–From Hoover to Obama; what has been learned? Not much, apparently.

Mitchell’s laws: To survive, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Reduced money growth cannot increase economic growth. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================================

The Great Depression actually began in 1920, though we didn’t know it then. In the next ten years, the U. S. Federal Debt was reduced 36%, causing a series of recessions, and finally the Depression officially began in 1929. It continued to worsen through 1932. Here is why:

Annual Message to Congress, Herbert H. Hoover, December, 1931

I must at this time call attention to the magnitude of the deficits which have developed and the resulting necessity for determined and courageous policies. These deficits arise in the main from the heavy decrease in tax receipts due to the depression and to the increase in expenditure on construction in aid to unemployment, aids to agriculture, and upon services to veterans….

We must have insistent and determined reduction in government expenses. We must face a temporary increase in taxes. Such increase should not cover the whole of these deficits or it will retard recovery. We must partially finance the deficit by borrowing. It is my view that the amount of taxation should be fixed so as to balance the Budget for 1933 except for the statutory debt retirement. Such government receipts would assure the balance of the following year’s budget including debt retirement.
[…]
Even with increased taxation, the government will reach the utmost safe limit of its borrowing capacity by the expenditures for which we are already obligated and the recommendations here proposed.
[…]
We must avoid burdens upon the government which will create more unemployment in private industry than can be gained by further expansion of employment by the Federal Government. We can now stimulate employment and agriculture more effectually and speedily through the voluntary measures in progress, through the thawing out of credit, through the building up of stability abroad, through the home loan discount banks, through an emergency finance corporation and the rehabilitation of the railways and other such directions.

I am opposed to any direct or indirect government role.

And a year later, having learned nothing, while the Depression continued to worsen, President Hoover said:

Annual Message to Congress, Herbert H. Hoover, December, 1932

The first (suggested) action is the continuing reduction of all government expenditures, whether national, state, or local. The difficulties of the country demand undiminished efforts toward economy in government in every direction.

Embraced in this problem is the unquestioned balancing of the Federal Budget. That is the first necessity of national stability and is the foundation of further recovery. It must be balanced in an absolutely safe and sure manner if full confidence is to be inspired.
[…]
In the Budget there is included only the completion of the Federal public works projects already undertaken or under contract. Speeding up of Federal public works during the past four years as an aid to employment has advanced many types of such improvements to the point where further expansion can not be justified in their usefulness to the government or the people.

As an aid to unemployment we should beyond the normal constructive programs substitute reproductive or so-called self-liquidating works. Loans for such purposes have been provided for through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. This change in character of projects directly relieves the taxpayer and is capable of expansion into a larger field than the direct Federal works.

The reproductive works constitute an addition to national wealth and to future employment, whereas further undue expansion of Federal public works is but a burden upon the future.
[…]
Many of the economies recommended in the Budget were presented at the last session of the Congress but failed of adoption. If the Economy and Appropriations Committees of the Congress in canvassing these proposed expenditures shall find further reductions which can be made without impairing essential government services, it will be welcomed both by the country and by myself. But under no circumstances do I feel that the Congress should fail to uphold the total of reductions recommended.
[…]
The time has come when, if the government is to have an adequate basis of revenue to assure a balanced budget, this system of special manufacturers’ excise taxes should be extended to cover practically all manufactures at a uniform rate, except necessary food and possibly some grades of clothing.
[…]
It is today a matter of satisfaction that the rate of bank failures, of hoarding, and the demands upon Reconstruction Corporation have greatly lessened. The acute phases of the crisis have obviously passed and the time has now come when this national danger and this failure to respond to national necessities must be ended and the measures to end them can be safely undertaken.

In 1935, New Deal federal spending programs such as the Works Progress Administration (WPA) were begun. By June 1937, the economy had begun to recover. Industrial production was greater than in 1929. However, President Roosevelt, himself having learned nothing from history, increased taxes and cut spending in yet another attempt to balance the federal budget. And predictably, the economy again crashed (The “2nd Depression”).

Now comes President Barack Obama, who has learned nothing from the the lessons of the past 80 years:

At certain times -– particularly during war or recession -– our nation has had to borrow money to pay for some of our priorities. And as most families understand, a little credit card debt isn’t going to hurt if it’s temporary.

But as far back as the 1980s, America started amassing debt at more alarming levels, and our leaders began to realize that a larger challenge was on the horizon. They knew that eventually, the Baby Boom generation would retire, which meant a much bigger portion of our citizens would be relying on programs like Medicare, Social Security, and possibly Medicaid. Like parents with young children who know they have to start saving for the college years, America had to start borrowing less and saving more to prepare for the retirement of an entire generation.
[…]
To meet this challenge, our leaders came together three times during the 1990s to reduce our nation’s deficit — three times. . . As a result of these bipartisan efforts, America’s finances were in great shape by the year 2000. We went from deficit to surplus. America was actually on track to becoming completely debt free, and we were prepared for the retirement of the Baby Boomers.

Yes, America’s finances were in such great shape we had a recession that began the end of 2000. And of course, if America were debt-free it also would be money-free.

But after Democrats and Republicans committed to fiscal discipline during the 1990s, we lost our way in the decade that followed. We increased spending dramatically for two wars and an expensive prescription drug program -– but we didn’t pay for any of this new spending. Instead, we made the problem worse with trillions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts -– tax cuts that went to every millionaire and billionaire in the country; tax cuts that will force us to borrow an average of $500 billion every year over the next decade.

The 1990’s marked one of the longest recession-free periods in U.S. history.

To give you an idea of how much damage this caused to our nation’s checkbook, consider this: In the last decade, if we had simply found a way to pay for the tax cuts and the prescription drug benefit, our deficit would currently be at low historical levels in the coming years.

But that’s not what happened. And so, by the time I took office, we once again found ourselves deeply in debt and unprepared for a Baby Boom retirement that is now starting to take place. When I took office, our projected deficit, annually, was more than $1 trillion. On top of that, we faced a terrible financial crisis and a recession that, like most recessions, led us to temporarily borrow even more.

In this case, we took a series of emergency steps that saved millions of jobs, kept credit flowing, and provided working families extra money in their pocket. It was absolutely the right thing to do, but these steps were expensive, and added to our deficits in the short term.

Hmmm . . . Let’s see. When times are bad, we increase the deficit, which cures the recession. Then when times are good, we cut the deficit, which causes the recession. Could there be a hint buried in that history?

So that’s how our fiscal challenge was created. That’s how we got here. And now that our economic recovery is gaining strength, Democrats and Republicans must come together and restore the fiscal responsibility that served us so well in the 1990s. We have to live within our means. We have to reduce our deficit, and we have to get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt.

What more can one say? More than 80 years of doing the same things and seeing the same results, and still our leaders haven’t learned a thing. How is it that the least competent and least knowledgeable seem to rise to positions of power?

That is the great human mystery.

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

–Perryisms: The world according to Rick Perry

Mitchell’s laws: To survive, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Reduced money growth cannot increase economic growth. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
========================================================================================================================================================================================================

Here are a few Perryisms for your amusement, amazement or terror.

“The way that we were able to stop the drug cartels in Colombia was with a coordinated effort. It may require our military in Mexico working in concert with them to kill these drug cartels and to keep them off of our border and to destroy their networks.”

“They have seen the headlines in the past year about doctored data related to global warming. They know that we have been experiencing a cooling trend. . . It’s all one contrived phony mess that is falling apart under its own weight. Al Gore is a prophet all right, a false prophet of a secular carbon cult, and now even moderate Democrats aren’t buying it.”

“I don’t put myself in the ignorant category. I put myself in the, you know, thoughtful skeptic.”

“I’m thinking Texas is the real economy.”

“If you don’t support the death penalty and citizens packing a pistol, don’t come to Texas,”

“I hear your mom was asking about evolution. That’s a theory that is out there – and it’s got some gaps in it. In Texas we teach both Creationism and Evolution in our public schools — because I figure you’re smart enough to figure out which one is right.”

“I am a firm believer in intelligent design as a matter of faith and intellect, and I believe it should be presented in schools along side the theories of evolution.”

“Shall they stand before God and brag that they fought to scrub His glorious name from the nation’s pledge? Shall they seek His approval for attacking private organizations merely because these organizations proclaim His existence?”

“I am concerned that some the highly diverse Magnet public schools in this city are becoming hotbeds for liberalism. Do we really need free school bus service, Black History Month, Hispanic Heritage Month, Asian-Pacific Heritage Month, ESL, special needs and enrichment programs like music, art or math Olympiad? I think we should get back to the basics of the three Rs, reading writing and arithmetic. I mean when is the last time a 6th grade science fair project yielded a cure for a disease? . . .I really don’t see why high schools should have to teach college level courses like calculus, economics, physics, chemistry or biology. Not all children go to college anyway. Texas has plenty of on the job training programs that teach skills and trades. Oil field workers need to know how to operate machines that extract oil. They don’t need calculus to do their job. . . I have no problem if curriculum specialists and teachers decide to replace language arts and literature with bible study.”

“The Christian Coalition voter guide [is] one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections.”

“The vaunted New Deal did not bring the country out of the Great Depression. Its numerous programs never died, and like a bad disease, they have spread. . . By far the best example of this is Social Security.”

“Consider that it is our courts that routinely decide, with little of no chance of further appeal, how and where we may and may not pray to God, when life begins, whether contraception must be allowed to be sold, whether and how we can celebrate religious holidays, what those other than man and woman must be allowed to marry, what level of discrimination may carried out (in the name of ending discrimination), whether a state must allow women to attend an all-male military academy, who may be executed and whether we may execute criminals at all, and generally any issue involving social preference, morality, and our collective concept of right and wrong.”

“Why is the federal government even in the pension program or the health care delivery program? Let the states do it.”

“I support the federal marriage amendment and I also support the same with the issue of abortion.”

“I don’t know what y’all would do to him (Bernanke) in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas”

“It is three agencies of government when I get there that are gone, Commerce, Education, and the — what’s the third one there? Let’s see, I can’t. The third one, I can’t. Sorry. Oops.” “This ain’t a day for quitting nothing.”

“There’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military, but our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school.”

““When you see his appointment of two, from my perspective, inarguably activist judges whether it was …” Perry said in the Des Moines Register editorial board meeting, pausing for six seconds. “Not Montemayor …” “Sotomayor,” a member of the editorial board interrupted. “Sotomayor, Sotomayor,” Perry said. “And Kagan are both activist judges.”

“For Washington to tell a local school district that you cannot have a prayer and a time of prayer in that school is, I think, offensive to most Americans. I trust the people of the states to make those decisions. I trust those independent school districts to make those decisions better than eight unelected, and frankly, unaccountable judges.”

1 2

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

–I thought he got it. But he still doesn’t get it. OMG, he simply does not get it. Obama is clueless about our economy

Mitchell’s laws: To survive, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Reduced money growth cannot increase economic growth. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
========================================================================================================================================================================================================

Just when I thought President Obama was starting to get it, he proves again he is clueless about our economy.

Washington Post: 8/18/11: ALPHA, Ill. — President Obama has decided to press Congress for a new round of stimulus spending and tax cuts as he seeks to address the great domestic policy quandary of his tenure: how to spur job growth in an age of austerity.

O.K. Stimulus spending and tax cuts. Lookin’ good.

The president is thinking about proposing tax cuts for companies that hire workers, new spending for roads and construction, and other measures that would target the long-term unemployed . . . Some ideas, such as providing mortgage relief for struggling homeowners, could come through executive action.

Excellent. One could argue about which kind of stimuli and tax cuts would be best or fastest (I favor eliminating FICA), but any increase in federal spending and any reduction in taxes will help.

Obama also plans to announce a major push for new deficit reduction, urging the special congressional committee formed in the debt-ceiling deal this month to identify even more savings than the $1.5 trillion it has been tasked with finding.

What??! More spending, less taxes – and even more deficit reduction? Will someone please teach this man arithmetic.

In packaging the two, he will make the case that short-term spending can lead to long-term savings. “We can’t afford to just do one or the other. We’ve got to do both,” Obama said . . . He did not reveal details. But . . . he will pressure Republican lawmakers this fall to back off their objections to additional spending in the short term.

Ah, so short term deficit increases will lead to long term deficit reduction. Sounds like Reaganomics in reverse: Cut taxes to increase tax collections. I suspect the philosophy goes like this. Stimulate the economy now. Then later, when the economy recovers, raise taxes and cut spending, so the economy can be sent back into a recession, thereby reinforcing the “cycle” myth of economics.

No, economic cycles are not normal or inevitable like the seasons. Economic “ups” and economic “downs” are created by politicians. There is no reason whatsoever, why we can’t have steady growth all the time. “Cycles” are an excuse for economic ignorance.

Democrats have expressed frustration that the White House allowed Republicans during the debt-ceiling negotiations to focus solely on deficit reduction while not pushing harder for steps that would energize the economy.

Gee, I wonder why the Tea/Republicans would want to do that? They couldn’t be so cynical as to want to ruin the American economy before the 2012 elections, could they?

“We should not have to choose between getting our fiscal house in order and jobs and growth,” Obama said.

“Fiscal house in order” – he still doesn’t understand the difference between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty. Or is he just pandering to the ignorant public?

A Gallup poll released Wednesday showed that just 26 percent of Americans approve of the president’s handling of the economy. More than a third, according to a Washington Post-ABC News survey last month, said he has made economic matters worse.

The public doesn’t know economics, and the people don’t understand the causes, but they sure understand the results of Obama’s economic non-policies. Yes, he has made things worse.

Many voters, particularly independents, . . . want to see serious deficit reduction — a goal that might seem at odds with any program to boost spending.

The President has only himself to blame. All along, he should have explained why federal deficits are different from private deficits. By agreeing with the Tea Republicans that the deficit is too high, he has tied his own hands.

Republican lawmakers signaled Wednesday that they are unlikely to embrace any new spending.

Of course. They don’t give a damn about America. Their sole concern is to win office by strangling Obama.

We must put an end to the policy uncertainty constantly being driven by this administration,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Va.) wrote in a memo to colleagues. “That means stopping the discussions of new stimulus spending with money that we simply do not have.”

“Money we do not have”?? Our Monetarily Sovereign government has run out of money?? What a load of crap. When Rick Perry directed the word “treasonous” at Ben Bernanke, he should have directed it at the Tea/Republicans. Intentionally harming the U.S. to gain personal benefit, is the very definition of treason.

A wide range of independent economists agree that the best prescription for the ailing recovery is pairing efforts to boost the economy now, which would include spending increases and tax cuts, with efforts to tame the national debt over the coming decade, through spending cuts and tax increases when the economy is in better shape.

And that is why the economy is in such bad shape. The “wide range of independent economists” simply does not know what it is talking about. Why is boosting the economy considered a temporary exercise? Why not grow the economy all the time? And “tame” the national debt is a meaningless term, akin to “unsustainable.” Typical media term signifying nothing.

And how about the wide range of MMT and Monetary Sovereignty economists who know “taming” the debt is nuts?

White House allies . . . said Wednesday that the president faces a stiff political test in explaining to voters the merits of short-term spending and long-term reduction of the federal deficit.

Yes, especially since he has spent the past three years saying the exact opposite.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), one of six Democrats on the newly formed “supercommittee” that will try to find ways to cut the debt, said Obama will have to “clearly articulate why those twin goals work together and why they do not work at cross purposes.”

He added: “The good news is that the American people seem to be in the same place that the right policy would dictate. Clearly they want to focus on jobs and the economy, but they also recognize the need to develop a long-term plan to reduce the deficit.”

Hey Chris, you’re on the supercommittee. You’re supposed to find ways to cut the debt. You’re supposed to understand how those goals really do work at cross purposes. And Mr. President, you agreed to the supercommittee. What were you thinking?

“You’ll hear a lot of folks . . . say that government is broken. Well, government and politics are two different things,” Obama said . . . “Government is Social Security. Government are teachers in the classroom. Government are our firefighters and our police officers. . . . America is going to come back from this recession stronger than before. . . “I’m also convinced that comeback isn’t going to be driven by Washington. . . it’s not either-or.”

Can you imagine more confused rhetoric than this? “Government is Social Security and firefighters”?? “Government and politics are two different things”?? This is the double talk we should expect from the man who is supposed to cure our ills?

God bless help America.

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

–As predicted, the euro nations’ boats sink, while their captains drill holes in the hull.

Mitchell’s laws: To survive, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Reduced money growth cannot increase economic growth. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
========================================================================================================================================================================================================

Washington Post: BERLIN — The economy of Germany, Europe’s headline performer, slowed to a virtual standstill over the past three months . . . The discouraging news came just hours before German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy called for closer European coordination in setting economic policy and new steps to discipline governments whose lax budget practices prompted the debt crisis.

No, the crisis was caused by the euro-zone nations being monetarily non-sovereign. They cannot control the supply of their currency, the euro. I predicted this on June 5, 2005: “Because of the Euro, no euro nation can control its own money supply. The Euro is the worst economic idea since the recession-era, Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The economies of European nations are doomed by the euro.”

. . . Merkel and Sarkozy . . . proposed that countries harmonize their tax policies, adopt a new tax on financial transactions and commit to balancing their budget . . .

Balancing their budgets assures a recession or depression, by eliminating euro supply growth. A growing economy requires a growing money supply.

The abrupt slowdown in Europe’s largest economy comes at a time when Germany is expected to fund a major portion of the emergency loans extended to struggling neighbors such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal. . . . The new figures call into question whether Germany can remain the economic engine that officials in the United States and elsewhere have been counting on to power Europe’s recovery.

Germany’s economy was strong because it was a net exporter, i.e. a net importer of euros. That was the only way a monetarily non-sovereign nation could increase its money supply.

“Trend growth is not that high,” said Thomas Mayer, chief economist for Deutsche Bank. “It would have been false to think that Germany would turn into a loco-motive for Europe. That is not a viable proposition.”

Right. It’s asking the blind to lead the blind.

According to a release from the Federal Statistical Office of Germany, flagging investment and household consumption were behind the slowdown — particularly disappointing for those, including U.S. officials, who have urged Germany to stoke local demand. . . .

Investment and household consumption “flagged,” because Germany now is short of the euros it formerly had acquired via exports.

Also discouraging were new figures released Tuesday for the entire region that uses the euro. Growth for the second quarter was only 0.2 percent, reflecting government austerity programs and slowing global economic activity.

If you want to kill a nation, austerity is the way to do it. (Hello, Tea/Republicans. Are you watching?)

Although the crisis in Europe is ostensibly driven by high levels of government debt and annual deficits, it is also rooted in slow growth, with nations such as Italy and Spain struggling to expand fast enough that their tax base keeps up with their commitments to citizens and bondholders.

Visualize trying to bail a rowboat having a big hole in the bottom.

Germany’s growth in the past few years offered an example to weaker economies. . . Germany revised its labor and tax rules to become globally competitive. Its stable of large multinationals benefited as China and other fast-growing developing nations snapped up German capital goods and high-end products.

Right. Exports were the key, because they brought in euros.

Figures released last week, however, showed that German exports in June were down significantly from the month before and manufacturing dropped to its lowest level since October 2009.

In a country that has been spared the riots and demonstrations of Greece and Spain, the slowdown may reinforce a public sentiment — reflected in some opinion polls — that Germany should go no further in risking its own financial health to help its weaker neighbors.

Now, visualize bailing your neighbors’ sinking boats, and tossing the water into your own boat.

Merkel and Sarkozy . . . called for what Sar-kozy termed “a true economic government for the euro zone” . . . Compared with some of the more dramatic steps that European officials have taken to address the debt crisis, such as establishing a trillion-dollar bailout fund last year, the proposals offered Tuesday were more evolutionary, Merkel said. By bringing the economic and social policies of the euro nations into sync, the region could “regain confidence step by step,” she said.

The proposals were short on details, and some analysts said they had heard similar ideas before. Over the years, European leaders, particularly from Germany, have offered various ways to control euro-zone spending, but to little effect. National parliaments would still have to approve the proposed measures, such as constitutional amendments to require a balanced budget, and governments would still have to live up to them.

“. . . bringing economic . . . policies into sync . . .” almost sounded like they understood the problem, and were going to combine the euro nations into one Monetarily Sovereign United States of Europe. That would have been one of the two possible solutions (the other being to disband the EU. Unfortunately, they still are talking about non-solutions like balanced budgets. Visualize using leeches to cure anemia.

“They have not given any details on what they feel economic governance should look like,” said Daniela Schwarzer, an expert on European integration at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. And if the new economic council meetings amounted to no more than the latest in a long series of summits, she said, “that is nothing substantially new.”

They are as clueless as the U.S. Congress and President. Our sole advantage: We are Monetarily Sovereign (though our leaders have not figured that out.) So we can’t go bankrupt, unless our government wants it.

The monetarily non-sovereign euro nations can go bankrupt, and that grim future unnecessarily will drive down the U.S. economy. “Unnecessarily,” because a Monetarily Sovereign nation has complete control over its economic growth, if it is wise enough to use that control.

Recessions are unnecessary in a Monetarily Sovereign nation. Tell that to Congress.

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