–How to make $100 million. No kidding

To all you folks who know Social Security and Medicare are in financial trouble, or that the federal deficit must be reduced or taxes increased, here is an easy way for you to earn $100 million. No kidding. Just go to the easy rules at Letters to the Tribune, and read response #3.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

–England is doomed; it doesn’t know it is monetarily sovereign

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.

Back in 2005, I said, “The Euro is the worst economic idea since the recession-era, Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The economies of European nations are doomed by the Euro.” I said that because the euro, or specifically the rules surrounding the euro, transformed a group of monetarily sovereign nations into helpless, monetarily non-sovereign nations.

These were nations that thirty years earlier had rejected the straightjacket of the gold standard, only to adopt the straightjacket of the euro standard. One EU nation, England, was wise enough to reject the euro. It still uses the pound sterling. So England is the only monetarily sovereign EU nation.

Alas, England has forgotten why it rejected the euro, and now has begun to act as though it were monetarily non-sovereign. Here is the headline for today’s article in the Washington Post, by Rebecca Omonira-Oyekanmi: “British budget cuts to include nearly 500K job losses

The article says, “The measures announced by Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne will span four years and include an average cut of 19 percent in central government departments’ budgets, an $11 billion reduction in welfare spending and an increase in the pension-eligibility age to 66. The government acknowledged that 490,000 public-sector jobs would be lost over the four years as result of the cuts.

Osborne went on to say, “The cuts deal decisively with the largest budget deficit this House of Commons has ever had to face outside of wartime.

Isn’t austerity wonderful? What a clever way to cure the recession: Destroy 500K jobs. But what choice do they have? As long as they mistakenly believe they are not monetarily sovereign, and so cannot afford budget deficits, they are required to cut spending and/or to raise taxes, both of which will send the English economy into a tailspin.

So England is doomed, because the debt-hawks have taken over.

In a similar vein, the debt-hawk Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (what an ironic name), has posted a questionnaire titled “In Search of Fiscal Responsibility: Ten Questions to Ask the Candidates.” The ten questions boil down to one: Would you rather have a tax increase or have certain federal programs cut? I urge you to go to their site and see what your answers would be.

Of course, the questionnaire is based on their false premise that cutting the deficit will benefit the economy. If you write to their president, Maya MacGuineas, as I have many times, and ask, “What evidence do you have that the federal deficit is unsustainable, and the budget should be cut?, you either will receive no answer (likely) or you will be given non-sequitur answers like, “The deficit is a high percentage of GDP.” Try it yourself. Her Email is:crfb@newamerica.net

Meanwhile, watch England fall – unless it comes to its senses.

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

No nation can tax itself into prosperity. Those who say the stimulus “didn’t work” remind of the guy whose house is on fire. A neighbor runs with a garden hose and starts spraying, but the fire continues. The neighbor wants to call the fire department, which would bring the big hoses, but the guy says, “Don’t call. As you can see, water doesn’t put out fires.”

–Three problems: The banks, the banks, the banks

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.

The banks’ lending practices caused the recession. They were rewarded by being bailed out.

Now, the banks’ paperwork violations will cause the second slump, or at the very least, extend the current slump, and undoubtedly, the banks will be bailed out again. Everywhere you look, the problem is the banks, the banks, the banks.

No, it isn’t China. No, it isn’t the federal deficit. No, it isn’t the dopey Tea Party, or Obama’s wishy-washy leadership, or the Supreme Court’s terrible decision on corporate political spending. No, it isn’t interest rates. The problem is the banks and the lack of supervision, thereof.

These institutions, fundamental to our existence as a capitalist economy, are dramatically under-controlled. Our law enforcement pays far more attention to drugs and driving, than to the money handlers. Meanwhile, the money industry’s “masters of the universe” make drug kingpins look like poverty-stricken choir boys.

The money industry should be the most closely watched industry in our economy, yet it is not. They are given a pass based on trust. Why do we continue to have faith in criminals, who wear three-piece suits and sit in posh offices? It makes no sense.

We should stop spending so much time and money on marijuana and speeding violations, and devote our resources to bank supervision.

There was a time when banks were limited to banking. Today, they can do anything they damn-well please. We should take the next trillion to be used for bank bailouts, and spend it instead on bank supervision, including prosecution of the higher-ups, none of whom have been touched by the evils they have done.

Enough with trusting these crooks.

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

No nation can tax itself into prosperity

–Letters to the Chicago Tribune

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.

I read the Chicago Tribune. It’s my hometown newspaper. Over the years I have written many letters to the editors, trying to help them understand our economy. I have failed.

The Tribune editors still live in the gold standard world, where the money supply and the government’s ability to pay its bills is limited. In short, the Tribune editors are debt-hawks.

I should have done this long ago, but I now have decided to begin posting my Tribune letters all in one spot — here. I put today’s letter in this post, and subsequent letters will be in the comments, below.

My hope: Some of you will write to Pat Widder, chief economic correspondent (Can you believe they have one?), and give her the facts. Perhaps if she hears from enough people . . . who knows? Maybe she’ll decide to learn something. Her Email is: PWidder@tribune.com
===============================================================================================
10/19/10

Pat, I don’t get it. Why do the Tribune editors intentionally resist knowledge?

In today’s editorial, “Stop Spending, Part I, your editors refer to the proposed $250 payment to each Social Securities recipient as “$14 billion that the government doesn’t have, putting the taxpayers of today and tomorrow deeper in debt.” Nothing could be further from the truth.

First, the government “has” an unlimited amount of money. The government became monetarily sovereign in 1971, the end of the gold standard, and since then, has had the unlimited ability to create money. To say the government does not “have” money is more misleading than the lies our worst politicians tell.

Second, although Illinois taxpayers do pay for Illinois spending, and Chicago taxpayers do pay for Chicago spending, U.S. taxpayers do not pay for U.S. spending. The reason: Illinois and Chicago are not monetarily sovereign; the U.S. is. And in a monetarily sovereign nation, taxpayers do not pay for government spending. There is zero relationship between federal taxes and federal spending. Taxpayers do not owe federal debt.

Are your editors being deliberately dishonest or are they too lazy to learn the facts? It has to be one of the two. When I see the typical, misleading political advertising these days, all I can think is, “My God, the Tribune is worse.”
===============================================================================================
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity

Continue reading “–Letters to the Chicago Tribune”