–The euro comedy continues. But don’t laugh at their ignorance. Our Tea/Republicans and the Dems are of the same mind.

Mitchell’s laws: The more budgets are cut and taxes inceased, the weaker an economy becomes. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity = poverty and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

This goes under the heading, “It would be funny if it weren’t so sad.”

Fin Min says Greek concession would strengthen Ireland’s hand
Ireland seeking ECB help in reducing sovereign debt burden

Feb 8 (Reuters) – Ireland would see any European Central Bank contribution to the restructuring of Greek debt as a precedent that would boost Dublin’s efforts to ease the burden of its own sovereign debt, the country’s finance minister said on Wednesday.

And why not? If the ECB is prepared to screw Greece’s creditors to get Greece off the hook, why not screw Ireland’s, too. And while they’re setting precedent, how about helping Spain, Italy and Portugal avoid their debt?

Ireland, widely seen as the poster child among bailed-out euro zone countries, has been lobbying the ECB to help it reduce the burden of its sovereign debt by cutting the cost to the government of bailing out its banks.

If the ECB are prepared to make this kind of concession to Greece it would encourage me to think that they might be ready to make concessions on the promissory note to Ireland,” Finance Minister Michael Noonan told state broadcaster RTE.

“I see it, if it occurs, as a strengthening of our negotiating position.”

And fair is fair. If you’re going to reduce the debts of the most flagrant budget busters, how about doing something for countries that have had lower deficits, like France, Finland, the Netherlands, Austria, and please let’s not ignore the needs of Belgium, Estonia and Luxemborg.

And why not even Germany? Just because they arranged their finances, and made their citizens accept a lower standard of living, so the government could pay its debts, why should they have to continue? So long as “screw the private creditors” is now an accepted EU strategy, everyone should be able to slurp from that trough.

Officials from the ECB, European Commission and International Monetary Fund on Wednesday were attempting to broker a deal that would open the way for a 130 billion euro EU/IMF rescue for Greece and avoid a disorderly default.

While the ECB has ruled out joining private creditors in voluntarily accepting losses on its Greek bonds, it could provide indirect relief by renouncing profits from bonds it bought at below face value.

It works like this. The ECB, which being Monetarily Sovereign, so having the unlimited ability to create euros and pay any bills, will not accept losses on its Greek bonds. But private creditors, who do not have this unlimited ability, will take all the losses. If you understand that, kindly explain it to me.

The ECB’s 23-member Governing Council, which holds a regular monthly meeting on Thursday, has yet to adopt a position, but some policymakers are reluctant to share the burden, in part for fear of setting a precedent.

They don’t want to set a precedent??? See, I told you this would be funny.

A precedent already has existed for years. The precedent is this: Euro-using nations, being monetarily non-sovereign, have but two choices: Somehow create a positive balance of payments or drift into an austerity-induced recession. Monetarily non-sovereign governments succeed long term, only if they have money coming in from outside their borders. This applies to all euro nations, the American states, counties and cities.

Germany succeeds by sucking euros from its neighbors, but what are the neighbors to do? It’s highly unlikely that all euro nations can be net exporters. So where are the euros to come from if the EU won’t supply them?

Unfortunately, despite being able to create euros at will, the EU is afraid to run a deficit. They still live in a pre-1971 world – just as the U.S. government does. Debt-hawk ignorance is everywhere.

I award two clowns to the policymakers who fear setting a precedent more than they fear injuring the private sector. Advice to all prospective lenders: Make sure you get high interest rates for those high-risk bonds. Of course, lenders don’t need my advice. They definitely will demand more interest, which will make the next crisis come sooner, which will cause even higher interest rates, followed by an even sooner crisis. And the downward helix continues.

ClownClown

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

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–AARP continues to peddle — this time it’s false information

Mitchell’s laws: The more budgets are cut and taxes inceased, the weaker an economy becomes. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity = poverty and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

AARP, formerly, The American Association of Retired Persons is a huge organization that peddles many things. They peddle insurance, publish a magazine, peddle insurance, produce radio and TV programs, peddle insurance, offer travel packages, peddle insurance, provide tax preparation services and, oh yes, they peddle insurance. They also publish on line, various advice bulletins, some of which peddle insurance.

Like virtually all publishers to the masses, AARP is clueless about economics, so repeatedly gives its members wrong information. For instance:

Frequently Asked Questions, 2/10/12
Why can’t the government just print more money to get out of debt?

First of all, the federal government doesn’t create money; that’s one of the jobs of the Federal Reserve, the nation’s central bank.

The Fed tries to influence the supply of money in the economy to promote noninflationary growth. Unless there is an increase in economic activity commensurate with the amount of money that is created, printing money to pay off the debt would make inflation worse. This would be, as the saying goes, “too much money chasing too few goods.”

I wrote to them: “The Federal government DOES create money — by spending. Congress and the President authorize spending. When the government spends, it sends instructions to its creditors’ banks. The instructions tell the banks to increase the numbers in the creditors’ checking accounts. That creates dollars.

Banks also create dollars by lending.

Inflation is not caused by “too much money chasing too few goods.” That expression is obsolete. In today’s world market, there cannot be too few goods — with one exception: Oil. For the past 40 years, since the U.S. became Monetarily Sovereign, inflation has had no relationship to the money supply, but rather to the price of oil.

I notice that virtually all of AARP’s economic statements refer to the time prior to August 15, 1971 (when we became Monetarily Sovereign), and no longer are valid.

This is not the first time AARP has given that same false information about the economy. On another post last fall, they said:

“First of all, the federal government doesn’t create money; that’s one of the jobs of the Federal Reserve, the nation’s central bank.”

I wrote to them: “Wrong. Think about it. The U.S. is 235 years old. The Federal Reserve was created on December 23, 1913 — only 98 years ago. The Federal Reserve’s main tasks involve interest rate and inflation control. So who creates dollars? The Treasury — on orders from Congress. It creates dollars by deficit spending. Every time you receive a federal payment, dollars are created.

In the same post, they said:

“… printing money to pay off the debt would make inflation worse.”

I wrote: “ Wrong. When someone buys a T-security, their checking account is debited and their T-security account is credited. No money is created or destroyed. Then, when the T-security is paid off, the process is reversed: Their checking account is credited and their T-security account is debited. Again no money is created or destroyed. It’s a simple asset exchange.

Since the U.S. went off the gold standard, there has been no relationship between federal debt and inflation. See: Oil causes inflation. It is very important that AARP not provide false information to its members.

Those of you who belong to AARP might write to them, urging them to at least try to understand Monetary Sovereignty.

And while I’m on the subject of false information, I couldn’t resist showing you this article:

Fla. Man Leaves Million Dollar Home to Uncle Sam
from: The Associated Press | December 12, 2011

A South Florida man willed his historic house worth $1 million to the U.S. government to help eliminate the country’s growing debt. The Miami Herald reports that Uncle Sam put the Coral Gables house up for auction Saturday. The winning bid was $1.175 million.

The house belonged to James H. Davidson Jr. who lived there from his teenage years until he died last December at 87. He also left $1 million to the government.

The Herald reports Davidson had nieces and nephews who live in the area. The government will auction off the contents on the home in January.

How sad. This guy thinks he’s doing a good deed. So instead of giving the money to his nieces and nephews, he destroys it by giving it to the government. Not only does this screw his relatives, but it screws the economy by removing millions from circulation – a double whammy.

I ascribe all this ongoing idiocy to the old-line economists, who continue to hypnotize the media and the politicians, who in turn, hypnotize the public into believing we are pre-1971, when the U.S. still was monetarily non-sovereign.

Be sure to contact AARP, and tell them they have been awarded two dunce caps, of which I have none, yet of which I never will run short. (Just like the federal government, which “has” virtually no dollars, but never can run short of dollars)

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

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Visualize a busload of passengers, speeding down a narrow, winding, ice-slicked mountain road, and driven by a crazed, blind driver.

Mitchell’s laws: The more budgets are cut and taxes inceased, the weaker an economy becomes. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity = poverty and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

Visualize a busload of passengers, speeding down a narrow, winding, ice-slicked mountain road, and driven by a crazed, blind driver. That’s our economy and that’s our Congress.

Republicans keep focus on federal pay Washington Post, by Ed O’Keefe

A bill under consideration Tuesday by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee would force workers to pay 1.5 percent more toward their pensions over three years beginning in 2013.

Take more dollars out of workers’ pockets and send it to the government for destruction: What an economic growth concept!

But the bill under consideration today is just one of several GOP proposals to curtail federal pay and benefits that is moving through the legislative process.

The Securing Annuities for Federal Employees Act of 2012: The bill would calculate federal retirement based on a federal employee’s highest five years of earnings instead of the current rate, which calculates the highest three years. Sponsor: Rep. Dennis A. Ross (R-Fla.). Status: In committee, most likely headed for a full House vote.

“Highest five” is lower than “highest three.”Another plan to take money out of workers’ pockets, and send it to a government that has no use for it.

Honest Budget Act: The bill would make it more difficult for Congress to pass appropriations bills without first approving a budget. It also tightens rules on paying for natural disasters that increase overall spending. Tucked within the bill, however, are provisions that would freeze all within-grade step increases for federal employees. Sponsor: Rep. Martha Roby (R-Ala.). Status: Proposed last week.

If there is a natural disaster, the government won’t help the victims unless money can be stolen from some other Americans — maybe you and me. And then, there is the inevitable war on federal workers, by preventing raises. That ought to improve the quality of workers.

Extending the Federal Pay Freeze One More Year: The bill would extend a pay freeze for federal employees, congressional staffs and lawmakers for one more year, beginning in 2013. Sponsor: Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.). Status: Passed the House last week.

I guess government workers, widely (and wrongly) viewed as lazy, inept, uncaring bureaucrats, are an easy target for the debt bullies.

Down Payment to Protect National Security Act of 2012: The bill would extend the federal employee pay freeze through June 2014 and cut the federal workforce by 5 percent through attrition. Supporters say those cuts would shore up sequestration cuts in defense spending set to take effect next year. Sponsors: Sens. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). Status: Unveiled last week.

The military/industrial/political complex does not want those defense cuts. Way too much money given to PACs to allow that. Better to cut the wages of a federal worker. Hey, those D.C. people can’t even vote for anyone in Congress, so who needs them? Like shooting fish in a barrel for the debt bullies.

If the Republicans tried this stunt on any other class of worker — auto worker, miner, transportation worker, soldier, and on and on, there would be an outburst of indignation. But federal workers? Does anyone really care about them? Better to protect the arms manufacturers.

These proposals are stupid from an economic sense, a humanitarian sense and a common sense, none of which are owned by Congress — especially the pious right.

I award three clowns to: Dennis A. Ross, Martha Roby, Sean Duffy, Jon Kyl, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, Kelly Ayotte and Marco Rubio.

ClownClownClown

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

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–How to starve the goose that lays the golden eggs: Taxing business

Mitchell’s laws: The more budgets are cut and taxes inceased, the weaker an economy becomes. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity = poverty and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

Where did you get your money? Unless you inherited it, you obtained your money by working for a business. It either was your business or someone else’s business. If you inherited your money, your parents or other benefactor worked for a business to obtain their money.

Whichever scenario is appropriate to your situation, the money you received came from a business, and that money is part of what was left over after the business paid its bills — including its taxes.

Keep that in mind as your read excerpts from this Time Magazine article:

The Corporate Tax Rate Is Lowest in Decades; Is Business Paying Its Fair Share?
By CHRISTOPHER MATTHEWS, February 6, 2012 |

As the nation frets over slow growth and large budget deficits, much has been made over how much Americas are and should be paying in income tax. President Obama and Democrats have argued that the wealthiest among us are not paying their fair share.

But there is another source of federal revenues that receives less attention: corporate income taxes. According to the Wall Street Journal’s recent study of Congressional Budget Office numbers, corporations are paying an effective rate of 12.1%, the lowest in at least 40 years.

In 2010 and 2011, companies were allowed to deduct the full cost of the purchases of new equipment, while normally these costs would be expensed over several years. In 2012, this deduction will go down to 50% and be eliminated altogether thereafter, causing the effective tax rate to return to roughly the 25.6% average effective tax rate corporations paid since the late 1980s, according to CBO forecasts.

Is this good for you? Is it good for the economy?

Of course that 25.6% number is still quite a bit lower than the nominal tax rate of 35%, the highest in the world behind only Japan. So why aren’t corporations paying what the law says they should? Certainly, some are. According to Howard Barnet, a tax attorney with Carter Ledyard & Milburn, it all depends on what kind of corporation you are. He says that large, multinational corporations have many more strategies available to them to reduce tax burdens than smaller, domestic firms do.

It would seem, then, that whatever your concept of fairness is with regards to personal tax rates, the corporate tax regime in America is blatantly unfair, with some corporations not paying enough and others shouldering too heavy a burden.

Actually, there is no tax fairness. See: Which taxes are fairest? Which taxes are least fair? Talking about which taxes are fairest is like talking about which religion is best.

Oddly enough, the best way to make corporations pay their fair share may be to do away with the corporate tax altogether. No matter what Mitt Romney says, corporations aren’t people. Their profits, however, are ultimately distributed to people, whether it be shareholders or employees.

Correct.

It is true that corporate America is currently hoarding cash . . .

Wrong. It is not possible to hoard cash, unless you bury it in your backyard. Whatever you do with cash, it goes into someone else’s hands — with just one exception: The purchase of T-securities.

Economist and blogger Ed Dolan argues for shifting the burden of income tax from the corporation to its proprietors, saying at the very least that the corporate tax rate should be lowered, its loopholes eliminated, and that capital gains should be taxed as ordinary income. He also suggests that the corporate tax could be eliminated altogether, and replaced with more broad based taxes on energy or consumption.

Shifting corporate taxes to proprietors, or to any other private parties, makes no sense. It solves no problems. It would remove dollars from the economy.

So are we moving to a point where we officially eliminate taxes on corporations? For obvious reasons, this is not politically feasible. Most proposals in Congress involve lowering the nominal corporate rate but at the same time removing loopholes that allow companies to pay well below the nominal rate.

It’s not politically feasible only because the public has not been educated. A modicum of courage would be required for a politician to say truthfully, “The government doesn’t use the tax money paid by businesses, and in any event, businesses don’t really pay taxes. You do — as an employee or owner of a business. The tax money comes right out of your pocket.”

We simply should eliminate the corporate tax and allow the dollars to go into the economy rather than to disappear as tax payments. The federal government doesn’t need or use tax money, so why do we want corporations to undergo that added expense?

The latest GPO budget report says corporations will pay $329 billion in federal taxes this year, about 10% of all federal taxes collected. That’s $329 billion removed from the economy and destroyed — for no purpose whatsoever — money that if left with businesses, would grow the economy, reduce unemployment and benefit every American.

As with so many arguments about economics, the corporate tax discussion devolves to a discussion of Monetary Sovereignty. If you understand Monetary Sovereignty, you know that corporate federal taxes take money out of your pocket and slow the economy.

Business is the goose from which we all receive our golden eggs. Taxing business is like stealing the goose’s grain, then cooking the goose.

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

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY