Traitors

The foundation of American democracy is the free election of our political representatives. That is what separates America from all the dictatorships around the world.

It is what separates us from China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and the various banana republics that repress their citizens.

It is the reason why American heroes fought the revolutionary war. It is the reason why American heroes helped the world defend against Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito.

Anyone who attempts to subvert America’s elections is, by definition, a traitor, and should be punished appropriately.

Here are the eleven Republican Senators who wish to cancel the votes of 81 Million Americans, and 306 electoral college voters.

**ELEVEN TRAITORS– Will they “find” enough votes to overturn the election**

These Senators are doing everything in their power to nullify the results of the Presidential election.

They are not doing it for any of the Senators who were elected in November. They are not doing it for any of the Representatives who were elected in November. They are doing it solely to satisfy the ego and desires of one man, Donald J. Trump.

Their claim is that the election was fraudulent, specifically fraudulent in the few “swing states” that voted for Joe Biden (though not fraudulent in all the other states that voted for Trump and not fraudulent regarding Senate and House votes.)

This claim has been rebuffed in 50 court cases and by the Supreme Court of The United States, many judges of which were appointed by Republicans.

In all cases, the Republicans have been given ample opportunity to present their facts, and all those so-called “facts” were found to be lacking.

Despite all the trials and examinations, these traitorous Republicans wish to continue endlessly, until somehow some judge can be found to agree with their laughable “facts.”

Presumably then, that judge would be believed, while the decisions of all the other judges would be nullified.

Their stated justification is that, because a psychotic, lying President has continued to promulgate his faux facts, “millions of people feel the election was fraudulent.”

The traitors will fail, because American democracy is strong, but they have succeeded in one dubious accomplishment: They have set an American precedent, whereby the losing party baselessly will claim the election was stolen, refuse to certify the votes, and will attempt to cancel the votes for the winner.

In short, the traitors want someone to make American elections meaningless and unnecessary, i.e to create a dictatorship.

Their public excuse is that they merely want to investigate to “make sure” that only “legal” votes are counted. The fact that this already has been accomplished again and again, does not satisfy the traitors, because the results are not to their liking.

Given all the court cases and all the testimony America has endured, the likelihood that somehow new evidence exists to satisfy yet another court, is more than remote, and the traitors know it.

So why do the traitors continue their efforts to destroy American democracy? To appease dictator-wannabe Donald Trump.

They believe that if they help him now, in future elections, he will help them get elected. They believe there are enough members of Trump’s cult, who will ignore this real danger to America, and do as he says two years and four years hence.

In short, they believe Americans are stupid enough to vote against America at the behest of Donald Trump.

In every sense of the word, these Senators, along with Representative of the same ilk, are the most dangerous traitors American ever has faced. They are the most dangerous because they have power. They are inside the highest levels of government.

They have votes that can pilot our nation onto dangerous shoals. Like Trump himself, they can force upon America harmful alliances with foreign adversaries, all to benefit Trump, personally, just as they now are doing.

Because of their governmental influence, they are of more immediate danger to America than even such acknowledged enemies as Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc.

The traitors have the power to destroy America without fighting a shooting war.

Our mighty military would be useless against their insidious attack. Thus, America is at war within, against the traitors who would enslave America to a dictator.

The traitors should be treated appropriately. They should be tried in a court of law, and made to pay as enemies, the way America has treated traitors throughout our history.

Remember their names, which will live in infamy: Cruz, Johnson, Lankford, Daines, Kennedy, Blackburn, Braun, Lummis, Marshall, Hagerty, and Tuberville.

Traitors all.

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

Why we fail, when success would be so easy

When discussing the Ten Steps to Prosperity (at the end of this post), I was reminded of the parable that begins with the question: “Why can’t crabs climb out of a bucket?” March 20: Don't Be A Crab - Good in the Head - Where everyone is working on something. GOOD TODAY, BETTER TOMORROW.

The answer: “As soon as any one of them starts to climb out, the others pull it down.”

That is similar to what often happens during discussions about the federal government providing economic benefits.

Some people, resenting the fact that they haven’t received the benefits in the past, don’t want other people to start receiving the benefits, now.

In essence, they pull down anyone likely to receive a benefit.

That has been a reaction to thoughts about federal support for college debt. “If I had to pay off my debt, why shouldn’t they have to pay off their debt?”

The Ten Steps describe events most people would relish: Lower taxes, free college, free health care, and increased income. Yet, the steps are thought to be impossible for several false reasons, among which are:

I. They would require a tax increase: False. The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, never can run short of dollars with which to pay it’s bills. Even if the federal government didn’t collect a single penny’s worth of taxes, it could continue spending, forever.

II. The federal government can’t afford them. False. Being Monetarily Sovereign, the federal government can create infinite dollars.

III. They would cause inflation. False. Inflation is not caused by federal spending. It is caused by shortages, usually shortages of food or energy.

IV, They’re socialism. False. Socialism is government ownership and control, not just government spending. And some socialism is necessary.

V. Receiving free, unearned benefits from the federal government is immoral. False. The rich have no compunctions about receiving benefits without labor, though the rich object to the poor receiving such benefits.

The failure to implement the Ten Steps to Prosperity (below), not only is due to the above misunderstandings, but also to two other factors, the first being Gap Psychology, the desire to distance oneself from those lower on any status measure, and the desire to approach those above.

There exist various income/wealth/power Gaps, with the widest Gap falling between the very rich and the rest of us. The very rich, by virtue of their income, wealth, and power, control the federal government, state governments, and local governments. They control America.

The Gaps are what make them rich — without the Gaps, we all would be the same — and the wider the Gaps, the richer they are. So to become ever richer, the rich influence the various governments to widen the Gaps. This can be accomplished not only by increasing what the rich have, but also by decreasing what the non-rich have. Either will make the rich richer.

The rich also control the media via advertising dollars and outright ownership. And the rich control the economists via contributions to universities and lucrative employment by “think tanks.” All these influences cause the common narrative to oppose federal spending that would narrow Gaps.

Because implementing the Ten Steps would narrow the Gaps, the rich create rationales to convince you not to demand what would benefit you, and to vote against your own well-being.

Thus, the poor and middle-classes are persuaded to vote against Medicare-for-All, free college-for-all,, Social Security-for-All, and other valuable benefits.

In addition to all of the above, one other factor influences you to vote against your best interests: Faux Fairness.

Fairness is in the eye of the beholder. Is it “fair” that you have a better life than some other people — better things, better relationships, better education, a better job, better in many other ways? Is it “fair” that some other people have better lives than you do?

Consider these scenarios.

A. You have just graduated college with a $100K student debt, and now the federal government passes Step #4: Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. It applies to all current and future college students, not to you. Is that fair?

B. You are half-way through college, with a $50K student debt. The government passes Step #4, which would cover you in the future, but you still would have to pay your $50 debt. Is that fair?

C. You have enrolled at a prestigious school, where your degree tuition will cost you $300K. The government passes step #4, but it doesn’t apply to prestigious schools. Is that fair?

D. At any time before, during, or even after you attend college, the government passes Step #4, which includes a lookback feature covering two-years-past, current, and future college attendance. Is that fair?

You might support any of the four scenarios. All four will benefit the nation by encouraging college education and by adding stimulus money to the economy. But there is that question of fairness.

In reality, no action or inaction by the federal government is “fair” to all. Some people illogically will reject a benefit simply because it is inferior to a presumed better benefit.

Consider taxation. There is no “fair” tax. All taxes, and all tax cuts, are unfair to specific groups.

So, in addition to objections I, II, III, and IV above, we encounter objection V, the faux fairness objection, phrased something like this: “If I had to ______, why shouldn’t they have to ______?” or, “If I can’t ______, why should they be allowed to ______?”

That is, “If I had to pay for college, why should they not have to pay?” Or, “If I paid off my debts, why should the government pay off theirs?”

The objections to unemployment compensation or aids to the poor include, “If I had to work for my money, why should they get money for not working?”

Regarding the proposed $2,000 stimulus check, one objection comes from those whose income denies them a check, “If I don’t get a check, why should they get a check?”

Regarding Medicare for All, one objection is, “If I had to pay for my health care all this time, why should they get free health care?”

Or regarding the elimination of FICA, “If I had to pay FICA all these years, why shouldn’t they?”

Some Faux Fairness objectors illogically speak even against themselves receiving benefits, only because they had not received the benefits in the past or others receive superior benefits.

The objection can take two forms:

The refusal to accept inferior benefits when better benefits exist
The refusal to allow others to receive benefits if we don’t receive equal or better benefits.

In both cases, our personal situation does not change, yet suddenly and illogically, we object to it.

These feelings could be built into our DNA. Imagine two children, neither of which has candy. Give candy to one child, and the other may begin to cry. Give one large candy to one child and one small candy to the other child, and the “small-candy” child may cry. Yet both criers received candy.

In the ‘inequality test’, the monkeys refused to exchange a token for a cucumber slice (non-preferred reward) on 43% of trials when they saw a partner monkey receive a preferred grape reward for the same effort.

However, in the ‘food control’ condition, in which the partner was not present, these same monkeys were just as likely to refuse the cucumber slice when they saw a grape placed where the partner normally sat (49% refusals).

There can be nothing inequitous about receiving a non-preferred reward igap f nobody is receiving anything better.

In the food-control condition, the monkeys are refusing the non-preferred reward simply because they can see that a better reward is potentially available.

We do not live our lives in a vacuum. Everything is judged by comparison with all that exists around us. A sunny day is more appreciated if it follows a string of rainy days than if it follows a string of sunny days.

Gap Psychology says that we don’t want the Gap below us to narrow, nor do we want the Gap above us to widen, no matter how much we may seem to improve objectively.

You might be overjoyed to receive $1 million when a relative’s will is being read, but a few minutes later, you may be outraged when your cousin receives $10 million — even though you now are $1 million wealthier.

The question never is, “What’s in it for me?” but rather, “What’s in it for me compared to them?” That’s the basis for Faux Fairness.

IN SUMMARY

“Rich” is a comparative. The Gap is what makes them rich. The wider the Gap, the richer they are.

Being rich, they control the sources of information and power — the politicians, the media, and the economists. All three groups are paid by the rich to convince you to reject Gap-narrowing benefits, by claiming these benefits are “immoral,” “unaffordable,” “unsustainable,” or “socialism.” All untrue.

To compound the misinformation we receive about benefits, we tend to reject benefits seen as unfair. Logically, a small benefit is better than no benefit, but humans can be illogical.

So we willingly allow politicians to reject offering a $2,000 stimulus check,. Though these checks would help everyone by speeding America’s recovery from a recession, we reject them partly because they unfairly help the “lazy” poor. We cut our noses to spite the faces of the poor: False Fairness.

Being Monetarily Sovereign, the U.S. federal government has the financial ability to end the current recession and its attendant poverty, today. But a combination of disinformation by the rich and False Fairness by the non-rich, prevent the government from taking the needed steps.

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

THE BIG LIE OF ECONOMICS EXPRESSED IN ONE CARTOON

The science of economics is burdened with many lies and myths, most of which are designed to convince you, the public, you should not ask the federal government for benefits.

The Big Lie of Economics is: Federal taxes fund federal spending. It simply is not true. The truth: Federal taxes fund nothing.
Even if the federal government collected $0 taxes, it could continue spending, forever.

The very rich, who control the political establishment, want to widen the Gap between them and you. So they do everything possible to make you agree to have less than you really should. (It’s called “Gap Psychology,” the desire to distance oneself from those below, in any social/economic measure.)

Because “rich” is a comparative measure, the less the poorer have, the richer the rich are. That is why you are told federal deficits and federal debt are too high, and “unsustainable” — to provide you with a seemingly logical rationale for denying you the things they already have: The availability of:

–Significant income
–Safe and comfortable housing
–Comprehensive health care
–A happy, safe, well-fed, well-clothed lifestyle
–University education for your children
–Pleasant, remunerative working conditions
–A comfortable retirement

They tell you, falsely, that you must pay for federal spending, either via taxing or inflation, and that your federal benefits are the dreaded “socialism,”

Not one word of that is true.

Federal taxing is not necessary for federal spending. Federal spending never causes inflation. And federal spending is not “socialism.”

And that is why the rich publish misleading cartoons like this:

Dana Summers — The federal government does not spend **your money**. Your federal taxes do not fund federal spending.

The truth:

1. The federal government does not spend your money. In fact, your federal taxes are destroyed upon receipt
2. You could have free, comprehensive Medicare covering you and everyone in your family, and not need to pay even one penny in FICA (which, by the way, is the most regressive tax in America.)
3. Your children could be educated, grades 13 and above, without any cost to you
4. You could be provided with sufficient income to afford good food, safe housing, good clothing, and the other benefits of being an American (car, TV, vacations, good working conditions, etc.)

Yes, the rich tell you the economy will falter without your hard labor and deprivation (though they themselves are excluded), and that only the rich are entitled to a good life, and that labor is moral (again, the rich are excepted).

And it is all a lie to keep you down.

Consider, for instance, the battle revolving around the $600 stimulus check vs. a $2,000 stimulus check.

Congress finally settled on $600, though there is not a single, economic reason for that limitation. Not one.

I challenge anyone to provide one good excuse for the lower number other than that the rich, and the party of the rich, don’t want you to have it.

The rich expect you not to understand the differences between our Monetarily Sovereign federal government and our monetarily non-sovereign state and local governments.

So, the politicians falsely claim that state and local governments struggle financially because they are inefficient, incompetent, and crooked.

Indeed, some are, but the real reason for the state/local government financial struggles is that they are monetarily non-sovereign.

They simply cannot afford to provide you with good streets, good water, good sewage systems, good elementary and high schools, good police and fire protection, and all the other benefits the federal government could pay for at the touch of a computer key.

The rich have managed to brainwash you into believing you deserve financial hardship and denial of benefits because you don’t labor hard enough or are not smart enough, and that the rich are the ones who deserve the lifestyles you admire.

This can change. The rich are not superior, more deserving Americans. Fate has just been kind to them.

You deserve to have all the benefits the rich have. But first, you must be willing to accept the truth. You must be willing to accept the fact that you have been lied to.

Yes, it is hard to admit you have been suckered all these years. But swallow your pride, understand the truth, and demand that the federal government, which has unlimited money, should even the score, and pay to give you the kind of life rich Americans enjoy.

You deserve it as much as the rich do.

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

The one, simple economics question that determines whether someone knows WTF they are talking about

Have you ever read an economics textbook or treatise?

If so, you might have been dazzled, or impressed, by the number of mathematical formulas, the charts, the graphs, the abstruse language. No science offers more dizzying complexity than does economics, “the dismal science.”

And yet . . .

And yet, it all can be boiled down to one simple question, the answer to which opens up the entire subject like a bright ray of sunshine on a foggy morning. That question is:

What is the difference between federal government finances vs. state/local government finances?

It’s a question that separates the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, the knowledgeable from the pretenders.

Consider the common phrase “taxpayer dollars.” You see it often, usually in the context of some government spending. But which government?

If the author is referring to a state or local government, the phrase may be apt. But it never is appropriate when referring to federal government spending.

The federal government does not spend taxpayer dollars. Never. Not ever.

The answer to the question, the fundamental difference between federal government finances and state/local government finances is:

The federal government is Monetarily Sovereign; state/local governments are monetarily non-sovereign.

Almost everything in economics, every true statement, and every false statement is related to that one basic truth.

What does it mean? It means the federal government is the issuer of the U.S. dollar, while state and local governments (and you and me) are merely users of the U.S. dollar.

As the issuer, the federal government creates dollars at will. It creates at will, all the laws that govern the supply and value of the dollar. The issuer never can run short of dollars and has absolute control over the exchange value of the dollar.

The issuer of the dollar does not need to obtain dollars from any outside source. Having the unlimited ability to create dollars, it does not borrow them nor does it need to levy taxes in order to obtain dollars.

What erroneously is termed “borrowing” when referring to the federal debt, actually is the acceptance of deposits into federal security (T-bill, T-note, T-bond) accounts. The so-called federal “debt” is the total of those deposits, the purposes of which are to:

–Provide a safe, parking place for unused dollars and
–Help the Fed control interest rates.

Thus, the purpose of federal “debt” is to stabilize the dollar

The purpose of federal taxes is to help control the economy by taxing what the government wants to limit and by giving “tax breaks” to what the government wants to encourage.

Neither taxing nor accepting deposits into T-security accounts, provides spending dollars to the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to create spending dollars at the touch of a computer key.

Even if the federal government collected no taxes and accepted no deposits into T-security accounts, it could continue to spend, forever. The same cannot be said of state/local governments, which rely on income in order to spend.

Recently I saw an article titled How are U.S. taxpayer dollars spent? by David Roos. It contained such lines as:

Your federal income tax dollars help to pay for the items on the federal budget. The money the federal government borrows to cover the budget deficit is what creates the national debt.

I love the Tax Receipt Calculator on WhiteHouse.gov. It’s highly informative and not a little shocking to see exactly how my tax dollars are spent.

Why don’t all Americans receive a similar receipt when we file our taxes? If the corner store gives me a receipt with my pack of Slim Jims, shouldn’t the federal government give me a receipt for my generous (if compulsory) contribution to the national piggy bank?

Wouldn’t it be nice to receive a kindly written thank-you note from the IRS attached to a detailed receipt of how every cent of our tax dollars would be spent that year.

According to How Stuff Works.com, “Dave Roos is a freelance journalist who has contributed hundreds of articles to HowStuffWorks since 2007, with a specialty in personal finance, economics, and business.

It is truly sad to have a specialty in something you know so little about, for Roos’s entire article, including the title, demonstrates a profound ignorance of economics. He does not understand the differences between federal finance and state/local government finance.

Federal taxpayer dollars are not spent. They are destroyed upon receipt. They disappear from any money-supply measure.

That’s right. Those precious dollars you work so hard to obtain, and then are forced to send to the federal government, are destroyed as soon as they hit the Treasury. That is why no one can answer the question, “How many dollars does the federal government have.” The best answer is, “Infinite.”

By contrast, state/local taxes are spent. They first are deposited into a bank and later are distributed into the economy, all the while remaining in that money measure called M3.

Sadly, Mr. Roos is not alone in his misunderstanding of Monetary Sovereignty. For instance:

Why Governments Levy Taxes, By: Mark Kennan, Reviewed by: Sari Luciano, BS, Accounting/Business, Updated December 04, 2018
Governments provide a variety of services to the people they serve. In order to pay for these services, the government levies taxes on the citizens and companies who benefit from these services. The government must also make payments on any money borrowed to sustain operations.

And:

Why We Pay Taxes. Since 1950, individual income taxes have been the primary source of revenue for the U.S. federal government.By Sarah Pruitt
Together with payroll taxes (used to fund social programs like Social Security and Medicare), income taxes amount to roughly 80 percent of all federal revenue, and are the essential fuel on which our government runs.

And:

Why Do We Have Taxes?
Taxes, which are the main source of federal, state and local government revenues, pay for buildings, public education, highways, airplanes, rockets, road signs, and the salaries of millions of government employees.

Without taxes there would be no governments. Taxation is one of the several ways by which governments raise money to pay for the goods and services that they are called on to provide. Governments lack the major sources of revenue available to other sectors of the economy and must therefore rely on taxes to finance the majority of their expenditures.

The list goes on and on. Similar articles can be found everywhere, Yet not one sentence in the above examples is correct.

The federal government does not levy taxes to pay for federal services. It creates new money, ad hoc, to pay for whatever it wishes. Payroll taxes do not fund Medicare and Social Security.

The U.S. government does not borrow money. It has no need to. The federal government (unlike state/local governments) has no need for revenue of any sort.

Not only does the government not borrow, but it should not lend. “Lending” implies repayment, which the government does not need. If, for instance, the government wishes to encourage college attendance, it should not have a student loan program. It should have a student gift program.

President Obama: Washington Has to Live within its Means, 9/19/2011, By Colleen Curtis
Summary: The President’s plan for economic growth and deficit reduction offers a balanced approach to get our fiscal house in order, based on the values of shared responsibility and shared sacrifice

The President’s plan will enable Washington to live within its means, something Americans across the country have been doing for years. And the balanced approach means that no one group has to bear the burden alone. It means that everyone – including millionaires and billionaires – has to pay their fair share.

Obama’s knowledge of economics was abysmal. Deficit reduction guarantees recessions and depressions by taking growth dollars from the economy.

“Fiscal house in order” implies reducing federal debt, which simply stated, is the dreaded austerity, that has claimed the lives of many economies.

**Red line: Federal Debt changes. Vertical gray bars: Recessions.** Relative debt reduction leads to recessions which are cured by relative debt increases.

And rather than “shared sacrifice,” how about shared prosperity, as a better alternative.

And so far as “live with its means,” Obama confuses federal finance with personal finance. While you and I must live within our means (i.e. spend no more than our incomes), the federal government has no “means” to live within. The federal government’s “means” is infinite.

Why then, do we see headlines like this?

Newsweek
Stimulus Check Update as House Republicans Block $2,000 Plan, Trump Golfs, Khaleda Rahman

The COVID-19 relief deal remains in limbo over Christmas after House Republicans rejected President Donald Trump’s demand for $2,000 stimulus checks on Thursday, while the president spent the day golfing in Florida.

I’m not referring to the “Trump Golfs” part. We know why that is. But, why do Republicans block the $2,000 stimulus?

Given that:

–The federal government has an infinite ability to create dollars
–Federal taxpayers do not fund federal spending, and
–The private sector has a desperate need for dollars,

Why the GOP reluctance to spend?

Yes, there are the GOP’s political considerations of not wanting to help the poor, and preferring to help the rich, but additionally, there is the belief (excuse?) that federal finances are no different from personal finances.

The public doesn’t understand the simple difference, and the GOP exploits that ignorance.

Contact your Senator or Representative to demand a $2,000 stimulus check (or better yet, Social Security for All). You will be met with the fake unaffordability issue.

Your Senator or Representative may or may not know the difference between federal financing and state, local and personal financing, but he/she makes the tacit assumption that you are ignorant about it.

That same assumed ignorance applies to arguments about Medicare for All, free college for all, and to every other debated federal expenditure.

Simply keep in mind that:

–The federal government can afford anything. It never can run short of dollars. It is the sovereign of dollars.
–Taxpayers do not pay for federal spending.
–The federal debt is not a burden on anyone. Lack of income is a burden on the populace
—Federal spending does not cause inflation
–Federal finances are nothing like state/local government, and personal finances. The federal government is Monetarily Sovereign; state/local governments are monetarily non-sovereign.

Try to find candidates who understand the differences, and vote for them, or teach the ones you are stuck with.

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: