A hilarious and sad letter Friday, Aug 19 2016 

It’s serious business, the question of who will be President of the United States, arguably the most powerful human on this planet. But sometimes, one only can laugh at what a desperate candidate will say or do.

And perhaps, today is the day for laughter. Here, belatedly, is a copy of a letter released by Donald Trump’s doctor.

It is a laught riot — and sad:

As you can see, the letter from the learned doctor begins, to whom my concern, a fittingly humorous beginning.

Here are some further comments by the New York Times:

Donald Trump Releases Medical Report Calling His Health ‘Extraordinary’”

The letter, gushing in tone and signed by Dr. Harold N. Bornstein of Lenox Hill Hospital in Manhattan, was four paragraphs long and provided few specific laboratory test results.

The letter made a sweeping declaration in a tone oddly similar to how Mr. Trump talks about himself.

Mr. Trump vowed on Twitter to release a “full medical report” about his physical health and fitness to serve as president, which he said would “show perfection.”

His pledge came after a Politico report pointed out his penchant for fatty foods, his lack of routine workouts and, until now, his refusal to release a medical report.

I don’t know about you, but when my doctor provides me with a report, it is three pages long, and filled with all sorts of measurements and chemical shorthands, and it indicates what’s normal and what differs from normal.

He doesn’t send me a strange little note telling me I’m the greatest of all time — but then, I’m not the Donald Trump.

Though Trump promised “a full medical report,” apparently that promise is as good as the one about producing his tax returns.

The email from Mr. Trump that contained the note said it was from his doctor, Jacob. According to an obituary, Jacob Bornstein died in 2010; the note lists Jacob Bornstein as Mr. Trump’s previous physician.

Seemingly, Mr. Trump was in such a hurry to provide proof of his magnificence, he forgot who his doctor was.

Dr. Harold Bornstein said in his letter that he had taken over his father’s practice and had cared for Mr. Trump since 1980. “Over the past 39 years, I am pleased to report that Mr. Trump had no significant medical problems,” giving a duration that suggested he had been caring for him since 1976.

Apparently, this does not cover the period when a bone spur in Mr. Trump’s heel was so serious as to make him unfit for the military — before the spur suddenly and mysteriously disappeared.

A “recent complete medical examination” of Mr. Trump “showed only positive results,” the letter said.

Real doctors do not use the term “only positive results,” simply because many positive results would indicate disease. Would you really want to test positive for syphilis or cancer?

Could it be that Trump dictated the letter? Naw, he wouldn’t be so devious — and obvious —  would he?

It gave few specifics about that examination but contained a number of flamboyant descriptions. For example, Dr. Bornstein said Mr. Trump’s blood pressure, 110/65, and laboratory test results were “astonishingly excellent.”

Presumably, the normal blood pressure reading was without benefit of any medication to lower a higher blood pressure.

“Astonishingly excellent”? Really? That’s doctor talk? My blood pressure is “within normal parameters.” Trump’s is astonishingly excellent.

Mr. Trump has lost “at least 15 pounds” in the past 12 months. But his exact weight before and after the loss was not stated. Reporters who have covered Mr. Trump’s campaign said their impression was that he had gained weight over recent months.

Hmmm . . . If his health is “astonishing excellent,” why did he lose 15 pounds in the past year? That’s astonishingly excellent?

And why does he look so bloated now?

Mr. Trump takes a low-dose aspirin (81 milligrams, or baby aspirin) daily as well as a statin to lower his high cholesterol, the report said.

His test results were “astonishing excellent” and his exam “showed only positive results,” uh, er, except for his high cholesterol and his excess weight — two of the most common cardiac concerns.

Reporters have asked Mr. Trump about his military draft status. He said he had received medical deferments from the Vietnam War because of a bone spur in his foot. When asked about it over the summer, Mr. Trump said he could not recall which foot was afflicted.

He couldn’t remember which foot was so painful it kept him out of the army?? Was this a memory problem or an honesty problem? You choose.

Mr. Trump said: “I am fortunate to have been blessed with great genes — both of my parents had very long and productive lives.” He did not say his father, Fred developed Alzheimer’s disease beginning in his late 80s.

O.K., so maybe it was a memory problem.

The note from Dr. Bornstein praised Mr. Trump’s “physical strength and stamina.” Those are the specific words that Mr. Trump has used to tar Hillary Clinton.

Yet more evidence that Trump forged the doctor’s note.

And then there is this:


DONALD TRUMP TESTS POSITIVE FOR EVERYTHING, ACCORDING TO HIS OWN DOCTOR

BY KURT EICHENWALD

Trump acolytes have not dropped their lying campaign about Clinton’s health, and their argument that people with epilepsy are unfit for political office. They are demanding she produce all of her medical records.

On July 28, 2015, the Clinton campaign released a typical medical letter from an internist, whom she has seen since 2001—Lisa Bardack, director of internal medicine, Mount Sinai Health System at CareMount Medical.

The letter is a typical medical history, and begins with the usual summary of a full physical, calling her a “healthy 67-year-old female.” It lists medical issues and the findings of testing. The tests, it says, were negative, meaning they showed no problems.

(Trump submitted what) purports to be a medical letter, but it is one of the most ridiculous documents ever to emerge in any political campaign.

First, the letterhead is in the same font as the letter, which appears to have been created using Microsoft Word.

The signature from the doctor is several inches past the signature line—the result you might get if the document had been signed as a blank and filled in later.

The letterhead includes a Gmail address—something doctors tell me is extremely unusual, since doctors do not want patients contacting them directly by email as a substitute for scheduling an appointment.

And don’t try going to the website listed (haroldbornsteinmd.com). It’s a fake.  Suprised?

Then, there is the doctor who allegedly signed this document. His name is Harold N. Bornstein, and he is a gastroenterologist.

This kind of physician is a specialist who treats the digestive tract. This is not an internist, who is trained specifically in providing full histories and physicals of patients.

It says results were “extraordinarily excellent.” (Not a medical term.)

It says, “His physical strength and stamina are extraordinary.” (Again, not a medical term.)

Then, in the most hilarious, Trump-esque line of all, it says, “If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest person ever elected to the presidency.”

In other words, this letter purports to show that a doctor has assessed the health of 43 people he has never examined, including the four who are still alive.

Hmmm . . . He’s not the healthiest person who ever has existed, or ever will exist, on the planet??

There is a genetic component to (Altzheimers, the disease that killed Trump’s father.) Risk increases when a person has a particular type of apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene on the 19th chromosome. The type of APOE gene a person has is testable.

Has Dr. Bornstein, the gastroenterologist, tested for it? If not, why not? Is that why Trump has avoided seeing an internist, since they would conduct such a test?

Such a test might reveal that Trump is unfit for office since dementia, unlike epilepsy, could damage a president’s ability to think coherently.

Type “Trump and Alzheimer’s” into Google and lots of articles and online comments pop up pointing out behaviors of Trump’s that are consistent with Alzheimer’s: meandering speech, poor self-control, not properly responding to questions that are asked, erratic behavior.

See? I can generate conspiracy theories, too. Please understand, I’m not saying Trump has Alzheimer’s. I’m just showing how easy it is to take a few facts and line them up to play the “I’m only asking questions” game.

In summary, Trump’s repeated attempts to con the public are hilarious, except . . .
His faking of his heel spur to get out of the military is hilarious, except . . .
His forged “doctor’s letter” is hilarious, except . . .
His coverup of his own health issues while questioning Clinton’s health is hilarious, except . . .

. . . Except there are millions of misguided Americans, who believe whatever Trump tells them.

You know these people. They are the easy marks who send money to Nigerian princes, buy penny stocks on the phone, let the guy at the door tar their driveway, and desperately want to believe someone they know has perpetrated repeated scams.

These are life’s punching bags, the suckers of the world, the dupes, the clowns, the fools, the eager prey of the con artists.

As Trump himself said, “I could shoot someone in the middle of Times Square and it would not cost me any votes.”

That is Trump’s one true statement.

And it is hilarious, but sad, that these naive folk are the ones who will suffer most if Trump ever were to be elected.

=Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

PLEASE HELP US GET THE WORD OUT
LOOK FOR US ON GOFUNDME.COM: RODGER MALCOLM MITCHELL

===================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich afford better health care than the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefiting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-tranferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be an good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Down the dark road. How a nation loses its liberty. Thursday, Aug 18 2016 

Liberty. Privacy. Freedom of speech. Freedom of thought.

These are not natural freedoms. They are difficult to obtain and difficult to retain.

Our founders gave their lives to establish these freedoms, and always, always someone lurks in the shadows, ready to steal them away from us.

Inevitably, it begins the same: Something frightens the working class. A charismatic and bombastic leader proclaims his unique ability to solve all their problems. Only he has the knowledge and the will to protect the working class from the evils that threaten them.

All he asks is that the people give him the power to take away the liberties of “them” who are different from “us,” and who “cause trouble.”

It’s a small step, isn’t it? Those “other” people aren’t all that important, are they? It’s good to destroy “their” lives so long as “our” lives are protected.

Helping the majority at the expense of the minority, easily is justified.

Hitler did it. Mussolini did it. Mao Zedung did it. Joseph Stalin did it. Kim Il-sung did it. Pol Pot did it. Saddam Hussein did it. Robert Mugabe did it.

The list goes on and on. Always different,yet always the same.

In every case the country was under a threat, real or perceived, The working class was afraid and suffering. An evil minority was identified as being the cause.

The fearful citizens turned to a “strong man.” a dictator to save them. They didn’t care whom he hurt, so long as it wasn’t​ them.

But, when they made their deal with the devil, the trap snapped shut.

The “strong man” thereupon began to expunge all who disagreed with him, for he was the nation and the nation was him.

Liberty became an unnecessary inconvenience. Freedom of speech, freedom of privacy, even freedom of thought, all stood in the way of the strong man’s goals.

Eventually, the country was enslaved and even the working people, who originally supported the “strong man,” no longer could be trusted, and they too were expunged.

The people willingly had walked down the dark road, ready to allow others to be punished, so they themselves could be saved.

Ironically, but inevitably, the working people, their children, and all their loved ones were punished.

The people all entered​ upon the dark road, believing “it could not happen here,” but soon their hatred rebounded on them, and their hell began.

Freedom is a fragile concept, hard to win, easy to lose.

Remember that as you read the following.

Trump Said He’d Throw Orlando Shooter’s Dad, A US Citizen, Out Of Country

Donald Trump told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that he would force even U.S. citizens found to have extremist views to leave the country as president.

Hannity asked Trump what he would do about individuals like Seddique Mateen, the Afghanistan-born father of the man who killed dozens in an Orlando nightclub in June and has criticized the U.S.

“What do we do when we find somebody that has extreme views?” Hannity asked in a town hall that was taped Tuesday but aired Wednesday so that it wouldn’t interfere with the live broadcast of Trump’s speech in Milwaukee. “Do we throw them the hell out?”

“I’d throw him out,” Trump said of Mateen, who is a naturalized U.S. citizen. “If you look at him, I’d throw him out.”

To Trump, Mateen “looks like” a Muslim. That, and having “extremist views” is sufficient reason to deport Mateen, despite Mateen being a U.S. citizen.

And what are extremist views? Are they the views of anyone disagreeing with the American government (as all Republicans have done for 8 years)?

Are they the views of those who speak against American attacks in Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc., as many Americans have done?

Are they the views of those who believe in a different God or in no God at all?

Only Trump is qualified to say what views are “extremist” and what are not.

Trump did not clarify where those identified as “extreme” would be sent, but said “racial profiling” was necessary to root out people who might pose a threat to national security.

“Whether it’s racial profiling or politically correct, we better get smart,” he said. “We are letting tens of thousands of people into our country. We don’t know what the hell we’re doing.”

As for racial profiling, Hitler would agree. He too felt it was necessary.

And the German people agreed. They voluntarily — eagerly in fact — walked down the dark path to hell — along with the Jews.

Trump first advocated profiling Muslim Americans after Seddique Mateen’s son Omar went on a deadly rampage at the Pulse LGBT nightclub. In the town hall, he insisted, yet again, that Muslim Americans are not doing their part to help U.S. authorities identify terrorist threats.

“We have to be so tough and so smart and so vigilant, and, frankly, the Muslims have to help us, because they see what’s going on in their community,” Trump said. “We don’t see it. They have to help us. If they are not going to help us, they are to blame also.

Trump never defines what “help us” means. What “help” does he expect from Muslim American citizens, that he does not demand from other American citizens?

If you don’t spy upon, and report against, your friends and family, are you too extreme? Shall we become a nation in which each of us fears the accusations of our neighbors, our neighbor’s children, or even our own children, lest the storm troopers kick down our door?

Nor does Trump specify who “us” are. Surely “us” cannot mean U.S. citizens, because he wants to deport many U.S. Muslim citizens.

And surely, “us” does not mean American citizens whose parents came from Mexico. He not only wants to deport many (calling them “anchor babies”) but doesn’t even trust a judge of that description.

And surely “us” doesn’t include blacks, or gays, or even women, who are not quite beautiful enough. Trump has no love for them.

One only can speculate that “us” means rich, white Christians born here to American citizens, just like him.

The Republican nominee gave a few more hints at the details of “extreme vetting” plan for refugees, which involves a ban on immigrants from countries with a “history of terrorism” and, as of this week, an ideological admissions test for all prospective immigrants.

Which countries have a “history of terrorism”? One easily might ask, “Which do not?”

Terrorists are everywhere. Many European nations have spawned terrorists. Shall we bar the English, the French, the Spanish, the Italians?

The United States has exported terrorists for training, and has suffered from terrorism. Clearly, the United States has a “history of terrorism.”

And what exactly is his “idealogical admissions test”? Who will create it? Who will grade it? Should it eliminate liberals? Democrats? Socialists? Fascists? Libertarians? Communists? Environmentalists? Buddhists? Satanists? Atheists?

Will it eliminate those who believe in Evolution? Those who don’t?

Who makes that determination? Surely not the United States Constitution.

Where does loss of freedom begin, and where does it end?

At least one proposal he introduced -— screening the social media accounts of refugees and terrorist suspects in the U.S. — is already in use by the intelligence community.

“We didn’t look at social media,” Trump said (falsely) of the married couple who went on a shooting spree at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California last December. “They just came in.”

After the San Bernardino shooting, FBI Director James Comey dismissed reports that shooters Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik made open posts on social media about martyrdom or committing terrorism.

Comey said all their communications were private messages that would not have been readily accessible by intelligence agencies.

As George Santayana reputedly said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Trump backers cannot remember the past, or if they remember, they naively believe, “It cannot happen here,” and “This time is different.”

Ignorance has its penalties. If Trump is elected, his followers and their families will pay with their lives, for yes, it can happen here, and no, this time is not different.

Freedom is fragile. It is difficult to gain and easily lost.

Trump is the reincarnation of every merciless dictator who ever trod the earth. He is not new. He is not unique. We have seen him many times before, bearing many flags and wearing many faces.

Fools follow dictators down the dark road to their doom. First,​ they lose their compassion. Then they lose their morality. Then they lose their freedoms and their lives.

It all begins with one small step.

It is ever thus.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

==================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich afford better health care than the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefiting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-tranferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be an good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The queen of bullsh*t Wednesday, Aug 17 2016 

You may have thought that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were the royal monarchs of bullsh*t, but Maya MacGuineas has them beat by a light year.

Her queenship comes not just from her incessant lying, but from the respect she is given by the bribed politicians in Washington.  She repeatedly is asked to testify about the “unsustainable” federal deficit and debt, always confusing them with private deficits and debts.

(News flash: Federal financing is different from private financing.)

I know politicians are cowards — afraid to upset the public’s delusions — but are they all really so ignorant of economics they not only listen to MacGuineas, but actually invite her to speak?

I am set off on this latest rant about her efforts to promulgate The Big Lie, by an Email I received today:

Maya MacGuineas: We Can’t Borrow Our Way to Prosperity

Maya MacGuineas, president of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and head of the Campaign to Fix the Debt, wrote an op-ed that appeared in RealClearPolicy. It is reposted here. 

With the general election now officially underway, it’s encouraging that presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have begun a discussion about how best to grow the economy and ensure our long-term prosperity.

Both candidates laid out their economic agendas last week, and it’s reassuring that reforming our dysfunctional tax system and increasing public investment seem to top the list of ideas for accelerating long-term economic growth.

Yes, they both want to “re-form” (i.e. change, form again), our tax system, but is simple change a good thing?

How about change-for-the-worse, by benefitting the rich more and by providing fewer benefits to the middle-class (Trump’s plan), or simply moving dollars around while increasing total taxes (Clinton’s plan).

Are those the kind of “reforms” we need?

But calls to finance these initiatives by increasing the deficit — effectively tacking them onto the national credit card — are self-defeating. Without a plan to pay for new initiatives and address our long-term debt, the nation faces slower, not faster, economic growth.

Early on, MacGuineas confuses federal finances with personal finances. There is no “national credit card,” nor is there anything even remotely resembling a “national credit card.”

It’s a phrase she uses to paint a picture of a federal government hopelessly indebted and unable to extricate itself — just like a person with large credit card debts.  And it’s all a lie.

The national debt is currently three-fourths the size of the economy — more than at any time in our nation’s history (with the exception of the World War II era).

Perfectly revealing. When the national debt rose dramatically during WWII, so did GDP:

Huge increases in federal deficit spending massively grew the economy. Government buying of goods and services built business sales and profits and employment. Government deficit spending for WWII was the most powerful economic growth device in U.S. history.

And, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the government’s official score-keeping agency, debt is on track to double as a share of the economy by 2050.

Assuming our creditors continue to allow these levels of debt, the CBO estimates that within three decades this will reduce average income by $4,000 per person compared to what it would be if debt were on a declining path.

In actuality, the U.S. has no “creditors.”

The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, has the unlimited ability to create its own sovereign currency, the dollar. It never can run short of dollars. It never needs to ask anyone else for dollars.

Thus, the U.S. never needs to borrow dollars. The so-called “debt” is nothing more than deposits in T-security accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank. The “debt” is bank accounts.

If you own a T-bond, T-note, or T-bill, you have a T-security account at the FRB. It’s part of the so-called federal “debt.” To buy that T-security, you ordered dollars taken from your bank checking account and deposited in your T-security account at the FRB.

It was a simple transfer of dollars.

To pay off the debt to you, the FRB simply will transfer your dollars from your T-security account back to your checking account. No new dollars needed.

MacGuineas either doesn’t know, or pretends she doesn’t know the difference between federal financing (Monetary Sovereignty) and personal financing (monetary non-sovereignty). Either she’s ignorant of basic economics or she’s lying.

While you and I can run short of dollars and may need to borrow some, the federal government cannot run short of dollars, so never needs to borrow any.

Not needing to borrow, the federal government has no “creditors” as the word normally is used. The so-called creditors are depositors — you and all the other depositors in Federal Reserve Bank accounts. (When you put money in the bank, you are referred to as a “depositor,” not a “creditor.”)

Go back to Macguineas’s statement, “Assuming our creditors continue to allow these levels of debt . . .” and substitute the word “depositors”:

  • Assuming depositors in Federal Reserve Bank accounts continues to make these levels of deposits, the CBO estimates that within three decades this will reduce average income by $4,000 per person compared to what it would be if debt were on a declining path.

The CBO is trying to tell you that increases in federal spending (as during the WWII growth years), plus deposits in the Federal Reserve Bank, reduce average income. What utter nonsense.

There is no known mechanism in economics, by which increased federal purchases of goods and services can reduce average income.

Think about it: The government buys more goods and services, thereby increasing business income, so businesses hire more people and pay more salaries. Somehow, by a miracle of mathematics, this is supposed to cut average income???

And yet we’re hearing calls for more borrowing.

No, the government doesn’t borrow.  What we’re hearing are more calls for federal spending on infrastructure repairs, Social Security, Medicare, education, the military, Research & Development, and all the other necessary investments in America the government can and should make.

Earlier this summer, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated that Mr. Trump’s policies would add $11.5 trillion to the debt over the next decade, largely as a result of his tax reform plan.

That would be $11.5 trillion added to the economy — $11.5 trillion in purchases of goods and services. And this is supposed to “reduce average income”? Ludicrous.

He has also called for further deficit spending as “priming the pump.”

Meanwhile, there have been calls on the left for Hillary Clinton to expand — and to deficit finance — her $275 billion infrastructure plan.

So, the government should not add 275 billion stimulus dollars to the economy and fix our crumbling infrastructure??? 

Some have pointed to today’s low-interest rates to buttress the argument that now’s the perfect time to invest in our future. And there is some truth to this.

Actually, low-interest rates are not a good argument for deficit spending. The government can pay any bill of any size.  Paying interest on T-securities is no problem, whatsoever.

Paying higher interest rates would be more beneficial, as more dollars would be added to the economy.

But the bottom line is that any plan to increase spending or cut taxes on pro-growth activities would be strengthened by including ways to pay for it over the medium-term, thereby reducing our nation’s long-term debt burden.

The above paragraph is classic MacGueneas obfuscation. She correctly talks about “pro-growth activities” as requiring spending increases and tax cuts.

But then demands spending decreases and tax increases (i.e. anti-growth activities) to pay down the mythical “debt.”

Just ask the CBO. They recently estimated the economic impact of increasing federal investment. According to their findings, $500 billion of new deficit-financed federal investments spread out over a decade would increase the size of the economy by about 0.007 percent over the first ten years, while $500 billion of investment fully paid for would double that level of economic growth.

Classic economic double-talk by MacGuineas and the CBO. The words “fully paid for,” mean no additional dollars added to the economy. Somehow, the federal government would be expected to make a $500 billion investment in economic growth, while spending no new dollars.

How? Where will the $500 billion come from if not from new dollars or new taxing (which would be recessive for the economy)? No one knows.

It’s all part of The Big Lie, the lie that like you and me, the federal government requires income in order to pay its bills. (The Big Lie is: “Federal taxes fund federal spending.)

Unlike state and local governments, and unlike you and me, the federal government requires no income. It creates dollars, ad hoc, each time it pays a bill. That is the method by which the federal government creates dollars.

By 2035, the CBO estimates the fully paid-for investment would increase the size of the economy by 0.06 percent, while the deficit-financed investment would shrink the economy by 0.04 percent.

See, it’s like this: You are asked to believe that adding dollars to the economy shrinks the economy, while taking dollars out of the economy, grows the economy. If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

Or ask the Joint Committee on Taxation. They found that while comprehensive revenue-neutral tax reform could increase the size of the long-run economy by about 1.5 percent, revenue-positive tax reform — even with a smaller reduction in tax rates — would increase it by close to 2 percent.

“Revenue-neutral” means no dollars added to the economy. “Revenue-positive” means dollars taken out of the economy.  You can decide for yourself which is more likely to grow the economy, additional government spending on goods and services, or no additional government spending.

Folks, this is not advance math. It’s a simple concept, made confusing by phrases like “revenue-positive,” which literally means “revenue-negative for the economy.” 

If federal debt wasn’t already on a path to increase by $10 trillion over the next decade, there might be a case for new borrowing. But, as a nation, we’ve too often been cavalier about borrowing when rates are both high and low, making tens of trillions of dollars in promises with no plans for how to pay them back. Given our past fiscal irresponsibility, no honest assessment of our nation’s balance sheet could conclude that what we need now is more borrowing.

And all these years, “with no plans for how to pay them back,” the federal government continues to pay it bills. Through depressions, recessions, stagflations, and wars, not only has the federal government never failed to pay a single invoice, but the U.S. economy has grown.

How would this be possible under the MacGuineas theory of austerity?  She keeps telling you the federal “debt” is unsustainable, and yet here we are, still paying our debts with no problem, whatsoever — still sustaining.

At what point do we acknowledge that “the girl who cried wolf” is a phony?

The evidence is clear: Reducing our projected long-term debt will promote economic growth; increasing debt will slow that growth.

In other words, increased government purchase of goods and services actually reduces economic growth, while reduced government purchases increase economic growth. Is that insane, stupid, or The Big Lie?

Today’s low interest rates do provide an opportunity: They buy us time to implement gradually much needed deficit reduction plans. Meanwhile, we can boost the economy by leading with pro-growth tax and spending reforms and enabling the pay-fors to follow as rates rise and the economy grows.

But low interest rates don’t get us off the hook. We must still address our massive and growing debt burden, particularly over the long run. There’s no excuse for punting this burden — and the slow economic growth that will accompany it — to the next generation.

And there you have it, The Big Lie in all its glory. “Cut deficit spending to grow the economy,” is like: “Apply leeches to cure anemia.”

Does The Big Lie result from mere ignorance or is there a more sinister motive?  I submit that the real motive is the desire to widen the Gap between the rich and the rest.

Without the Gap, no one would be rich (We all would be the same), and the wider the Gap, the richer they are.

So the rich pay the politicians (via campaign contributions), and the media (via ownership), the economists (via salaries and university contributions), and Maya MacGuineas (via her salary) to promulgate The Big Lie and to impoverish you.

They are terrified that one day, you will demand the truth.

At that point, poverty in American will diminish to historic lows, the Gap between you and the rich will be narrowed, and America will fulfill its promise of true greatness.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich afford better health care than the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefiting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-tranferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be an good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Today’s new politics explained Monday, Aug 15 2016 

For those who cannot understand today’s Presidential campaign, we offer:

Today’s New Politics Explained

  1. I don’t mean what I say. I don’t say what I mean. I won’t do what I promise. Follow me.
  2. I never consult with anyone. I know more than everyone. I have a very good brain.
  3. My illogic is logical; you just aren’t smart enough to understand it.
  4. My immorality is strength. Your morality is weakness.
  5. My fictions are fact. Your facts are fiction.
  6. That’s not what I said. That’s not what I meant. That’s not what I did. Don’t you understand sarcasm?
  7. If I cheat, I am a winner and they are losers. If I lose, they cheated, but I still am a winner and they still are losers.
  8. If the media tell the truth about me, they are liars.
  9. I offer non-solutions to hard problems. Real solutions are too hard .
  10. Women are beautiful if they say nice things about me; they are bleeding pigs if they don’t.
  11. I am not a bigot. Mexican-American judges are bigots.
  12. If it’s bad, it’s your fault and I always knew it would be. If it’s good, I alone did it, and I always knew I would.
  13. Captured soldiers are not heroes; dodging the draft is real heroism.
  14. The handicapped, gay, poor, or non-white are losers.
  15. My hatred of “them” demonstrates my compassion for you.
  16. I love babies; Get that one out of here.
  17. My favorite book is the bible. I didn’t read it. My next favorite book is “Art of the Deal.” I didn’t write or read it.
  18. Only losers apologize.

Many people say I will be the greatest President in the history of the world.

I am huge.

Now do you understand?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich afford better health care than the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefiting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-tranferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be an good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

« Previous PageNext Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 745 other followers