A day of your life under Trump Friday, Aug 3 2018 

This is August 2, 2018, a typical day under Trump:

Trump: “I Would ‘Personally Prefer’ a Government Shutdown Before the Midterms”

President Donald Trump said he would “personally prefer” to shut down the government before the midterm elections in November if Congress does not pass funding for a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

(Trump said,) “You know who thinks It’s better to do it before? Rush Limbaugh thinks it should be before, before the election. You know who else? Sean Hannity. A lot of them, great people.”

Yes, government shutdowns are great. Who needs roads, bridges, dams, parks, firefighters, Social Security, the military, the VA, FEMA, NASA, Medicare, Medicaid, the FBI, CIA, TSA, the Secret Service, and all the many thousands of things the federal government does?

Image result for Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and trump.

“Shut down the government, now.”

We should shut it all down because Trump didn’t receive his Wall money?

But wait! Do you recall how Trump repeatedly, endlessly promised that Mexico would pay for the Wall?

Again and again, he asked his followers, “Who’s going to pay?” and like programmed robots, they chanted, “Mexico!”

The suckers believed yet another of the thousand Trump’s lies.

And notice from where Trump gets his presidential advice: Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Why confer with experts when you have Limbaugh and Hannity?

THE WEEK, 8/3/18: White House battle with media escalates

CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta on Thursday confronted White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders over her claim that President Trump is “rightfully frustrated” when he calls the press “the enemy of the people.”Image result for hitler said about the media

Sanders refused to reject Trump’s allegation, instead criticizing the press for lowering “the level of conversation in this country” and saying the media incited anger against Trump.

Acosta pressed Sanders, but she said she and Trump had made their position clear. Acosta later walked out of the briefing over Sanders’ co criticimments.

At a Pennsylvania rally Thursday night, Trump resumed his attacks on what he called “fake, fake, disgusting news.”

Hitler called it ‘lügenpresse’ The phrase means ‘lying press’ in German, and was used to attack media outlets that were deemed to be unsupportive of the Nazi party and its aims.

The word has also been previously used by Donald Trump supporters, and in a rally in October, two people were caught saying the Nazi term to journalists.

Infographic: Trump's Favorite Twitter Insults | Statista

Sanders: “Media are lowering the level of conversation.”

Trump resents the 1st Amendment to the Constitution — freedom of the press — as all dictators do.

Bashing the free press is one of the first acts of a despot.

His mouthpiece, Sanders, has the gall to criticize the media for “lowering the level of conversation.”

Her boss barely goes a day without tweeting or saying an insult.

Trump administration says ACLU – not government – should find deported parents 

The Trump administration believes that the responsibility for finding parents who were deported after they were separated from their children should rest with immigration advocacy groups, not with the federal government.

Not only was it the government’s unconstitutional separation practice that led to this crisis, but the United States Government has far more resources than any group of NGOs” ACLU wrote.

The ACLU lawyers also complained that the government is not even sharing information it already has on parents who have been deported, mostly to the Central American nations of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.

Related image

Trump: Let the ACLU do it. We can’t.

The administration established contact information with some deported parents but didn’t pass that information along to the ACLU.

Even when information is being shared, it’s only coming in pieces.

Some addresses for parents list only a street, some merely a city.

On Tuesday, a bipartisan group of senators grilled administration officials over the family separation crisis.

During the hearing, a senior Department of Health and Human Services official said he repeatedly warned the Trump administration that the separation policy would not be in “the best interest of the child.”

On Wednesday, a group of 14 bipartisan senators sent a letter to the heads of the departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services, demanding information on the status of separated families, including those where the parents have been deported.

“Unfortunately, the flow of information to the public and to congressional offices with important oversight responsibilities has been both incomplete and below acceptable standards,” the senators wrote.

Even for an administration, a President, and a political party, now known for immorality, the torture of children and parents is exceptional.

The lie that the government no longer can find the parents, and that the ACLU should do it, is beyond the pale — except apparently for Trump.

A bipartisan group of senators offered Thursday a bill that would impose tougher sanctions on Russia if it continues to interfere in U.S. elections.

The bill would create new criminal penalties for anyone who targets election systems and slap sanctions on political figures, oligarchs, and others who engage in “illicit and corrupt activities” on behalf of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The legislation also pushes back against President Donald Trump’s attacks on NATO, requiring a two-thirds vote of the Senate for the U.S. to leave the military alliance, which includes Canada and most of Europe.

Image result for trump putin

Trump: Putin says he didn’t do it.

Trump has questioned whether Russia really meddled in the 2016 presidential election and whether NATO is still useful to the U.S.

However, Dan Coats, Trump’s director of national intelligence, has said that “the warning lights are blinking red again” for Russian interference in this year’s elections.

Congress voted last summer to impose sanctions on Russia for interfering in the 2016 election, but the bill’s six sponsors of the bill say the penalties weren’t tough enough and won’t deter Putin from meddling in this year’s elections.

The bill’s strong bipartisan support means it has a good chance of passing in the Senate.

It’s not clear whether it will be introduced in the House or whether Trump would sign it if Congress approves the legislation.

Trump will sign it if Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Putin to tell him to.

Following the White House’s release of a proposal to cripple Obama-era fuel regulations, 19 states have stated they plan to sue to stop the rollback.

Image result for auto air pollution

What air pollution?

The administration’s new plan calls for holding 2020 fuel efficiency standards steady through 2026, undoing the plan for Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards to get stricter every year until 2025.

The Trump administration argues that a rollback of regulations would prevent fatalities by reducing car prices, leading people to buy automobiles that are newer and safer.

States fighting the plan allege that it will result in increased air pollution.

Trump makes the outrageous claim that cutting fuel efficiency will prevent fatalities. Nevermind that it will increase human breathing fatalities, and also use more oil.

The Guardian: 8/2/18: A suspected Russian spy has been working undetected in the heart of the American embassy in Moscow.

Two investigators from the US Department of State’s Regional Security Office (RSO) sounded the alarm in January 2017, but the Secret Service did not launch a full-scale inquiry of its own.

Instead, it decided to let her go quietly months later, possibly to contain any potential embarrassment.

“The Secret Service is trying to hide the breach by firing [her],” a source said. “The damage was already done but the senior management of the Secret Service did not conduct any internal investigation to assess the damage.

The Secret Service attempted to downplay the significance of her role. The state department said it would not comment.

The discovery of a suspected FSB mole on its staff within the US embassy in Moscow could have severe consequences for the safety of other Secret Service staff and those it is mandated to protect.

The Guardian has been told the name of the suspected spy and her job title within the agency.

With a role that gave her an insight into ongoing Secret Service investigations, the woman had access to the Secret Service intranet, its internal email and its counterfeit-money tracking system.

The state department alerted the Secret Service in January 2017and at least nine high-ranking Secret Service officials became aware of the findings.

The potential breach was not reported to any of the congressional intelligence or oversight committees.

“The US Congress is focusing on Russian hackers when it is possible that all of the information they needed to get into the system came from the internal breach in the Secret Service,” a source said.

This is what happens when there is no sane leadership, and experienced staff repeatedly quits, or is fired and replaced by new, inexperienced staff (or sometimes not replaced at all).

There, we have one day of your life under Trump.

Based on Trump’s erratic and mercurial history, we only can be sure of one thing: Tomorrow will be worse.

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

The fake “debt time-bomb,” still ticking after 78 years Wednesday, Aug 1 2018 

Every so seldom, I feel compelled to remind you of the #1 idiocy in economics, the daily, weekly, monthly, and annual warnings that the U.S. federal “debt” is a ticking time-bomb, ready to explode at any moment.

This repeated forecast has been promulgated for at least the 78 years since 1940, with  no end in sight.

In any other science, a repeated failed prediction would be a strong signal that either the facts are wrong or misinterpreted, and its forecasters are wrongheaded.

But, because mainstream economics is not a real science, but rather is akin to a religion, its asinine, proven-wrong forecasts are treated with solemn respect.

Image result for sign the end is near

Any minute, now

Imagine the cult leader who tells his followers to climb the mountain and await the world’s end.

When the world fails to end, they climb back down, but still believe the cult leader’s next “world-is-ending” prophecy.

That is economics.

By way of reminder, the debt in 1940 was $40 Billion, and today it is $16 Trillion. Surely, a gigantic 40,000% increase should have caused that debt bomb to explode.

But no, the debt bomb ticks, perhaps the slowest time bomb in recorded history. And our cult leaders continue their false warnings.

Waiting, waiting, waiting for that debt bomb to explode. Still waiting.

By way of further reminder, here is a bit of history from previous posts:

Back in 1940, the federal budget was a “ticking time-bomb which can eventually destroy the American system,” said Robert M. Hanes, president of the American Bankers Association.

By 1960: the debt was “threatening the country’s fiscal future,” said Secretary of Commerce, Frederick H. Mueller.

By 1983: “The debt “probably will explode in the third quarter of 1984,” said Fred Napolitano, former president of the National Association of Home Builders.

In 1984: AFL-CIO President Lane Kirkland said. “It’s a time bomb ticking away.”

In 1985: “The federal deficit is ‘a ticking time bomb, and it’s about to blow up,’ U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell.

Later in 1985: Los Angeles Times: “We labeled the deficit a ‘ticking time bomb’ that threatens to permanently undermine the strength and vitality of the American economy.”

In 1987: Richmond Times–Dispatch – Richmond, VA: “100TH CONGRESS FACING U.S. DEFICIT ‘TIME BOMB’”

Later in 1987: The Dallas Morning News: “A fiscal time bomb is slowly ticking that, if not defused, could explode into a financial crisis within the next few years for the federal government.”

In 1989: FORTUNE Magazine: “A TIME BOMB FOR U.S. TAXPAYERS”

In 1992: The Pantagraph – Bloomington, Illinois: “I have seen where politicians in Washington have expressed little or no concern about this ticking time bomb they have helped to create, that being the enormous federal budget deficit, approaching $4 trillion.

Later in 1992: Ross Perot: “Our great nation is sitting right on top of a ticking time bomb. We have a national debt of $4 trillion.”

In 1995: Kansas City Star: “Concerned citizens. . . regard the national debt as a ticking time bomb poised to explode with devastating consequences at some future date.”

In 2003: Porter Stansberry, for the Daily Reckoning: “Generation debt is a ticking time bomb . . . with about ten years left on the clock.”

In 2004: Bradenton Herald: “A NATION AT RISK: TWIN DEFICIT A TICKING TIME BOMB”

In 2005: Providence Journal: “Some lawmakers see the Medicare drug benefit for what it is: a ticking time bomb.”

In 2006: NewsMax.com, “We have to worry about the deficit . . . when we combine it with the trade deficit we have a real ticking time bomb in our economy,” said Mrs. Clinton.

In 2007: USA Today: “Like a ticking time bomb, the national debt is an explosion waiting to happen.

In 2010: Reason Alert: “. . . the time bomb that’s ticking under the federal budget like a Guy Fawkes’ powder keg.”

In 2011: Washington Post, Lori Montgomery: ” . . . defuse the biggest budgetary time bombs that are set to explode.”

In 2014: CBN News: “The United States of Debt: A Ticking Time Bomb”

*On Jun 18, 2015: The ticking economic time bomb that presidential candidates are ignoring: Fortune Magazine, Shawn Tully,

*February 10, 2016, The Daily Bell: “Obama’s $4.1 Trillion Budget Is Latest Sign of America’s Looming Collapse”

*On January 23, 2017: Trump’s ‘Debt Bomb’: Deficit May Grow, Defense Budget May Not, By Sydney J. Freedberg, Jr.

*On April 28, 2017: Debt in the U.S. Fuel for Growth or Ticking Time Bomb?, American Institute for Economic Research, by Max Gulker, PhD – Senior Research Fellow, Theodore Cangeros

And now, for your amusement, here is a sampling of this year’s Henny Penny, sky-is-falling, ticking-time-bomb, scare articles:

America’s Debt Bomb Conservatives and deficit hawks are hurling criticism at Washington for deepening America’s debt hole.

Paying debt servicing costs associated with what America owes is also tying up federal dollars that could be used elsewhere.

The U.S. must pay interest on its outstanding debt, and, given the trillions and trillions of dollars that the country owes, those payments are becoming particularly expensive.

This latest article drips with ignorance. Here are the facts:

  1. The U.S. government is Monetarily Sovereign. It has the unlimited ability to create its own sovereign currency, the U.S. dollar. The U.S. government cannot run short of dollars.
  2. Because the federal government has infinite dollars, its dollars cannot be “tied up,” and there always are plenty of dollars to be “used elsewhere.”
  3. Federal deficit is necessary for economic growth, so the interest the government pays into the economy stimulates economic growth.

And then, there’s this:

CBO: US Debt Burden Set to Break Record in Early 2030s
Growing deficits to push debt to almost 100 percent of GDP by 2028
Jun 26, 2018

CBO Director Keith Hall said that by 2048, “as interest rates rise from their currently low levels and as debt accumulates, the federal government’s net interest costs are projected to more than double as a percentage of GDP and to reach record levels.”

Hall said interest costs would equal spending for Social Security, currently the largest federal program, by 2048.

CBO has long warned that rising debt poses a risk to the economy, and Hall made the point again Tuesday.

“The prospect of large and growing debt poses substantial risks for the nation and presents policymakers with significant challenges,” he said in the statement.

It’s all a lie. Debt/GDP is one of economics’ more meaningless ratios.

Debt/GDP does not indicate the federal government’s ability to pay its bills, nor does it indicate the likelihood of inflation, recession, depression, economic growth, stagflation or any other economic measure.

Being meaningless, it naturally is a favorite of mainstream economists and the media.

Then there is this:

Podcast: Ticking Debt Bomb, Jul 2, 2018

The Congressional Budget Office recently issued an alarming report on the nation’s debt outlook, which CQ senior budget reporter Paul M. Krawzak says should worry millennials.

“A tidal wave of interest payments on the debt is about to hit us.”

And from the reliably wrong, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget:

National debt is about to roar back to life as a pressing issue
By Maya MacGuineas, Updated 6:03 PM ET, Tue July 31, 2018

As a result of an unprecedented debt binge by Congress over the past year, the national debt is about to roar back to life as a pressing issue after years of hibernation.

The debt didn’t go away. It has been growing by the second ever since, and the dominoes are about to start falling. 

These sums accelerate a coming fiscal freefall and will push the nation over a psychological barrier as soon as next year: trillion-dollar annual deficits.

You would expect worries about debt to center on affordability. If you experience debt problems, your primary concern is, “Can I afford to pay it off.”

You would expect warnings about federal debt to include words similar to: “The government will run short of money.

But those words never are used because unlike state and local governments, the federal government cannot run short of money.

It can pay off any size financial obligation at any time, and despite the massive debt increase, through wars and depressions, the federal government never has failed to pay a debt.

Instead, we are treated to such meaningless generalities as “ticking time bomb,” “looming collapse,” “tidal wave,” “the dominoes are about to start falling,” “coming fiscal freefall,” “psychological barrier,” and “alarming report.”

After seventy-eight years, that ole’ federal debt bomb still is ticking. Meanwhile, it also has been “unsustainable,” “insane,” and “irresponsible,” a “mounting debt crisis,” and servicing is “problematic.”

All of the above are not based on mere ignorance. Instead, they are part of an intentional plan to deceive you.

The very rich .1%, who run America, do not want you of the 99.9% to know that the federal government has the ability to provide far more benefits for you than it currently does.

They want you to believe falsely, that benefits are a burden on the government and require tax increases. In short, they want to convince you to vote against yourself.

It has to do with Gap Psychology, which you can learn about, here.

In brief, the very rich want to widen the Gap gap between them and you, and making false claims about the federal debt is their insidious method.

It works. You have been suckered.

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

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

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

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 The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

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 can afford better health care than can 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 A MONTHLY ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA (similar to Social Security for All)
(The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Guaranteed Income)) 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 EVERYONE
Five 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 benefitting 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
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 FEDERAL TAXES ON BUSINESS
Businesses are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the federal government (the later having no use for those dollars). Any tax on businesses reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all business taxes reduce 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 business taxes would be a 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 shame and horror of America Wednesday, Aug 1 2018 

Image result for memorial to the ship st. louis

Donald Trump signs his immigration ban January 27, 2017, the UN International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

President Donald Trump repeatedly has told his followers that undocumented (i.e. brown skinned) Mexican immigrants seeking asylum are “drug dealers, murderers, and rapists.”

His followers, ignoring history, want to believe him.

Consider this article from the University of Pennsylvania, School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Criminology:

Do Mexican Immigrants “Cause” Crime?

The results of research offer little evidence that Mexican immigration increases crime in the United States.

If anything, there is evidence that crime declines after immigrants arrive.

These findings are supported by research from the Public Policy Institute of California on the composition of inmates in California prisons, which reveals that Mexican immigrants are dramatically underrepresented in the state prison system.

Consider the case of El Paso, Texas a working class city of approximately 700,000 people that sits opposite the Rio Grande river from Ciudad Juarez, one of the most violent and lawless cities in Mexico.

More than 80% of El Paso’s residents are Hispanic and the vast majority of these individuals are of Mexican origin. El Paso has one of the highest proportions of immigrants among U.S. cities.

Many of these migrants are undocumented. If those who fear Mexican immigration are right, then El Paso should be a hotbed of violence.

As it turns out, El Paso is one of the safest cities in the United States with a homicide rate of 2.4 per 100,000 residents.

The nation’s overall murder rate in 2016 was 5.3 per 100,000 people (From the FBI’s 2016 Uniform Crime Reporting program.)

Just a tiny handful of American cities have a lower homicide rate and most of those that do (San Diego, Chula Vista, and Mesa, AZ, for example) also have outsize Mexican populations.

El Paso’s homicide rate is so low that it compares favorably to European capitals like London, Paris and Amsterdam, cities which have rates of lethal violence that are generally an order of magnitude lower than cities in the United States.

While it is right for Americans to be concerned about the equality of the immigrants we attract, there is simply no evidence to support that Mexican immigration should be a cause for concern.

If anything, there is quite a bit of evidence that the immigrants we attract from Mexico make us safer than we otherwise would be.

Does Trump’s race-baiting sound familiar? Perhaps this will serve as a reminder:

Japanese internment camps were established during World War II by President Franklin Roosevelt through his Executive Order 9066.

From 1942 to 1945, it was the policy of the U.S. government that people of Japanese descent would be interred in isolated camps.

Image result for memorial to japanese internment in washington dc

Engraving on the Japanese American Memorial to Patriotism

Enacted in reaction to Pearl Harbor and the ensuing war, the Japanese internment camps are now considered one of the most atrocious violations of American civil rights in the 20th century.

The Japanese American Memorial to Patriotism During World War commemorates the experience of American citizens of Japanese ancestry and their parents who patriotically supported the United States despite unjust treatment during World War II.

It reads, “The lessons learned must remain as a grave reminder of what we must not allow to happen again to any group.”a

How soon we have forgotten.

And then there was this:

MS St. Louis

MS St. Louis set sail from Hamburg to Cuba on May 13, 1939. The vessel was carrying 937 passengers, most of them Jewish refugees seeking asylum from Nazi ill-treatment of Jews in Germany.Image result for memorial to the ship st. louis

Prohibited from landing in Cuba, the St. Louis headed towards the United States.

It circled off the coast of Florida, waiting for permission to enter the United States.

Cordell Hull, Secretary of State, advised Roosevelt not to accept the Jews.

After the St. Louis was turned away from the United States, a group of academics and clergy in Canada tried to persuade Canada’s Prime Minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, to provide sanctuary to the ship’s passengers.Related image

But Canadian immigration official Frederick Blair, hostile to Jewish immigration, persuaded the prime minister on June 9 not to intervene.

(In 2000, Blair’s nephew apologized to the Jewish people for his uncle’s action.)

Research determined that 254 of those who returned to continental Europe were murdered during the Holocaust.

In 2012, the United States Department of State publicly apologized for the incident.

In January 2017, a Twitter account tweeted the names of each passenger who was not allowed to disembark and subsequently killed.Related image

The format of each tweet included the passenger’s name, the sentence “The US turned me away at the border in 1939” and the location where each was killed.

In May 2018, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the Government of Canada would offer a formal apology its role in the fate of the ship’s passengers.

Now we Americans, having learned nothing from history, again advocate deporting innocent people whose sole “crime”  is to seek sanctuary for themselves and for their children.

Trump advocates depriving undocumented immigrants of due-process rights

President Trump on Sunday explicitly advocated for depriving undocumented immigrants of their due-process rights, arguing that people who cross the border into the United States illegally are invaders and must immediately be deported without trial or an appearance before a judge.

And:

No One Expected Obama Would Deport More People Than Any Other U.S. President 

As a presidential candidate in 2008 Obama promised the then 14 million undocumented immigrants that he would introduce immigration reform in his first year in office.

It became known in the Latino community as “La Promesa de Obama,” or Obama’s Promise. But he didn’t introduce immigration legislation.

Obama’s Homeland Security deported 2.7 million people — an average of about a thousand immigrants a day, for eight years — earning him the title of “Deporter in Chief.”

In 2010, Democrats lost control of Congress, and immigration reform died.

History will not judge President Obama, President Trump, and their bigoted apologists kindly, for their roles in deporting, and refusing to protect, desperate seekers of sanctuary.Image result for words on statue of liberty

Perhaps, one day, we will create yet another memorial of shame, this one to those Mexican innocents whose lives we ruined or ended because of our needless cruelty: “The US turned me away at the border.”

On behalf of true Americans — the people who still believe in the words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty — I apologize to you who have experienced “evil America.”

Future Americans will look back in shame and horror at what we do today.

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

A false defense of income inequality Sunday, Jul 29 2018 

Image result for bernanke and greenspan

It’s our little secret. Don’t tell the people we don’t use their tax dollars.

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

Alan Greenspan: “A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency.”

———————————————————————————————————————————————————–

“Gap Psychology describes the desire to distance oneself from those below, and to come closer to those above, on many positive measures — income, wealth, power, education, etc.

In a comparative world, those at the top have two ways to remain at the top or even to increase their distance from the rest: Move higher or move those below, lower.

In America, the top 1% chooses both methods, as evidenced by the efforts of the Republican Party, which gives tax breaks to the wealthy while denying benefits to the poorer.

Excerpts from the following article summarize the right-wing defense of income inequality — a defense that claims income inequality either doesn’t exist or is beneficial to all.

A conservative scholar, Scott Winship, questions whether the US really has an inequality problem
QUARTZ, Written by Dan Kopf

Scott Winship is now one of the most prominent academic skeptics of the idea that rising inequality is harming the US.Quartz spoke with him about the state of the debate on inequality in the US.

Quartz: So let’s start really broadly. Is increasing income inequality in the United States a problem?

Winship: Maybe? There are some empirical questions in the social sciences that are very hard to answer convincingly, and .this is one of them.

The answer is not all that difficult. There is significant evidence that increasing income inequality is a problem.

Who, other than perhaps Mr. Winship, is willing to claim that the poorer are equal to the richer in crime commission and victimization, diet, health, education, housing, and political power?

Crime commission and victimizationThe poorer are more likely to be victims and perpetrators of crime than are the richer:

As Aristotle said, “Poverty is the parent of crime.” That is why Chicago’s affluent “North Shore” suburbs have almost no violent crime, while Chicago’s poorer neighborhoods are rife with violence.

A disproportionate number of shooters and victims are poor.  The problem is lack of money, not innate morality.

There’s a powerful correlation between cities’ income inequality and their crime rates, including both property and violent crime.

How Income Inequality Affects Crime Rates
In a 2002 study by World Bank economists Pablo Fajnzylber, Daniel Lederman, and Norman Loayza, it was found out that crime rates and inequality are positively correlated within countries and also between countries. The correlation is a causation – inequality induces crime rates.

Economist Gary Becker says an increase in income inequality has a big and robust effect of increasing crime rates. Poverty alleviation has a crime-reducing effect.

Diet: The poorer tend to have worse diets than do the richer:

Health: The poorer tend to live shorter, less healthy lives than do the richer.

In the United States between 2001 and 2014, higher income was associated with greater longevity, and differences in life expectancy across income groups increased.

Education: The poorer tend to be less educated than are the richer:

2011-11-02-Screenshot20111102at11.52.53AM.png

2011-11-02-Screenshot20111102at11.50.09AM.png

Statistical Abstract of the United States, US Census Bureau.

No one doubts that housing is positively related to income.  Yes, Mr. Winship, the richer do live in better houses than do the poorer.

Political power:

The richer have more political power than do the poorer. Political representation functions reasonably well for the affluent. But the middle-class and the poor are essentially unrepresented, unless they share the preferences of the well-off.

Dictatorships and plutocracies operate on the reality that richer people have more political power than do poorer people.

None of the above is surprising, but Mr. Winship seems to downplay its significance. His conservative approach can be summarized: Income inequality may not really exist, and anyway it’s not harmful.

As he says:

It’s not the case that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, which is a concern many people express.

The middle class and the poor have actually seen their incomes go up quite a bit over the last 40 years. Median household income is at an all-time high.

Overall poverty, child poverty, and poverty among the kids of single mothers are at all-time lows.

The story for the middle and the bottom is a lot better than most folks believe.

Aside from cherry-picking statistics, Mr. Winship ignores the fact that rich” and “poor” are relative terms, not absolutes.

If you earn $10,000 a year, while others earn $1,000, you are rich, and the $1,000 earners are poor. 

But if you earn $10,000, and everyone else earns $100,000, you are poor.

In both examples, you earned $10,000, but in the first, you were rich and in the second you were poor.

So, whether or not America’s middle class and poor may have increased income, is a diversion. Income inequality has risen.

The poorer are getting poorer. The richer are getting richer.

GINI ratio: Higher numbers = more inequality. (0 = Everyone earns the same; 100 = One person earns all.)

Winship continues:

Conservatives tend to believe that income inequality increases economic growth, which benefits the middle and the bottom.

You can call it “trickle down.” The liberal position is often that every dollar that goes to the top is a dollar that is taken away from the middle and the bottom.

Winship wants you to believe that widening the income Gap benefits the middle and the poor more than does narrowing the Gap.

But as you will see, he skirts the inequality issue, and merely says everyone benefits when the total economy grows, so why worry about inequality?

Further, no economically educated person, liberal or otherwise, believes that the total of available dollars is fixed, so that “every dollar that goes to the top is a dollar that is taken away from the middle and the bottom.” He’s putting conservative words into liberal mouths.

I’ve found that countries that have higher inequality tend to have higher living standards for the middle class and the poor.

I would not assert strongly that that is a causal relationship. But it is not what you would expect to find if inequality was bad for growth.

He doesn’t reference the research that supposedly shows higher income inequality equates to higher living standards, perhaps because such research doesn’t exist.

If you go the CIA’s World Fact Book, you’ll see no such relationship. Quite the opposite.

The GINI ratios of third-world nations tend to cluster above the U.S. score, while first-world European nations all fall below — exactly the opposite of Winship’s claim.

Winship says:

I have argued for an Office of Opportunity in the White House to make income mobility a national priority. In my version of this office, it would spend about $20 billion a year on local experiments to promote school readiness among young kids.

I think we really have to focus on younger kids because of the vast test score gaps by income and by race when kids start school.

He acknowledges “vast test score gaps by income and by race,” yet “questions whether the US really has an inequality problem.”

Then comes the “lazy poor” myth espoused by the rich:

I think the evidence from welfare reform is that a lot of people that aren’t working can work, and that it would actually reduce their poverty and increase their income if they could be encouraged to do so.

I don’t look at work requirements being punitive, I look at it as being better for a lot of people receiving those benefits.

The rich claim the poor are slothful “takers,” and need to be “encouraged” (via punishment) to work. Apparently, just being poor is not punishment enough.  Winship wants to make them poorer, as additional “encouragement.”

He says:

The policies liberals pursue to try to expand mobility too often revolve around just spending more money. They tend to think if you are cutting programs that is bad for mobility, and if you are expanding programs that is good for it.

Yet, Winship wants a $20 billion-per-year Office of Opportunity, to increase income mobility, but doesn’t want to spend more money on the poor, because the poor supposedly are unmotivated to improve.

If this makes sense to you, please explain it to me.

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

IN SUMMARY: “Poor” and “rich” are comparatives, not absolutes. The rich become richer either by increasing their own wealth or by decreasing the wealth of those below them.

Income inequality leads to inequality in crime commission and victimization, diet, health, education, housing, and political power.

While humans are not all equal, today’s level of American income inequality is incompatible with a well-functioning democracy.

The Ten Steps to Prosperity is a recommendation for dealing with excessive income inequality.

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

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

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

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 The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

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 can afford better health care than can 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 A MONTHLY ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA (similar to Social Security for All)
(The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Guaranteed Income)) 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 EVERYONE
Five 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 benefitting 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
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 FEDERAL TAXES ON BUSINESS
Businesses are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the federal government (the later having no use for those dollars). Any tax on businesses reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all business taxes reduce 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 business taxes would be a 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 »

%d bloggers like this: