Mitchell’s laws:
●The more budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor, which leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

I have a plan to protect our children. It is a proven plan that has been tried in the past and failed miserably. It is a plan that was demonstrated to cause a dramatic increase in crime, and has been responsible for many thousands of deaths among our young people. It is a plan that is guaranteed to send thousands of our young people to jail.

My plan absolutely will cost our society many millions of dollars and thousands of lives and destroy many families, and not only doesn’t work, but actually worsens the problem it is supposed to solve.

My plan is called “Prohibition.”

What? You say that name is taken? “Prohibition” was the name given to a plan to save us from the most potent, the most dangerous, most addictive drug America ever has known: Alcohol? And all Prohibition did was increase alcohol consumption and crime? Wow. I didn’t know.

O.K., so “Prohibition” didn’t work, in fact made things worse, but if I keep my plan but give it a new name, I’m sure it will work. So, my new name for my plan is “War on Drugs.”

What? You say that name is taken, too? You say the “War on Drugs” has had exactly the same results as “Prohibition”? More drug use? More crime? More cost? More young people in jail? More lives and families destroyed?

Could it be that (and this may be a stretch) Prohibition and the War on Drugs have had the same results because they are the same plan?

Now, let me get this straight. You’re telling me if I have a plan that fails miserably, and even exacerbates the problem I’m trying to solve, changing the name of the plan won’t work? Hmmm.

So, how did we solve the problem of the most potent, most dangerous, most addictive drug America ever has known? You say we legalized it, regulated it and taxed it? You’re kidding. That’s how we solved the problem? Legalization?

Well that sounds crazy. Surely, if you outlaw a product that people want and will risk jail or even death to obtain, that should reduce usage. It doesn’t? Who’d a thunk?

So, if legalizing, regulating and taxing alcohol was proven to reduce usage, crime, jail time, financial and social costs and the destruction of our youth, do you think that maybe, just maybe, that same proven idea could work with currently illegal drugs?

Oh, you say Colorado and Washington State have begun the process by legalizing recreational use of the most benign of the illegal drugs, marijuana? What is the likelihood that the rest of the states and the federal government will learn from experience and legalize the recreational use of any drug someone wants to put in their own bodies?

I mean, the Democrats talk about privacy, and the Republicans complain about too much government intrusion on our lives. And taking recreation drugs is a private, personal decision, like drinking alcohol.

So could it be that the government should simply let people eat, drink, smoke and otherwise ingest whatever they want? And if we did that, might millions of lives and billions of dollars be saved?

So what’s the problem?

Ah, I see. You say that if only we tried harder, we could make Prohibition and the War on Drugs work. Makes sense to me. As I always say, if a plan does not work, never has worked and never can work, and actually makes things worse, keep doing it.

Only more so.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

P.S. I have an idea. Next, let’s have a “War on Sugar.” Oh, Mayor Bloomberg already has begun that?

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

Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Medicare — parts A, B & D — for everyone
3. Send every American citizen an annual check for $5,000 or give every state $5,000 per capita (Click here)
4. Long-term nursing care for everyone
5. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
6. Salary for attending school (Click here)
7. Eliminate corporate taxes
8. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
9. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99%

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. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Mitchell’s laws:
●The more budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor, which leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

There is a value to losing. It teaches you what you might have done better. Without losing, there is scant progress. The player who never loses eventually loses – loses his motivation for improvement, loses his competitiveness, loses his desire to learn, loses his morals and his compassion.

Losing teaches you life. Losing teaches you humility — if you let it.

The Republicans lost. This election presumably was one of those “teachable moments.” So, what did the Republicans learn?

Here are a few excerpts from an article in the Washington Post:

Life after defeat for Mitt Romney: Public praise, private questions
by Philip Rucker

Romney’s top aides, who only a couple of days ago were openly speculating about who would fill which jobs in a Romney administration, woke up Wednesday to face brutal recriminations.

Some top donors privately unloaded on Romney’s senior staff, describing it as a junior varsity operation that failed to adequately insulate and defend Romney through a summer of relentless attacks from the Obama campaign over his business career and personal wealth.

They learned Romney should have been “insulated and defended” against his history with Bain Capital and his millions in earnings.

Romney told the donors he believed Hurricane Sandy stunted his momentum in the final week of the campaign. . .

They learned not to have a hurricane interrupt a carefully crafted campaign.

Although Romney himself stopped short of placing any blame on New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who praised President Obama’s leadership during the storm, several Romney supporters privately pointed fingers at the outspoken governor.

“A lot of people feel like Christie hurt, that we definitely lost four or five points between the storm and Chris Christie giving Obama a chance to be bigger than life,” said one of Romney’s biggest fundraisers, who requested anonymity to speak candidly.

They learned the fault was Chris Christie’s for saying something nice about Obama.

Romney advisers have said they were disappointed with Christie’s keynote address at the Republican National Convention because they believed the speaker focused too much on himself and not enough on the candidate. Republicans close to Christie, however, said the Romney team approved the final draft of the speech.

They learned that Christie’s speech caused Romney’s defeat.

Some of his top donors immediately pointed to the campaign’s early strategic decision to frame the race as a referendum on Obama rather than a choice between two different governing philosophies and leadership styles.

They learned losing was a matter of poor framing.

A second member of Romney’s national finance committee said that while the campaign’s tactics and fundraising organization were executed well, the strategy and message were “total failures.” This fundraiser added that the campaign’s cautious and adversarial relationship with the news media proved detrimental.

“That strategy was we don’t want to define differences, we want it to be a referendum not a choice, but it was always going to be a choice. Elections are a choice. Their fundamental premise was incorrect — and when you’re incorrect on this level, you are shunned by people in the party,” said the fundraiser, who requested anonymity to speak candidly.

They learned not to be adversarial with the media, and that they should have presented defined differences, whatever they may have been.

In sum, the Republicans learned they should have insulated Romney, prevented a hurricane, not let Christie talk and to define differences. Hmmm . . . sounds a bit superficial.

What do I hope the Republicans really learned?

I hope they learned that when you encourage such candidates as Bachmann, Paul, Gingrich, Santorum, Perry and Cain, people will begin to believe you are a party of mean, nutty extremists — and Americans don’t like mean people, nutty people or extreme people — at least not to be President.

I hope they learned that when you give serious attention to birthers and to celebrity grouches like Donald Trump and Clint Eastwood, people will be even more disposed to dislike you and to doubt your sanity.

I hope they learned that a majority of voters believes in the availability of abortion during the first trimester, or in cases of rape or to save a mother’s life. Despite all those massively magnified photos of microscopic fetuses, the majority of people believe there are private personal, social and health issues into which the federal government should not stick its nose. We do value our privacy.

I hope they learned that women are an important voting constituency, who hate when strange men disrespect them or force life decisions on them.

I hope they learned that screaming idiots, of the Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh ilk, actually can have a negative effect, particularly on people capable of rational thought.

I hope they learned that a candidate should have his own beliefs, and that the voters do not trust someone who will say anything and repeatedly change positions to please his current audience and the most extreme segments of the party.

I hope they learned we each make our own religious decisions, and do not want the majority forcing their religious beliefs on us.

I hope they learned that Americans do not want religious fundamentalism ala the Taliban, and that our ancestors came here to avoid that dictatorship of church.

I hope they have learned that Americans basically are decent people, who still believe in “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

I hope they have learned Americans care about fairness and protecting the underdog, and that we do not want to be ruled by the richest 1%, and we want everyone to have decent food, housing, education and health care.

I hope they learned people want their leaders to care about them and protect them.

Unfortunately, both parties have become so immersed in political strategies and tactics, they have forgotten why they are running for office, and why we should care who wins.

Reminder: The goal is not to defeat this candidate, or to occupy that office. The goal is to serve the people of America. The goal is to make America better. Both parties have forgotten that, or don’t care, but the Republicans lost, so they need to remember and to care more.

I have the feeling that if someone woke Romney in the middle of the night, and asked, “Why do you want to be President?” his first thought would be to say, “Tell me who you are, so I know what to answer.”

Is it too naive for candidates to care about America and the men, women and children living here — to put our nation and our neighbors first, and strategy and tactics last — to reach down and lift the “the homeless and the tempest-tost”?

Is it really too naive?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Medicare — parts A, B & D — for everyone
3. Send every American citizen an annual check for $5,000 or give every state $5,000 per capita (Click here)
4. Long-term nursing care for everyone
5. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
6. Salary for attending school (Click here)
7. Eliminate corporate taxes
8. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
9. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99%

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. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Mitchell’s laws:
●The more budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor, which leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

I told this true story about a year ago, and it’s worth repeating now, because of an article I just read:

I can remember an incident from the time I was five years old. I was at a family picnic. My uncle had built a bonfire for warmth, and my parents, uncles and aunts threw branches and leaves into it, which made the fire flare up in a big roar.

We kids loved it, but were not allowed to throw things into the fire, because it was considered dangerous. I recall whining about this, so after a time, my father said, “O.K., you can throw sand into the fire.” Thrilled, I picked up a handful of sand and threw it in, but the fire didn’t grow. So I threw another handful and another, but instead of flaring up, the fire grew smaller.

Finally, much to my dismay, the fire went out, and all the fun went out with it. I thought I was building the fire, but I was putting it out. And on the drive home, when I realized what I had done, I felt so sad. My father had lied. I had misunderstood the difference between wood and sand. That’s what I remember. That feeling of sadness and betrayal and ignorance.

That story again came to mind when I read this is the article, in the November 7th, Florida Sun Sentinal.

Nationwide strike in Greece protests new austerity plan
By Anthee Carassava

Shopkeepers rolled down shutters, transport screeched to a halt and state agencies were closed Tuesday as millions of Greeks walked off their jobs to protest the toughest measure yet unveiled by the government in its bid to slash the nation’s deficit and jump-start the stalled economy.

But three years of piled-on austerity and five years of recession have unleashed a wave of public unrest.

The new measures include futher pay cuts, tax hikes and an increase in the average retirement age. The plan would also sack thousands of public employees and slash severance payments in a society where unemployment has hit 25 percent.

Samaras’ government says the measures are necessary to bring down Greece’s deficit and squeeze out a primary budget surplus.

It’s a lie that putting sand on a fire will stimulate that fire, and it’s an equal lie that cutting federal deficits will stimulate the economy. As a five-year-old, I had misunderstood the differences between wood and sand. Today, the American and Greek adults misunderstand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty.

So they pour sand on their fire.

Please remember my little sand-on-the-fire story, as you read and hear lies about the U.S. having to cut federal spending and President Obama’s “grand bargain” of deficit cuts. The purpose of those lies is to widen the gap between the rich and the rest.

The poor and middle will suffer first, but even if you’re rich, eventually you’ll suffer as America’s fire slowly winks out.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Medicare — parts A, B & D — for everyone
3. Send every American citizen an annual check for $5,000 or give every state $5,000 per capita (Click here)
4. Long-term nursing care for everyone
5. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
6. Salary for attending school (Click here)
7. Eliminate corporate taxes
8. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
9. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99%

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. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Mitchell’s laws:
●The more budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor, which leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

Obama didn’t win; the Republicans lost. As German news magazine Der Spiegel said even before the vote:

It seemed like a new beginning for America when he took office. But, Obama didn’t close the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, nor lift immunity for alleged war criminals from the Bush-era, nor regulate the financial markets, and climate change was hardly discussed during the current election campaign. The military, the banks, industry — the people are helpless in the face of their power, as is the president.

Not even credit default swaps, the kind of investment that brought down Lehman Brothers and took Western economies to the brink, has been banned or even better regulated.

We want to believe that Obama failed because of the conservatives inside his own country. Indeed, the fanatics that Mitt Romney depends on have jettisoned everything that distinguishes the West: science and logic, reason and moderation, even simple decency. They hate homosexuals, the weak and the state. They oppress women and persecute immigrants. Their moralizing about abortion doesn’t even spare the victims of rape. They are the Taliban of the West.

Still, they are only the symptom of America’s failure, not the cause. In reality, neither the idealists and Democrats, nor the useful idiots of the Tea Party have any power over the circumstances.

The political system is in the hands of big business and its lobbyists. The checks and balances have failed. And a perverse mix of irresponsibility, greed and religious zealotry dominate public opinion.

The downfall of the American empire has begun. It could be that the country’s citizens wouldn’t be able to stop it no matter how hard they tried. But they aren’t even trying.

The picture that emerges is of an American president, weak before the forces of wealth and evil. The Presidency, Congress, even the Supreme Court, all have been compromised by big money. Is it as hopeless as Der Spiegel says?

Now that Obama is a lame-duck President, he has left himself so little time. Future accomplishments for history to judge, will have to take place in the next two years. Even so, his problem will be the mid-term elections, which will occupy those running.

Sadly, Obama will focus on his “grand bargain”: $2.50 of spending cuts for every dollar in new tax revenue? He and his advisers surely know both federal spending cuts and tax increases reduce GDP growth. His “grand bargain” is a plan to reduce GDP growth — a plan to widen the gap between rich and poor.

And that is how he will be remembered, because his motivation for deficit cuts is not based on ignorance. Rather it is based on his knowledge – the knowledge that spending cuts and tax increases each impacts the lower 99% income groups far more than the upper 1% income groups.

The Supreme Court may give Obama some possibility for accomplishment. If the elderly on both sides have the decency to retire, Obama could nominate enough justices to swing the balance away from the 17th century thinking of the current majority.

But then what? The “grand bargain,” even with a more humane Supreme Court, still spells a weakening economy and an ever widening gap between the rich and the rest. Are we lost, or is there a cowboy film in our future – a cavalry that will ride to the rescue?

I believe there is, and in a twist of plot, the face of that cavalry is in shades of brown – and young. For seemingly, in America today, the people who truly understand why this great nation was founded, are the young and the people of color, and thankfully, they are the fastest growing segments of our population.

Romney’s base, the mean-spirited, selfish, white male, is on the decline, no longer to be the majority, and we will be all the better for it. While the young, the Latin and the black don’t have the money, they have the votes and the real morality (not the phony religiosity), and that combination will be unstoppable.

If (big IF) Obama wanted history to remember his administration favorably, he would focus on two simple initiatives:

1. Use the voice of the Presidency to educate the public about Monetary Sovereignty — the need for increased federal deficit spending to grow the economy. Then, using this truth as his sword, cut taxes for everyone – rich and poor – and increase spending on such programs as Medicare for all; increased Social Security benefits, science, education, ecology, poverty.

2. Ease immigration policy and provide a short, sweet path to citizenship. “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”. Immigrants built America. They created the American dream. They, not the selfish excluders, will be the future of American greatness and pride.

Obama has drifted through mediocrity. Accomplishing just these two initiatives would move him toward greatness. His time is running short.

Our time is running short.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Medicare — parts A, B & D — for everyone
3. Send every American citizen an annual check for $5,000 or give every state $5,000 per capita (Click here)
4. Long-term nursing care for everyone
5. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
6. Salary for attending school (Click here)
7. Eliminate corporate taxes
8. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
9. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99%

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. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY