What THE WEEK Magazine said, and what they really meant. Monday, Nov 11 2019 

Sometimes (often), a print medium writes a set of words that imply one thing but really mean something quite different.Related image

Here, for instance, is the exact wording of a short article that appeared in the November 8, 2019 issue of THE WEEK Magazine, followed by a translation into more accurate wording:

National debt nears $1 trillion — THE WEEK
The U.S. federal budget deficit increased 26 percent over the past fiscal year and is expected to top $1 trillion in 2020 the U.S. Treasury reported last week.

That puts the deficit at its highest since 2010, following four straight years of red ink.

The deficit has jumped nearly 50 percent since President Trump took office, largely because of shrinking tax revenues.

Massive tax cuts in 2017 have not paid for themselves, as Republican backers promised, and federal spending is now rising at twice the rate of revenue.

In a decade, the national debt is projected to represent a bigger share of the economy than at any point in U.S. history, except the period immediately following the massive expenditures of World War II.

Someone reading the above article, with its use of such pejorative wording as “debt,” “deficit,” “red ink,” “shrinking tax revenues,” and “not paid for themselves,” might be led to believe that the economy and the federal government are in trouble.

But exactly the reverse is true. The article actually describes the primary reasons why the economy has continued to grow, even under the feckless leadership of Donald J. Trump.

And now for the translation. What follows are exactly the same facts, but corrected to convey the true meaning:

Investments in Treasury Securities nears $1 trillion
The U.S. federal government’s financial contribution to the economy increased 26 percent over the past fiscal year and is expected to top $1 trillion in 2020 the U.S. Treasury reported last week.

That puts the federal government’s net contribution to the private sector at its highest since 2010, following four straight years of sending increased growth dollars to the economy.

The economy’s surplus of economic growth dollars has jumped nearly 50 percent since President Trump took office, largely because of shrinking deductions from the private sector.

Massive tax cuts in 2017 have not been matched by massive tax increases, as Republican backers warned, and federal inputs to the economy are now rising at twice the rate of federal deductions from the economy.

In a decade, the total of investments in Treasury Securities is projected to represent a bigger share of the economy than at any point in U.S. history, except the period immediately following the massive expenditures of World War II — the period when the economy grew faster than at any point in U.S. history.

Rather than stressing over federal “debt” and “deficits,” neither of which is any burden whatsoever on the U.S. economy, the U.S. government, or on the U.S. taxpayers, the rewrite demonstrates that increased federal spending and reduced taxes help grow the private sector (i.e the economy) grow.

Now if only we could convince the media to write that way.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell
Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics.

Implementation of Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Why the truth is a victim of the well-meaning. Thursday, Oct 17 2019 

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no! NO!

Ryan Cooper, a well-meaning, national correspondent at TheWeek.com, whose work has appeared in the Washington MonthlyThe New Republic, and the Washington Post, wrote:

“. . . taxes are always a net cost by definition — something that is taken from the American citizenry and spent on government boondoggles or welfare for poor people.”

And, “. . . while Medicare-for-all would require some additional taxes on the middle class, those increases would be more than compensated for by zeroing out premiums, co-pays, and deductibles.”

And, “As economist Gabriel Zucman explains: ‘Note how Warren and Sanders actually cut taxes for the bottom 95%. That’s because they abolish mandatory private health insurance premiums, which are in effect a huge poll tax.'”

NO, Mr. Cooper, and NO, Mr. Zucman. NO. While state taxes fund state spending, and county taxes fund county spending, and city taxes fund city spending,

FEDERAL TAXES DO NOT FUND FEDERAL SPENDING.

The federal government may claim that FICA funds Social Security and Medicare. The federal government may claim that income taxes fund the military and the myriad other federal spending. But, it simply is not true.

There is zero relationship between federal spending and federal taxing. Federal taxes (unlike state and local taxes) are not “spent on” anything. They are destroyed upon receipt.

And, Medicare-for-all would not require some additional taxes. Medicare for all will be funded entirely by deficit spending, regardless of what tax schemes are implemented.

And, Warren and Sanders do not cut taxes for the bottom 95%, because they abolish mandatory private health insurance premiums. No, they will raise taxes unnecessarily, and also will cut premiums.

The tax increase and the premium decrease mathematically may or may not offset, but in either event, they have nothing to do with one another.

The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, creates brand new dollars every time it pays a creditor. It works like this:

When anyone — you, me, any business and any government agency — pays a creditor, it sends instructions to the creditor’s bank instructing the bank to increase the balance in the creditor’s checking account.

At that instant, brand new dollars are created. To pay for those new dollars, the checking accounts of the payors are debited.

But here is the huge difference: The checking accounts of the aforementioned you, me, any business and any government agency all are part of the money supply (mostly M1). So those checks contribute a net $0 to the money supply.

The only checking account that is not part of the money supply is the federal government’s account. So its checks add to the money supply.

Why are government checking accounts not part of the money supply? Because the federal government has the unlimited ability to add to its checking accounts any time it wishes. So whatever amounts are shown in the government’s checking accounts have no meaning.

The federal government dips into an infinite pond. There is no dollar answer to the question: “How much money does the federal government have?”

The answer is, “Infinite.”

Sadly, Mr. Cooper’s article continues:

“Bernie Sanders forthrightly admits that Medicare-for-all would require some additional taxation on the average citizen.”

Professor Kelton

gain, no. Sanders is not being “forthright.” He is being cowardly. He knows full well that additional taxes are not necessary. He had Professor Stephanie Kelton as his economic advisor, and she told him.

But, in typical politician fashion, he either didn’t understand it or more likely, was too afraid voters wouldn’t believe it.

Where does that leave us? Pretty much where we always have been, because Mr. Cooper’s article demonstrates the misinformation distributed by the public’s three main sources of knowledge: The politicians, the media, and the academics.

The politicians misinform you because they are bribed by the rich via campaign contributions and promises of future lucrative employment. The media misinform you because they are bribed via ownership and advertising dollars.

And most of the academics misinform you because they are bribed via university grants and think tank employment.

You understand this, but what of the rest of the public?

Driven by Gap Psychology (the desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any status measure), the rich want to keep the middle class from realizing that the Ten Steps to Prosperity (below) are easily provided, and without increasing taxes even one cent.

The rich wish to become ever richer, and that requires widening the Gap between them and those “below” them.

And that leads to the fourth main source of misinformation, the public itself. Having been brainwashed by the politicians, the media, and the academics, the public takes over spreading misinformation about federal financing until it becomes perceived as “common knowledge.”

It is “common knowledge” that one should live within one’s means, and that debt should be avoided, and that budgets should be balanced — except that “common knowledge” does not apply to Monetarily Sovereign governments.

Misinformation often may come from the well-meaning, but it remains misinformation, and even more harmful than misinformation from the ill-meaning.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell
Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Alan Greenspan: “A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency.”

Ben Bernanke: “The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost.”

St. Louis Federal Reserve: “As the sole manufacturer of dollars, whose debt is denominated in dollars, the U.S. government can never become insolvent, i.e.,unable to pay its bills. In this sense, the government is not dependent on credit markets to remain operational.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics.

Implementation of Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts a, b & d, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

 

Economics: Faux complexity of the simple, or faux simplicity of the complex? Monday, Oct 14 2019 

One definition of “science” is: A systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.

Economics is a “social science. One wonders whether it can be called a science at all, for it really is an accounting-based branch of psychology, which itself holds to the title, “science,” by its fingertips.

As for “testable explanations” and “testable predictions,” not so good. The psychology role in economics testing is at its best when “predicting” history, but fails repeatedly when trying to predict the future.

Economics approximates religion, which predicts that your following (or not following) certain arbitrary, often illogical and meaningless, rules will be rewarded in some vague way by an omniscient entity.

Accounting
While accounting can have complex and changing rules, it is based on simplicity: The direct relationships among income, saving, and outgo.Image result for complexity vs simplicity

Any change in one factor is balanced by a mathematically equal change in the other factors, thus the word “balance” sheet.

Based on its arbitrary rules, accounting strictly is logical and eminently predictable. Adding to the left side of a balance sheet always requires adding to the right side, yesterday and tomorrow.

Though based on arithmetic, and in one sense on algebra (the relationship to the “=” sign), accounting is not a science. Though it organizes knowledge, it doesn’t create testable explanations and predictions about the universe.  It simply is a score-keeping method for money-related valuations.

Psychology
This brings us to the other leg of economic’s extremely shaky, two-legged stool, psychology.

In its attempts to rise above religion (the pompous quest to know God’s mind) psychology does run tests and many of these tests provide results that pass for explanations that even are the basis for predictions.

But the economic results seldom are conclusive, while the explanations are subjective, and the predictions often are laughably random — just like with religion.

In real science, testing attempts to change one variable while holding all other variables stable. In psychology, and so in economics, holding all other variables stable generally proves to be impossible. So results vary wildly.

But that impossibility does not deter people known as “chartists.” From Investopedia:

A chartist is an individual who uses charts or graphs of a security’s historical prices or levels to forecast its future trends.

Chartists generally believe that price movements in a security are not random but can be predicted through a study of past trends and other technical analysis.

Generally, chartists will use a combination of indicators, personal sentiment, and trading psychology to make investment decisions.

Serious chartists can seek to obtain the Chartered Market Technician designation which is sponsored and written by the Market Technicians Association.

Even if charting could predict future prices, it still could not predict future prices. 

Future stock prices are based on demand. So if charting could predict future prices, everyone would wish to buy or sell according to what the chart indicates.

In that way, charting would affect demand, which in turn would affect charts in an endless helix of price changes, all having little to do with a security’s underlying value. 

Thus, charts destroy their own predictions, the “better” the chart, the more the destruction.

Though securities charting doesn’t work as claimed, it does have one value: It establishes a pseudo-scientific, mathematical veneer to its one area of economics.

That is why economics is obsessed with graphs. We economists wish to use mathematics, so to demonstrate our “real science” chops.

That also is why economists love complexification. Read any economics textbook, I dare you. You will discover a convoluted amalgam of graphs, charts, and equations and balance sheets, and difficult wording, all designed to give scientific credence to a non-credible forecasting ability.

How about “Externality,” “Autraky,” “Opportunity set,” “Convexity,” “Dynamic stochastic general equilibrium,” and one of my favorites that often is in the news, “quantitative easing.”)

I too am guilty of graphs and charts, though I use them mostly to disprove economic nonsense. For instance.

Blue line: Gross federal debt. Red line: Gross federal debt/GDP. Green line: GDP

The above graph disputes the “debt-clock” worriers, who falsely claim the federal debt is like personal debt and so is “unsustainable” because of the following myths:

A. The federal debt is too big (blue line) to sustain, [though it has grown massively and still is “sustained.”]
B. The federal debt is too high a percentage of GDP (red line), [though it repeatedly has passed predicted limits with no ill economic effects.]
C. The huge federal debt will slow economic growth (green line), [which has shown scant signs of slowing for 80 years.]

The faux simplicity is the false claim that federal debt is like personal debt. The public understands personal debt, so it is led to believe it understands federal debt.

The effect of complexity is to confuse either the author or the readers, and in that it has done remarkably well. The vast majority of the literate world is confused.

Once we wipe away the faux complexity, we are left with the following simplicity:

I. The U.S. federal government, unlike state, local, and euro governments is Monetarily Sovereign, which means it is sovereign over the U.S. dollar. It never unintentionally can run short of dollars. Even if all federal tax collections fell to $0, the federal government could pay any size debt denominated in dollars. Further, it has absolute control over the relative value of the dollar.

Monetary Sovereignty is fundamentally simple. Anyone who has played the board game, Monopoly, knows the Monopoly Bank is Monetarily Sovereign. By rule, it never can run short of Monopoly dollars and can create all it needs.

II. Recessions are caused by a lack of money, and they are cured by money creation, particularly by federal deficit spending.

III. Inflations are not caused by government currency printing but rather by shortages, usually shortages of food or energy. Counter-intuitively (for many), increased government spending, to reduce food or energy shortages, reduces inflation.

IV. The human side of economics is ruled by Gap Psychycholgy, the desire to distance oneself from those “below” on any social scale and to approach those “above.”

If you understand the above four simplicities, you understand the Ten Steps to Prosperity (below).

You understand why the federal government can eliminate FICA, increase Social Security and Medicare, fund advanced education for all who want it, and reduce poverty, while preventing and curing recessions, depressions, and inflations.

And you also understand why the government doesn’t do these things that would benefit the middle and lower-income/wealth/power groups.

In short, you will know more economics than your favorite politician, news source, or friend.

And you won’t even have to learn to calculate “cross elasticity of demand.”

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell
Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics.

Implementation of Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts a, b & d, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

“There’s No Such Thing as ‘Free Money.'” Yes, there is, Mr. Greenhut. Friday, Aug 2 2019 

Economics is a unique science.

It is the only science in which people who have no background, no education, no history, and no knowledge, feel absolutely confident in their opinions about it.

I’m sure they don’t feel confident in arguing about quantum mechanics or about relativity, or about rocket science, but when it comes to economics, everyone is an “expert” — often a laughable expert with a way-too-loud megaphone.

I suggest Steven Greenhut is one such “expert.” Here are excerpts from his recent article:

There’s No Such Thing as ‘Free Money’ or Meaningless Deficits
STEVEN GREENHUT, Reason Magazine

Vice President Dick Cheney famously said that “deficits don’t matter.”

Such conservatives weren’t interested in using federal spending to fight poverty and inequality, but they didn’t want growing deficits to curtail their military efforts in Iraq or quash their desire to step up tax cuts.

Greenhut is 100% correct about the motivations of the conservative right.

Cheney’s ideological heirs now argue that deficits are fine as long as interest rates are low and the Gross Domestic Product keeps growing.

Deficits not only are “fine,” but deficits are absolutely necessary for economic growth, and this has nothing to do with low interest rates.

Federal deficits add dollars to the economy. It is functionally impossible for an economy to grow, without the money supply growing.

In fact, the formula for Gross Domestic Product, our most common measure of economic growth, is a money measure.

GDP = Federal and Non-federal spending + Net Exports

When federal deficit spending doesn’t grow, the economy doesn’t grow. Reduced deficits cause recessions, and increased deficits cure recessions, as the following graph demonstrates:

Recessions (vertical gray bars) begin with reduced deficits; they are cured by increased deficits.

Sorry, but deficits and debt do matter.

There’s no short-term crisis, for sure, but debt “will depress economic growth over time and could potentially lead to a fiscal crisis if borrowers lose faith in the country’s ability to pay,” explained Yuval Rosenberg in The Fiscal Times.

Federal “debt” is nothing more than deposits into Treasury security accounts (T-bills et al).  The government pays back the “debt” every day simply by returning the dollars in those accounts.

And what does this phrase mean, “borrowers lose faith in the country’s ability to pay.”? Makes no sense, unless he means “lenders lose faith . . . ”

Even then, the federal government does not borrow. It accepts deposits into T-security accounts and it never touches those dollars.

The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, creates all the dollars it needs, ad hoc, each time it pays a creditor. The government never has any difficulty returning those dollars to the account holders.

See: It is 2019, and the phony federal debt “time bomb” still is ticking. Thursday, Jan 24 2019.

Periodically, I remind you about a disaster that was considered to be so imminent, it repeatedly was referred to as a “ticking time bomb.” I have evidence of the warning as early as 1940, and then every year thereafter.

I’m talking about the federal debt that not only was said to be a “ticking time bomb,” but “unsustainable” and “the time bomb of doom“!

Year after year, that time bomb of doom has kept ticking, and here we are, in 2019, with a  healthy economy, and still that bomb hasn’t exploded. Eighty years of warnings, eighty years of being wrong, eighty years, and people still believe the doomsday sayers.

The phony “time bomb” began to “tick” back in 1940, when the total debt was $40 Billion. Today, 80 years later, it has risen 52,500% (!) to $21 Trillion, and still it ticks.

Go to the above reference, and you’ll see that year, after year, after ridiculous year, “experts” like Greenhut repeatedly referred to the federal debt as a “ticking time bomb.”

Wrong for 80 consecutive years.

Continuing with his article:

Furthermore, he (Rosenberg) notes, debt hampers government’s ability to react to real emergencies “such as recessions, wars or natural disasters.

As debt soars, federal payments to service the debt will crowd out the government’s core spending responsibilities.

The above is a perfect example of closing one’s eyes and ignoring the reality standing before one.

Here we are, looking at 80 past years of a dramatically increasing debt (deposits), and the federal government’s continual “ability to react to real emergencies “such as recessions, wars or natural disasters.

Since 1940, America has fought dozens of wars, all over the world, had numerous recessions, and dealt with all manner of natural disasters. And today, the nation is wealthier than ever.

Explain that Messrs. Rosenberg and Greenhut.

In a way, these denials-of-the-obvious remind me of Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf  (aka “Baghdad Bob”). He was the Iraqui, who during Desert Storm, kept going on television to deny that American tanks were in Baghdad, while they were visible over his shoulder.

Rosenberg’s and Greenhut’s comments are that ridiculous.

And now for the source of their ignorance: They don’t understand the differences between personal financing and federal financing.

You could borrow an immense amount of money to upgrade the kitchen and take Hawaiian vacations and then claim that it doesn’t matter as long as you can cover the monthly interest payment.

But that’s a road to eventual ruin.

The federal government is Monetarily Sovereign, meaning it is sovereign over the dollar.

At the beginning of this nation’s existence, our new federal government created laws, and those laws gave the government the unlimited ability to create U.S. money.

So the government created millions of U.S. dollars — from thin air.

So long as those laws and others like them, exist, the federal government will continue to have the unlimited ability to create U.S. dollars.

Here’s how they do it:

To pay a creditor, the federal government sends instructions (not dollars) to the creditor’s bank, instructing the bank to increase the balance in the creditor’s checking account.

At the moment the bank obeys those instructions, brand new dollars are created.

So long as the federal government doesn’t run out of instructions, it won’t run out of dollars.

You and I don’t have this ability. Neither do our cities, counties, and states. And neither do France, Germany, and Italy, all of which don’t have a sovereign currency, but rather use the euro.

All are monetarily non-sovereign.

Ask Messrs. Rosenberg and Greenhut what “Monetary Sovereignty” means, and they won’t have a clue, even though it is the basis for modern economics.

Now we get to what Greenhut thinks is absolutely necessary and what he thinks, isn’t:

Some debts can’t be helped—e.g., capital expenses—but look at the nonsense that our massive federal budget is funding.

Easy debt drives easy spending. It enables our government to do things it shouldn’t do, such as wage unnecessary wars and create boondoggles like the Green New Deal or a space force.

Which capital expense “can’t be helped,” Mr. Greenhut? Building a wall on our southern border? Buiding cages to house children we have taken from their parents?

Which wars are “unnecessary” and which are necessary?

And as for the “Green New Deal,” it describes the various efforts to reduce climate change. To you, that’s a boondoggle?

We’ll end with Greenhut’s final bit of nonsense:

Deficit spending creates constant pressure for tax hikes. We shouldn’t spend what we don’t have.

“Constant pressure for tax hikes”???? You mean the recent tax cuts, that came with the billions in increased deficit spending?

Will someone please contact Messrs. Greenhut and Rosenbert with the facts so that they don’t continue to make fools of themselves.

It would be the charitable thing to do.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell
Search #monetarysovereigntyFacebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the richer and the poorer.

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics.

Implementation of The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts a, b & d, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and you.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

 

Next Page »

%d bloggers like this: