The cost of science denial

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

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Science is not always right. In fact, science advances by being wrong and then conducting research to discover why it was wrong, an effort that leads to better answers.

Almost everything you think you know about the world results from that process: Hypothesis —> Test —> New Hypothesis.

Many science deniers use a different system: Rumor —> belief —> unshakable belief.

Non-scientists do not know more about science than do the real scientists.

The notion that a layman can get away with saying any damn fool thing he or she wishes, and then justify it by saying “Scientists often are wrong,” is nothing more than blissful — and harmful — ignorance.

Here are some examples of that blissful — and harmful — ignorance:

Beetroot for AIDS: Fighting denialism in Mbeki’s South Africa
HIV researcher and doctor Glenda Gray worked through the dark days of Thabo Mbeki’s AIDS denialism. In an era of fake news and climate scepticism, her story has lessons for us allBy Sarah Wild

By 2000, 1 in 5 pregnant South African women were HIV-positive, with about 70,000 infected babies born each year.

Under Nelson Mandela, I was drafting South Africa’s plan to tackle HIV and AIDS, including the roll-out of nationwide treatment.

But in 1999 a new president, Thabo Mbeki, had prejudices about science. Mbeki’s line was that poor nutrition, rather than HIV, was the cause of AIDS.

(Government officials) were advocating beetroot and garlic to prevent AIDS!

A huge problem is the transmission of HIV from mother to baby during childbirth or breastfeeding, which is preventable by giving the mother antiretroviral drugs (ARVs).

But Mbeki’s government would not provide ARVs. I saw the effects of this firsthand. We were counting the dead bodies, many of them babies.

Scientifically, mother-to-child transmission of HIV, and its prevention, weren’t contentious. Why would anyone object to giving AZT or nevirapine – internationally approved drugs that reduce HIV’s ability to replicate – to a pregnant woman to prevent her infecting her baby?

Some even were saying that AZT was toxic and that we were killing black women by using it.

Administrators and civil servants kowtowed to Mbeki whether they believed in AIDS denialism or not, and so toed the party line at whatever cost. I once had a call from a doctor at another hospital, who said, “I have an HIV-pregnant woman in labour. I hear you have the drugs to prevent mother-to-child transmission during childbirth. Can I send an ambulance to fetch them?” The ambulance rushed to our unit, and I gave the driver the package.

When he got there, the hospital boss confiscated the drugs and phoned me, saying, “How dare you send that medicine!”

(Today), when the ARVs finally (have been) rolled out it is like Lazarus syndrome. My patients went from needing wheelchairs and oxygen tanks, from lying on stretchers, to healthy.

Children I was treating went back to school. ARVs were the most amazing thing to happen to South Africa.

In 2008, Mbeki resigned and interim president Kgalema Motlanthe, on his first day in office, appointed a new health minister. It was like waking up from a nightmare. Mbeki’s stance on HIV was ultimately his undoing, and with him gone South Africa began making ARVs available in all its clinics, to anyone who needed them.

Well, that was South Africa, a backward people. Fortunately,  such ignorant science-denial could not happen in The United States of America, a scientifically sophisticated nation.

If one of our leaders arbitrarily denied the scientific consensus, he would be run out of town.  Right?

Can a new history of vaccination silence doubters?
Controversies and scandals cannot obscure the self-evident success story of vaccines told by Meredith Wadman in “The Vaccination Race”

EVERY year, millions of children and adults are vaccinated against diseases that only a few decades ago were terrifying and deadly, including rubella, polio and measles.

Meredith Wadman’s meticulously researched book begins with the heart-rending account of a baby girl born in 1964 who survived just 16 months before succumbing to the effects of maternally transmitted rubella. She spent only nine days of her life outside hospital.

The fear and horror these diseases cause is a fading memory, and despite the fact that vaccines work, the sceptics are gaining ground, their claims given credence by a handful of Hollywood stars and now by US president Donald Trump.

-/-

Trump energizes the anti-vaccine movement in Texas
Some mothers have stopped immunizing their young children because of doubts about vaccine safety.

President Trump’s embrace of discredited theories linking vaccines to autism has energized the anti-vaccine movement. The movement is raising doubts about basic childhood health care.

Public health experts warn that this growing movement threatens one of the most successful medical innovations of modern times. Globally, vaccines prevent the deaths of about 2.5 million children every year, but deadly diseases such as measles and whooping cough still circulate in populations where enough people are unvaccinated.

Measles was eliminated in the United States more than 15 years ago, but the highly contagious disease has made a return in Texas, in part because of parents refusing to vaccinate their children.

The modern anti-vaccine movement is based on a fraud. A study published almost 20 years ago purported to show a link between childhood vaccines and autism. The data was later found to be falsified, and the study was retracted.

Scores of large-scale, long-term studies from around the world since then have proved that there is no connection between vaccines and autism.

Some Texas public schools are dangerously close to the threshold at which measles outbreaks can be expected. A third of students at some private schools are unvaccinated.

Jinny Suh worries about the risk that the school’s unvaccinated children pose to her 4-month-old, who is too young to be immunized. “I’m sure there are people I go to the grocery store with and go to the park with” who have unimmunized children, she said. “This is a public hazard. You can’t see germs.”

In some parts of Texas, vaccine coverage is slipping below the 90 to 95 percent level that experts say is needed to prevent an outbreak. Many private schools have the highest rates of unvaccinated children, exceeding 20 percent.

One part of the anti-vaccine movement’s message is that vaccine-preventable diseases aren’t dangerous if people get modern medical care. But that’s a myth, and the failure to vaccinate can be catastrophic.

One only can wonder how many children President Trump will kill with his anti-science, anti-vaccination ignorance.

Donald Trump, the non-scientist, does not know more about vaccination than do the doctors. He not only threatens the lives of our children; he threatens the lives of all people:

Trump’s Budget Slashes Climate Change Funding
NELL GREENFIELDBOYCE
If there was any doubt over President Trump’s views on climate change, those doubts evaporated with the unveiling of his proposed federal budget on Thursday.

The budget would end programs to lower domestic greenhouse gas emissions, slash diplomatic efforts to slow climate change and cut scientific missions to study the climate.

“It’s terrible from the perspective of having any concern at all about climate change,” says Andrew Light, a senior fellow at the World Resources Institute’s climate program and a professor at George Mason University.

Previously,  Trump had described climate change as a hoax, but he also (hired) EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt (who) has questioned whether CO2 is causing the globe to warm.

In a press briefing Thursday, Mick Mulvaney, the head of Trump’s Office of Management and Budget, was unequivocal about the administration’s attitude toward the issue.

“We’re not spending money on that anymore,” Mulvaney said when asked about climate funding. “We consider that to be a waste of your money to go out and do that.”

At the Environmental Protection Agency, the proposed budget “discontinues funding for the Clean Power Plan, international climate change programs, climate change research and partnership programs, and related efforts.”

Donald Trump does not know more about global warming than do the climate scientists.

If President Trump’s vaccination denial doesn’t kill you and your children with measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, diphtheria, polio, and tetanus, etc., he will get your family later with the multitude of disasters caused by his global warming denial.

You are trusting your life and our planet to Donald Trump.

There are stiff penalties for ignorance.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
THE RULES

•Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.

•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money no matter how much it taxes its citizens.

•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.

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

•Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.

•A growing economy requires a growing supply of money (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)

•Deficit spending grows the supply of money

•The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.

•Progressives think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.

•The single most important problem in economics is the Gap between the rich and the rest.

•Austerity is the government’s method for widening the Gap between the rich and the rest.

•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.

•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–How much money would you take to risk your children’s and grandchildren’s lives?

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

Mitchell’s laws:
•Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
•The single most important problem in economics is
the Gap between rich and poor.
•Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the Gap between rich and poor.
•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

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

It’s just a question of comparative risk.

How much money would you take to risk your children’s lives? How much would someone have to pay you for you to let your kids run across a busy, high-speed highway, or to take illegal drugs or to swim during a lighting storm?

After all, there is no proof they would be hit by a speeding truck, no evidence that everyone is harmed by drugs, and statistically, the odds are against being hit by lightning.

It’s just a question of risk. So, how much money would you take to put your children at risk?

That is the question the conservatives ask you.

About zero reputable climatologists deny that human activity is causing the earth’s climates to warm, and that this warming will have adverse effects on our lives.

According to the vast majority of climatologists, the science that supports global warming is settled, with the only questions being: How bad will it get and how soon? The answer to both questions is: It has begun, and it will get very bad, unless we do something about it, now.

Most politicians are dishonest. We put up with their dishonesty, because honest people won’t run for office, or if they do, they then become dishonest.

But intentionally destroying future life on our planet, so you can remain in office, falls way below mere dishonesty. It is dishonesty flavored with a dollop of stupidity and a dash of criminal intent.

Here are some of the dishonest and stupid with criminal intent:

Donald Trump: “This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bullshit has got to stop. Our planet is freezing, record low temps,and our GW scientists are stuck in ice.”

“Scientist” Trump has determined the real scientists are wrong, and there is no risk to your children and grandchildren. Is that good enough for you?

Ben Carson: The climate change debate is “irrelevant.” Temperature change is cyclical. “There’s always going to be either cooling or warming going on.”

“Climatologist” Carson isn’t worried about your children and grandchildren. Their safety is “irrelevant.” Do you trust him on that?

Marco Rubio:We’re not going to make America a harder place to create jobs in order to pursue policies that will do absolutely nothing, nothing to change our climate. America is a lot of things, the greatest country in the world, absolutely. But America is not a planet.”

Climate “expert” Rubio believes there is nothing we can do to save our children’s lives, and anyway, it’s too expensive to try. Do you agree?

Ted Cruz: “If you look at satellite data for the last 18 years, there’s been zero recorded warming. The satellite says it ain’t happening. I’m saying that data and facts don’t support it.”

Well, that settles it. “Meteorologist,” Ted Cruz says the scientists are wrong; there is no danger. Do you feel safe with him determining the fate of your children and grandchildren?

Carly Fiorina: “Every one of the scientists that tell us that climate change is real and being caused by man-made activity also tells us that a single nation acting alone can make no difference at all.”

Blase Fiorina says there is no reason even to try to protect your children’s futures. Kids will run in the streets, smoke cigarettes or swim at dangerous times, and there’s nothing you can do to stop them. So why try? Don’t you agree?

Jeb Bush: “The climate is changing but I don’t think the science is clear on what percentage is man-made and…what percentage is natural. It’s convoluted. And for the people to say the science is decided on this is just really arrogant.”

Yes Jeb, when kids run into the street, it isn’t clear what percentage of the deaths are the kids’ fault and what percentage are the drivers’ fault. It’s really arrogant to prevent kids from running into the street.

Mike Huckabee:Now we’re told that we’re all burning up. Science is not as settled on that as it is on some things.”

Rand Paul: “The earth goes through periods of time when the climate changes, but (I’m) not sure anybody exactly knows why. “

You see, it’s like this. Given the bare possibility that 97% of climatologists are wrong when they say the world will suffer because of global warming, we conservatives recommend you ignore their warnings and endanger your children and grandchildren, rather than taking precautions.

After all, safety for your kids costs money, and our wealthy donors don’t like it.

The rejection of science and the lack of concern about your children’s future seems to be in proportion to how conservative one is. The more conservative, the less concerned about your children.

monetary sovereignty

66% of ALL REGISTERED VOTERS understand global warming is happening, but only 44% of Republicans think so.

A majority of liberal and moderate Republicans understand climate change is happening, but only 29% of Tea Party conservatives agree.

Politicians deny climate change because they are paid to deny. But, why would voters intentionally elect a candidate who will risk their grandchildren’s lives just to garner votes?

If the climate-change deniers are right, all we risk is reducing CO2 at an unnecessary financial cost.

But, if the deniers are wrong, we risk not reducing CO2 at the unnecessary cost of our children’s and grandchildren’s lives.

Which risk are you more willing to accept? What are your kids’ futures worth to you?

Bottom line: Either these conservative politicians care more about money than about your children and grandchildren, or they are just plain addled.

Either way, why would you support them?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually Click here
8. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

The Ten Steps will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.
——————————————————————————————————————————————

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

THE RECESSION CLOCK
Monetary Sovereignty

Recessions come after the blue line drops below zero.

Monetary Sovereignty

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY