Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================

A friend asked me, “Why doesn’t President Obama give #Occupy Wall Street a great big, public hug and kiss?”

Good question. After all, they are the antithesis of the Tea Party, which essentially has ruined the first three years of Obama’s presidency, and which was embraced by the Republicans. Tea/Republicans are an elitist organization (though many of its members don’t seem to understand that). The Teas want to cut taxes on the wealthy while reducing benefits to the poor. They hate Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, most of which benefits go to the lower classes.

It’s no wonder that the Tea/Republicans have come out so strongly against #OWS, as witness this from Paul Krugman’s 10/9/11 column in the New York Times:

It remains to be seen whether the Occupy Wall Street protests will change America’s direction. Yet the protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent.
[…]
Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, has denounced “mobs” and “the pitting of Americans against Americans.” The G.O.P. presidential candidates have weighed in, with Mitt Romney accusing the protesters of waging “class warfare,” while Herman Cain calls them “anti-American.” My favorite, however, is Senator Rand Paul, who for some reason worries that the protesters will start seizing iPads, because they believe rich people don’t deserve to have them.

Michael Bloomberg, New York’s mayor and a financial-industry titan in his own right, was a bit more moderate, but still accused the protesters of trying to “take the jobs away from people working in this city,” a statement that bears no resemblance to the movement’s actual goals.
[…]
What’s going on here? The answer, surely, is that Wall Street’s Masters of the Universe realize, deep down, how morally indefensible their position is. They’re not John Galt; they’re not even Steve Jobs. They’re people who got rich by peddling complex financial schemes that, far from delivering clear benefits to the American people, helped push us into a crisis whose aftereffects continue to blight the lives of tens of millions of their fellow citizens.

So where is Obama? Since the vast majority of our voters empathize with #OWS’s mood, if not its proposals (so far, it has none. See: Nine Steps to Prosperity), you would think a vote-hungry politician like Obama would be camping out on Wall Street, in “Tent 1.” Yes that’s what you would think, if you believed he supports the regular folk. But he doesn’t.

Sorry to tell you this, liberal voters. You elected him, but doesn’t love you. He is an elitist who graduated from Columbia and Harvard law school, and was president of the Harvard Law Review. He taught at the University of Chicago. This is all elitist stuff. He bought a house for somewhere between $300K and $950K less than it was worth (depending on how you count acreage), thanks to a huge favor from his pal Tony Rezko, convicted swindler. Regular folk don’t get deals from Tony Rezko.

The Obama administration is loaded with bankers and bank-related cronies, and as you may have noticed, while the banks caused all the fraud problems, their friend, Barack Obama bailed them out — and not one banker has been arrested, much less tried and convicted of the most massive fraud, not just in U.S. history, but in world history (Try to name one bigger).

To pull the wool over voters’ eyes, he instituted the HAMP program, which punished suffering people even more, by seeming to be a solution to mortgage problems, but was a fraudulent waste of time. Just what these poor people needed: A waste of time.

Obama’s solution to the Social Security “problem” is to raise the regular folks’ qualifying age, and he goes along with the Tea/Republicans on the need to cut federal spending, most of which benefits the less fortunate. So this man has been far, far from a supporter of regular folk. He’s acted more like a charter member of the “Screw You, I’ve Got Mine” clan.

Yes, he’s a bit better than the Tea/Republicans, who at least are honest in that they make no secret of their disdain for the underclass. But really, from where does Obama get his political contributions? And what happens to those contributions if he supports #OWS? Think about it.

So, eventually, Obama may may be dragged, kicking and screaming, into support for #OWS. He can count votes. But his reluctance is telling.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

==========================================================================================================================================
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. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================

Remind me again. Why have Americans have been dying in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Washington Post
Iraq, siding with Iran, sends essential aid to Syria’s Assad
By Joby Warrick, Published: October 8

More than six months after the start of the Syrian uprising, Iraq is offering key moral and financial support to the country’s embattled president, undermining a central U.S. policy objective and raising fresh concerns that Iraq is drifting further into the orbit of an American arch rival — Iran.

Iraq’s stance has dealt an embarrassing setback to the Obama administration, which has sought to enlist Muslim allies in its campaign to isolate Syrian autocrat Bashar al-Assad. While other Arab states have downgraded ties with Assad, Iraq has moved in the opposite direction, hosting official visits by Syrians, signing pacts to expand business ties and offering political support.

After Iraq sent conflicting signals about its support for Assad last month, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki spoke firmly against regime change in Syria in an interview broadcast on Iraqi television Sept. 30. “We believe that Syria will be able to overcome its crisis through reforms,” Maliki said, rejecting U.S. calls for the Syrian leader to step down. His words echoed those of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who weeks earlier proposed that Syrians should “implement the necessary reforms by themselves.”

On other issues as well, the Maliki government in recent months has hewed closer to Iran’s stance — Iraq, for example, has supported Iran’s right to nuclear technology and advocated U.N. membership for Palestinians — as the U.S. military races to complete its troop withdrawal over the coming months.

Few policy objectives are more important to Iran than preserving the pro-Tehran regime in Syria, longtime Middle East observers say.

“This is Iran’s influence, because preserving the Assad regime is very much in Iran’s national interest,” said David Pollock, a former adviser on Middle East policy for the State Department during the George W. Bush administration. “Iran needs Iraq’s help trying to save their ally in Damascus.”

U.S. officials acknowledged disappointment with Iraq over its dealings with Assad, while noting that other Middle East countries also have been reluctant to abandon Assad at a time when the outcome of the uprising remains uncertain.

“The Iraqis should be more helpful, absolutely,” said a senior administration official involved in Middle East diplomacy.

Not only do our politicians not understand Monetary Sovereignty, as demonstrated in the many preceding posts, but apparently they also do not understand world politics and religious history. So the question becomes, exactly what do they understand?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

==========================================================================================================================================
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. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

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.
●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.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap.

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

The “Occupy” movement will fail, because it is directionless, generally opposed to everything and in favor of nothing.

They should favor one goal: Narrowing the Gap between the rich and the rest, and in that effort, we offer them the Ten Steps to Prosperity:

===================================================================================
The Ten Steps to Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded free 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. Federally funded, 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. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all their 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)

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

O.K., now that I have given the debt hawks heart attacks, let me assure you I am aware of the limit to deficit spending: It is inflation. So exactly where is that limit? No one knows, especially since for the past 40 years, inflation has not been related to deficit spending, but to oil prices. (Click here)

So my recommendation is to begin #1-#10, slowly and sequentially, today, and if/when inflation starts to occur, institute the first inflation-fighting program the Fed always uses: Raise interest rates. In the unlikely event that doesn’t do enough, begin to cut deficit spending.

We have total control over inflation, so there is no reason to cut today’s deficits for fear that some time in the unknown future, we may have inflation. We must feed the starving patient, now. Later, if ever he becomes fat, we always can cut back on his food.

By balancing interest rates and deficit spending, we can hold inflation at any level we choose, while accruing the benefits of increased money creation.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

==========================================================================================================================================
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. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================

What is the relationship between these “unrelated” stories?

CBS News, 4/14/2011, By Brian Montopoli
Tea Party Supporters: Who They Are and What They Believe

CBS News and the New York Times surveyed 1,580 adults, including 881 self-identified Tea Party supporters. . . Eighteen percent of Americans identify as Tea Party supporters. The vast majority of them — 89 percent — are white.
[…]
Fifty-three percent of Tea Party supporters describe themselves as “angry” about the way things are going in Washington, compared to 19 percent of Americans overall who say they are angry.
Asked what they are most angry about, the top four answers among Tea Party supporters who identify as angry were the health care reform bill (16 percent), the government not representing the people (14 percent), government spending (11 percent) and unemployment and the economy (8 percent).
[…]
Twenty-four percent of Tea Party supporters say it is sometimes justified to take violent action against the government. That compares to 16 percent of Americans overall who say violence against the government is sometimes justified.

And this one:

New York Times
If the Arab Spring Turns Ugly
By VALI NASR, ugust 27, 2011

THE Arab Spring is a hopeful chapter in Middle Eastern politics, but the region’s history points to darker outcomes. There are no recent examples of extended power-sharing or peaceful transitions to democracy in the Arab world. When dictatorships crack, budding democracies are more than likely to be greeted by violence and paralysis. Sectarian divisions — the bane of many Middle Eastern societies — will then emerge, as competing groups settle old scores and vie for power.

Syria today stands at the edge of such an upheaval. The brutality of Bashar al-Assad’s regime is opening a dangerous fissure between the Alawite minority, which rules the country, and the majority Sunni population. After Mr. Assad’s butchery in the largely Sunni city of Hama on July 31, on the eve of the holy month of Ramadan, the Muslim Brotherhood, a Sunni group, accused the regime of conducting “a war of sectarian cleansing.” It is now clear that Mr. Assad’s strategy is to divide the opposition by stoking sectarian conflict.
[…]
The struggle that matters most is the one between Sunnis and Shiites.

And this one:

Yahoo! News, 10/4/2011, by Chris Hawley, AP
Protests against Wall Street spread across US

Protests against Wall Street entered their 18th day Tuesday as demonstrators across the country show their anger over the wobbly economy and what they see as corporate greed by marching on Federal Reserve banks and camping out in parks from Los Angeles to Portland, Maine.
[…]
A slice of America’s discontented, from college students worried about their job prospects to middle-age workers who have been recently laid off, were galvanized after the arrests of 700 protesters on the Brooklyn Bridge over the weekend.

Some protesters likened themselves to the tea party movement — but with a liberal bent — or to the Arab Spring demonstrators who brought down their rulers in the Middle East.

And this story:

Chicago Tribune, 10/7/2011, by Mick Swasko and Ted Gregory
Mosque resistance questioned

For years, HOPE United Church of Christ advertised on its front lown plans to build a church on 14 acres it owns . . . and the minister there says he never heard so much as a peep of displeasure. But those plans fell through, and now that the church wants to sell the property to another religious group, protests have erupted at the Planning and Zoning Commission. Handmade signs critical of the deal have sprouted on utility poles.

This time around the Islamic Center wants to buy the land and someday build a mosque there, said HOPE’s pastor, the Rev. Timoth Sylvia. . . “This display of true ignorance . . . breaks my heart, raises my concern and honestly angers me,” Sylvia wrote to congregants and friends. . .”

I suggest the relationship is anger and frustration at the economy, and specifically at the politicians who caused the economic problems by neither understanding nor caring about Monetary Sovereignty and the needs of the people.

Few of the public, the media, or the economists understand Monetary Sovereignty. The world is crashing, and they don’t know why. People want answers from their leaders, but the politicians have demonstrated cluelessness about the plight of the middle and lower classes. The people feel they have no savior to whom to turn. They are desperate, as witness the popularity of the Tea/Republican presidential candidates, a veritable rogues gallery of economic ignorance.

So the people cast about for devils to exorcise, and the most convenient devils are big government (Tea Party), Banks and other financial institutions (Wall Street protesters), Muslims (Pastor Sylvia’s flock and neighbors), and even religious foes. (Arab spring). Casting out sin is as old as civilization. Witch burning always has been an attempt to appease the gods, who caused our problems, and it had the added benefit of “doing something,” when no one knew what else to do.

At the top of this, and many previous posts, you will see the rule, “Economic austerity causes civil disorder.” As the economy worsens, you will see more and more protest movements, each of which has misdirected goals. Unless the politicians understand, and act according to, Monetary Sovereignty, look for more powerful protests world wide, revolution becoming the norm rather than the exception. So long as Rick Perry’s prayers don’t bring rain, and the Tea Party’s appeals for austerity don’t bring recovery, people will grow angrier and angrier.

Our government thinks bleeding our economy will cure our economic anemia. Unless this changes, there will be an “American spring,” where Americans turn on Americans, and guns become the law of the land. The “greatest generation” followed a strong leader, by working together during times of stress, and so reaped beautiful victory and economic success. Today’s “worst generation,” given no strong leader, will reap ugly chaos and despair.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

==========================================================================================================================================
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. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY