MAGA Marco shows his ignorance for the world to see

I wrote to Sen. Marco Rubio, reminding him that the U.S. federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, cannot unintentionally run short of dollars.During Iowa visit, Marco Rubio won't say if he's running for president Thus, no federal government agency can run short of dollars unless that is what Congress and the President want. Here is the response I received. It indicates MAGA Marco either is ignorant about federal finance or is lying.  I vote for both.

Dear Mr. Mitchell:

Thank you for taking the time to express your thoughts regarding the future of Social Security and Medicare.

Understanding your views helps me better to represent Florida in the United States Senate, and I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

Except, he doesn’t understand my views and/or doesn’t care about representing Florida or the United States. He is a weak and willing (and usually absent) tool of the extremist GOP.

Social Security and Medicare are critical pieces of the retirement security safety net for seniors. In 2023, more than 66.2 million Americans currently receive Social Security benefits of some form.

As currently structured, however, these programs are going bankrupt, and Congress must work to protect and reform them so that they can fulfill their promises to future retirees.

Alan Greenspan: “A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency.” Alan Greenspan: “There is nothing to prevent the federal government from creating as much money as it wants and paying it to somebody.” Alan Greenspan: “The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print the money to do that.” 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.” Quote from former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke when he was on 60 Minutes: Scott Pelley: Is that tax money that the Fed is spending? Ben Bernanke: It’s not tax money… We simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account.
The federal government can and should fund Social Security just as it funds the military, the Senate, the House, SCOTUS, the White House and almost every other federal agency — by simply paying their bills.

Social Security began in 1935 as a social insurance program primarily for widows, orphans, and those living past the current average life expectancy. These benefits are funded by taxes on the wages of all American workers, called payroll taxes, which are automatically withheld each payday.

No, the benefits are not funded by taxes. The federal government destroys all tax dollars it receives. It pays its bills by creating new dollars ad hoc.

In 1950, 16.5 workers were paying in for every beneficiary receiving payments. Today, that ratio has fallen to 2.8 workers for every beneficiary and will continue to decline for the foreseeable future.

Wrong. Those FICA taxes are destroyed upon receipt. Workers do not pay for benefits.

According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Social Security program is now running permanent deficits due to this declining ratio and a growing number of disabled individuals.

According to the Social Security Administration, benefits will only be fully payable until 2033. At that point, the Social Security Trust Fund will only be able to meet 77 percent of scheduled benefits.

The government can pay benefits forever. These scare tactics are solely for the rich who wish to widen the Gap between themselves and those below them on the income/wealth/power scale.

Medicare, created in 1965, is currently running deficits as well. Its solvency must be addressed to protect current and future generations of Americans.

Medicare, an agency of the Monetarily Sovereign federal government, cannot become insolvent unless Congress and the President want it to.

According to the CBO, total Medicare spending was $747 billion in 2022. By 2033, Medicare spending will be $1.6 trillion.

Though Congress has known about these problems for years, it has chosen not to address them straightforwardly with the American people.

Congress can “address the problem” simply by paying Medicare’s bills.

I will continue to highlight the need to reform this critical program in a responsible manner to ensure future generations have Medicare and Social Security in old age.

Marco’s idea of “reform” is to cut benefits and/or increase taxes. The “solutions” the rich want, so the income/wealth/power Gap will be widened.

Social Security should also be reformed to reflect the different kinds of economic insecurity Americans face in the 21st century.

For example, my New Parents Act of 2023 (S.35), which I reintroduced on January 24, 2023, would offer paid parental leave to new parents by allowing the option to use a portion of their Social Security benefits after the birth or adoption of a child.

This is a tacit benefits-cutting measure. The federal government should pay, not Social Security benefits.

They then would have the option to delay retirement by the benefit taken or receive a proportionate reduction in monthly retirement benefits for the first five years of retirement.

The rich always look for ways to reduce retirement benefits, so the poor will be forced to work forever.

At a time when working families are being left behind, and childbirth rates are falling, it is essential to realign our economic policies in support of American families. S.35 would not raise taxes or expand bureaucracy and would not change the long-run balance of the Social Security Trust Fund. 

The so-called “Trust Fund” is a bookkeeping fiction. No dollars are stored in any federal “trust fund.” The so-called trust funds simply are records of contributions that have nothing to do with the ability to pay for benefits.

It is an honor and a privilege to serve you in the United States Senate. As your United States Senator, I will keep your thoughts in mind as I consider these issues and continue working to ensure America remains a safe and prosperous nation.

Yeah, right. Blah, blah, blah. I’m sure he has us in his thoughts and prayers and is working day and night for us. Does anyone want to buy a bridge from this guy? Rodger Malcolm Mitchell Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

……………………………………………………………………..

The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Will people still work if the government gives them money?

There is a rather widespread belief that if the government simply gives people money, they won’t work. Instead, they will be satisfied with the money they are given.

Long days, hard labor another day at the office for Oregon firefighters - CNN.com
Forest Fire Fighter: Median pay, $40,815 a year.

The variables in this hypothesis are: The amount of money, the people’s needs, the jobs available, the salaries available, and perhaps most importantly, the psychology of the people with regard to work.

There is a strange paradox that the people who labor hardest or at the least appealing jobs are paid the least.

It’s a paradox only because, for instance, one would think an employer would have to pay more to get someone willing to dig in a windowless, damp, dark, dreary, dangerous mine than to a teacher sitting in a comfortable, clean, often air-conditioned room, with windows to the outside.

Where would you rather be: A mine or a classroom?

Yet the median coal miner’s salary is about $29 per hour and the median elementary school teacher’s salary is about — right, that same $29 per hour.

When those coal miners, school teachers, forest fire fighters, et al are out of work, Modern Monetary Theory(MMT) refers to them as “buffer-stock.”

When you are nothing more than “buffer-stock,” you have no ambitions, preferences, or human needs.

You are just a peg to be fitted into an appropriately-sized government hole.

And having none of those aforesaid ambitions, preferences, or needs, you will be satisfied with whatever amount of money you have and/or receive.

So, if you are a buffer-stock person formerly making $50,000 a year, and the government was to pay you $30,000 a year, you will be satisfied, and not work to earn even more. At least, that is the belief of MMT and others with similar views.

California construction firm buys Lunda Construction
Highway construction worker: Median pay: $45,940 per year

And that is why MMT suggests its Jobs Guarantee.

Rather than having the government simply give you money, MMT et al would give you a minimum wage job, that you may or may not (probably, not) like, to prevent you and the other lazy slugs from just lolling about, doing nothing but collecting the dole.

The MMT rationale is that having any job, even a crap job, will look good on your resume, and help you find a job.

Puleeeze! I personally have hired hundreds of people, and never have found that make-work on a resume was more attractive than no-work.

Quite the opposite.

The myth of the lazy poor is rampant and ignores the reality that pay scales tend to be inverse to effort or benefit to society.

The laziest people on earth probably are the billionaires who resent having to walk, drive, lift, wash a dish, make a bed, set an appointment, wait in a line, fill out a form, or rear a child.

For those rich, their primary contribution to society is to give falsely appreciated property to charity, thereby gaining more in tax deductions than the cost of the property. (Hello, Donald Trump, who hasn’t paid taxes in most of the past 20 years).

These entitled few are given tax breaks that allow them to pay little or nothing against millions or even billions of annual income.

Yet there is annoyance, even among your fellow buffer-stocks, when a poor person receives any sort of free ride. Taking a few dollars in food stamps receives sneers even from the middle classes.

When there is a mention of Step 3. of the Ten Steps to Prosperity (below) [Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in Americasimilar to social security for all], there is heard in our land, plaintive moans, “Who will pick up our garbage; who will pave our streets; who will mow our lawns, who will do the dirty work the rest of us can’t bear to touch?”

The whole notion of the “buffer-stock” not caring to earn more and lift their standard of living is demeaning, ridiculous, and ignorant.

BUT, let’s say it’s true. Let’s say that if you simply give all those road construction workers the equivalent of their salary, and they decide not to work, what would happen?

First, it would stimulate the economy. When state and local governments pay bills, they use existing, recirculated dollars. No stimulus there.

But when the federal government pays bills, it uses newly created dollars, which increases the nation’s money supply and stimulates Gross Domestic Product.

Second, there would be a shortage of road construction workers, which would lift their salaries, and that would narrow the Gap between the richer and the poorer. A narrow Gap benefits the masses, which should be both a moral and economic goal of any nation.

In Summary, people are not “buffer-stock.” They are humans with hopes and dreams for themselves and their children. Whatever they have, they want more.

If unemployed people need money, give them money, not junk jobs.

Don’t pretend it is morally unsavory to do for the poor exactly what the government does for the rich. The less affluent need money, so give them money.

The inverse relationship between effort and reward is an abomination. If being given money means fewer people will accept junk jobs, good.

That will help force employers to make the jobs less “junky.” Work environments will improve and the pay will increase. Those are good results.

Every man, woman, and child in America should receive Social Security, and the benefits themselves should be increased. The result would be greater economic growth and a narrower Gap between the richer and the rest.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

  1. Eliminate FICA
  2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone
  3. Social Security for all or a reverse income tax
  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