I perceive this causing real economic, legal and social problems in the near future.

A new world is rushing at us. The problem is, humans are not improving, but computers are. Neanderthals lived for about 80 thousand years, then were supplanted by a superior species: homo sapiens. Modern homo sapiens have been alive for something like 80 thousand years. When will a superior species supplant us? And will we even recognize it happening?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.

–Who cares about jobs?

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology. Those, who do not understand Monetary Sovereignty, do not understand economics. Cutting the federal deficit is the most ignorant and damaging step the federal government could take. It ranks ahead of the Hawley-Smoot Tariff.
============================================================================================================================================================================

House Speaker John Boehner was asked about the probability that the GOP plan to cut $100 billion from government spending would cause federal job cuts: He replied, “Over the last two years since President Obama has taken office, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs. And if some of those jobs are lost in this, so be it. We’re broke. It’s time for us to get serious about how we’re spending the nation’s money.”

Two problems with this:

1. We’re not “broke.” As a Monetarily Sovereign government, the U.S. has the power to pay any bill of any size. No federal check ever has bounced and none ever will (unless this silly Congress fails to raise their silly debt ceiling) – not even during the Great Depression, and not even during the worst recession in recent history, and not even while spending trillions to cure that recession.

In short, John Boehner simply does not know what the heck he is talking about. The man is completely ignorant of modern economics and is using that ignorance to guide the American economy. Visualize the Large Hadron Collider run by Mortimer Snerd (You young folks can look him up.)

2. The GOP repeatedly criticized the Obama initiatives for failure to add jobs, but their own “job-killing” (GOP phraseology) plan receives a shrug and a “. . . so be it.”

Not that the Democrats are without guilt. Obama wishes to “pay for” federal spending by raising taxes on the rich. Two problems with this:

1. In a Monetarily Sovereign government, taxes do not “pay for” spending. In fact, federal taxes have zero relationship to federal spending; the two processes are completely separate, independent and unconnected. The proof: We could eliminate federal taxes without changing federal spending, and we could eliminate federal spending without changing federal taxes. Federal taxes are a relic of the gold standard days.

2. Soaking the rich either is meaningless or harmful, depending on how successful it is. The more taxes collected, the more damage is done. Contrary to popular myth, taxing the rich does not add one penny to the pockets of the poor, in fact, such taxes remove money from the pockets of the poor. (See: Does taxing the rich help the poor? )

So here is what I think will happen, based on what we know now: The economy will grow, albeit slowly, for the next three years, because of projected, large, so-called “deficits” (i.e., money creation), while Congressional ignorance and hubris will cause a continual struggle to maintain spending on beneficial projects.

The poor and the jobless will be the primary losers, as these beneficial projects will be squeezed. Obama repeatedly will play the class-warfare card, using poverty as evidence taxes on the rich should be increased. (Visualize warming the poor by shredding the clothes of the rich.)

After three years, when fiscal “prudence” (i.e., reduced money creation) takes hold, the economy will tank, again. Meanwhile, the right will offer a plan to solve the economic problem: Eliminate abortion and Medicare, and allow everyone to carry a gun. The left also will offer a plan: Raise taxes on everyone making “too much” money and require the states (who really are broke) to absorb more unfunded mandates for the poor.

In answer to the title question, ‘Who cares about jobs?”, Congressmen and Congresswomen do. But, it’s their own jobs, not yours.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.