Your cost for federal debt ignorance

Ignorance is expensive. Used car dealers prove that to customers every day.
avatar
Caitlin Owens
Unfortunately, so do writers like Caitlin Owens, who is described as “a health care reporter for Axios. She covers health care politics, policy, and business,” but seemingly doesn’t understand federal finances. Quick intro: Unlike state/local governments, the U.S. federal government is Monetarily Sovereign. It has the infinite ability to create its sovereign currency, the U.S.  dollar. It never, unintentionally, can run short of dollars. Federal taxes do not fund federal spending. Bills are paid by creating new dollars, ad hoc. Even if the federal government collected zero taxes, it could continue to pay its bills, forever. Keep that in mind as you read what Owens wrote:

The next president’s $4 trillion problem Caitlin Owens / 6.26.2023

Whoever wins the White House next year will quickly face a series of legislative deadlines with impossible price tags:

$3.6 trillion in tax cuts and $350 billion in Affordable Care Act subsidies are expiring. That’s after another debt-limit cliff.

Passing legislation that could be north of $4 trillion is “ridiculous when you already have debt that’s headed to record levels,” said Marc Goldwein, senior vice president and senior policy director at the CFRB.

The so-called “federal debt” is not debt, and it is not a financial problem. It is the total of deposits into Treasury Security accounts, which are easily paid off every day. The  government simply returns the dollars in those accounts to the account owners. No problem at all. No tax dollars are needed or involved.

Why it matters: The deadlines could force political horse-trading of epic proportions. Alternatively, gridlock or alarm over the nation’s debt may lead to Americans seeing higher taxes and fewer benefits.

There is  no reason for alarm. There is no reason for higher taxes. There is no reason for fewer benefits. This all is a con to make you think federal benefits to you are unaffordable.

The big picture: The 2024 election could very well be a rematch between the same two presidents who signed each measure into law.

Republicans’ 2017 tax law, and the enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies that Democrats first passed in 2021, are signature policy accomplishments for each party. They’re also both extremely polarizing and became law under party-line votes.

In the past, the coinciding expiration dates may have been fodder for a grand bargain in which both sides etched out wins — and still could be.

But the recent debt-limit fight showed that these days, even a crisis can barely force Democrats and Republicans to agree.

Between the lines: Most Democrats would happily extend the ACA subsidies. But allowing taxes to rise may be a tough political sell — especially since the party increasingly represents wealthier parts of the country.

The above paragraphs show that Ms. Owens believes federal taxes are necessary to fund federal spending. They aren’t. The federal government could, if it wished, pay a $10 trillion or a $100 trillion bill tomorrow merely by pressing a computer key.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan: “There is nothing to prevent the federal government from creating as much money as it wants and paying it to somebody.”

Former Federal Reserve Chairman 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.”

The debt-limit fight, mentioned by Ms. Owens, was a charade for the benefit of the public. The sole purpose of a debt limit is to convince the populace not to ask for federal benefits. Behind the scenes, the very rich, who control Washington, want the Gap between the rich and the rest to widen. The wider the Gap, the richer are the rich. (It’s called Gap Psychology) — the desire of the rich to become richer by widening the income/wealth/power Gap below them.) Federal benefits narrow the Gap, and the rich don’t want that.

Reality check: Budget hawks warn that the nation’s finances are on a disastrous path. Letting at least some of these policies expire — or finding a way to pay for extensions — would be the responsible course of action.

Reality check: The extensions could be paid for merely by passing a law that pays for the extension. That is how all federal debts are financed. Congress and the President simply pass laws.

Political horse-trading could increase the cost of a deal — if the limit on the state and local tax deduction is eliminated, for instance.

Increasing the deal’s cost would benefit America by pumping growth dollars into the economy. Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Nonfederal Spending + Net Exports. Mathematically, the more the federal government spends, the more GDP grows.

Even one-party control of Congress and the White House wouldn’t necessarily make the process headache-free.

    • The nation’s debt level will only rise over the next two years, forcing Republicans to choose between raising taxes and dropping another $3.6 trillion onto the balance sheet, according to an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
    • “I think there will be a faction of the Republican party who would not want to go into a debate, even with significant tax cuts, if it would blow a hole” in the deficit,” Campbell said.
Again, Ms. Owens repeats the false trope that federal finances are like personal finances, where the “balance sheet” should be minimized. She gets this from that fountain of lies, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), an organization devoted to convincing you the federal government should spend less and tax the not-rich folks more. It’s called “austerity,” a formula for economic disaster. Ask any Euro nation how that has gone.

And while most Democrats would happily extend the ACA subsidies, and nearly all of them have criticized the Trump tax cuts as handouts to the wealthy, allowing taxes to rise may be a tough political sell — especially as the party increasingly represents wealthier parts of the country.

Raising federal taxes should be a hard sell because it’s unnecessary. The sole purposes of federal taxes are:
  1. To control the economy by taxing what the government wishes to discourage and by giving tax breaks to what the government hopes to encourage
  2. To create demand for the U.S. dollar by requiring dollars to be used for tax payments
Federal taxes do not fund federal spending.
    • “It could potentially be a really good deal for Democrats if they were to agree to extend the tax cuts and extend the ACA subsidies. Then they don’t get blamed for raising people’s taxes, and they get the subsidies,” former House Budget Committee Chairman John Yarmuth, a Democrat, told Axios.
It also would be a good deal for the economy because both steps would leave more growth dollars in the economy.

Yes, but: Budget hawks warn that the nation’s finances are on a disastrous path, and letting at least some of these policies expire or finding a way to pay for extensions would be the responsible course of action.

That is a bunch of BS. America’s finances are not on a disastrous path. Increased federal spending is absolutely necessary for economic growth. Here’s what happens when the federal government cuts spending to run a surplus.

U.S. depressions tend to come on the heels of federal surpluses.

1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807. 1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819. 1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837. 1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857. 1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873. 1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893. 1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929. 1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. Recession began 2001.

There are also scenarios where political horse-trading could even increase the cost of a deal— like if the limit on the state and local tax deduction is eliminated or if Democrats successfully demand more of their preferred policies to more closely match the cost of extending the tax cuts.

Increasing “the cost of the deal” would add growth dollars to the economy. Remember that GDP = Federal  Spending + Nonfederal Spending + Net Exports formula. Increase federal spending and mathematically, you increase GDP because two terms in the formula (Federal Spending and Nonfederal Spending) will increase.

What we’re watching: One of the simplest ways to bring down the price tag of any of this would be to just pass temporary extensions.

There is no reason to bring down the price tag. None at all.
“I can’t imagine that any Congress is going to pass a bill that costs $4 trillion,” Yarmuth said. “My guess is if they did something, it would be a much shorter duration.”
But limiting the price tag by extending the measures for only a couple of years is “a horrible way to do tax policy,” Goldwein said.
“There are other ways to have a deal that would be fairer to both sides that don’t involve sticking the bill to our grandkids,” he added.
And so, the article ends with the oft-stated but totally BS notion that federal spending would be paid for by “our grandkids.” Anyone making that claim is demonstrating ignorance of federal finances or being intentionally deceptive. Federal spending is paid for by federal new money creation. The federal debt is paid for by returning T-security account deposits. Federal taxes pay for nothing. They are destroyed upon receipt. IN SUMMARY The nations finances are on a “disastrous path” only if one believes federal finances are like personal finances, which they are not. Federal taxes don’t fund federal spending; they remove growth dollars from the economy. So tax cuts are inherently good for the economy and for you. Unfortunately, the Trump tax  cuts mostly were gifts to the rich; they widened the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest. The Affordable Care acts (ironically called “Obamacare,” though Obama did virtually nothing to enable its passage), has benefitted millions of Americans. The rich hate it because it narrows the Gap  between the rich and the rest. Ignorance of federal financing is costly to those who currently benefit, or would benefit, from more federal spending, namely everyone in America, and most of the world’s population. Ms. Owens would serve her readers better if she learned the facts of Monetary Sovereignty and the diferences between federal financing and personal  financing. Her misstatements, and the mistatements of those who agree with her, cost you money. They widen the Gap between the very rich 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.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The right-wing wants you to believe Social Security and Medicare benefits must be cut. They are liars.

We have discussed this for many, many years. But because of the new, ultra-partisan, endlessly repeated efforts led by the right wing to reduce any benefits to the non-rich, the truth must be repeated so it can fight through the fog of lies to be remembered.

No rational person would take dollars from the economy and give them to a federal government that has the infinite ability to create new dollars.

Yet, that same rational person approves collecting tax dollars from the private sector and giving them to the federal government.

It is illogical to the extreme, yet it is universally countenanced. So much for human mental superiority.

Economics is a combination of mathematics and psychology. Economists lose their place during attempts to blend the two, for instance, when they claim that something must happen when historically it seldom or never happens.

The most important problems in economics involve just two issues:

  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.

Insolvency, the phony issue: Cutting SS and Medicare is again being touted as the “only” way to avoid national insolvency. It is a lie.

The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, has infinite money to support all its agencies. No federal agency becomes insolvent unless Congress and the President want that.

The notion that funds for Medicare and Social Security — and no other federal agency —  are limited by a tax on the lower side of the income scale — FICA — is absurd. Billionaire Donald Trump doesn’t pay that tax; you do. 

The fact that the so-called “debt ceiling” has arbitrarily been raised 94 times should give any thinking person pause to consider the idiocy of the ceiling itself.

An astounding 94 increases, the sky hasn’t fallen, and still we debate it.

Ask your neighbor why we have a debt ceiling that we have increased 94 times. I promise he will give you an ignorant answer. Why?

Because the sole purpose of the debt ceiling is to take advantage of the ignorant.

Your neighbors believe they understand economics. They don’t. They think federal financing resembles personal financing. It doesn’t.

If you try to explain it to them, they will resist understanding it. In their ignorance, they will laugh at what they perceive as your ignorance.

Their ignorance is akin to flat-earth believers, who assure you that ships sailing west eventually will fall over the edge. No amount of evidence can convince a flat-earther or a federal debt worrier. They are beyond the evidence.

An engraved portrait of Semmelweis: a mustachioed, balding man in formal attire, pictured from the chest up.
Ignaz Semmelweis failed to convince doctors to wash their hands

How do  I know? I’ve been doing this for nearly 30 years. Why do I keep doing it? Every so seldom,  I meet someone open to learning, which requires changing one’s beliefs.

So despite meeting thousands of learning-resistant people, the relatively few who use their brains give me hope.

In that sense, I am an Ignaz Semmelweis of economics.

I hope I don’t meet his fate.

Federal Taxes: They do not fund federal spending. The U.S. Treasury destroys all dollars it receives and creates new dollars every time it pays a creditor.

To pay an invoice, the federal government sends instructions as a check or wires (not dollars) to the creditor’s bank, telling the bank to raise the balance in the creditor’s checking account.

New dollars are added to the M2 money supply when the bank does as instructed.

At no point are federal tax dollars involved.

When you send your M2 tax dollars to the Treasury, those dollars immediately disappear from any money supply measure. The reason: Our Monetarily Sovereign government has the infinite ability to create dollars from thin air, so trying to measure its supply of dollars would make no sense.

Adding dollars to infinite dollars yields infinite dollars. No change.

The sole purposes of federal taxes are:

  1. To discourage what the government doesn’t like and to give tax breaks to what the goverment likes
  2. To create demand for the dollar by requiring taxes to be paid in dollars.

That’s it. Taxes do not provide the federal government with spending money.

The sole purpose of the debt ceiling is to sell the lower-income groups the false idea that the government cannot afford to give them benefits.

In short, the debt ceiling has no financial purpose other than to widen the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest. It is a program designed to make the rich richer.

Period.

There is a political purpose, however: To give the party that is out of power leverage over the party that is in power.

Federal finances are nothing like personal finances.


The useless and misleading “debt limit” should be eliminated. The so-called “debt” is the net total of deposits into T-security accounts (T-bills, T-notes, T=bonds). These deposits are:

  1. Like the contents of safe deposit boxes: Owned by the depositors, not by the federal government
  2. Not used by the federal government
  3. Not borrowed by the federal government. The federal government never borrows dollars.
  4. Not touched by the federal government
  5. Not a debt of  the federal government
  6. Paid back simply by returning the dollars in the accounts.

The useless and misleading Social Security “trust funds” are:

  1. Not trust funds, but simply bookkeeping  notations
  2. Not recipients of FICA tax dollars, which are destroyed upon receipt by the Treasury.
  3. Not paying for Social Security or Medicare, which are funded by new dollar creation like all federal programs.
  4. Illusions, established by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, in a (failed) psychological attempt to keep Congress from cutting Social Security.

And contrary to popular myth, federal deficit spending never has caused inflation. There is no historical relationship between federal spending and inflation.

If federal deficit spending (red) caused inflation (blue), the lines would be parallel. They are not.

Rather than causing inflation, federal deficit spending prevents and cures recessions.

Recessions (vertical gray bars) follow decreases in federal deficit spending (red line) and are cured by increases in federal deficit spending.

Federal “debt” reduction caused every depression in U.S. history.

1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807.
1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.
1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.
1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.
1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.
1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.
1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.
1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. A recession began 2001.

All inflations in history have been caused by the scarcity of critical goods and services, mainly oil and food. This is demonstrated by the graph below:

The graph showing federal deficit spending vs. inflation shows no relationship between the two. The graph showing oil prices vs. inflation shows a strong relationship. Oil prices reflect oil scarcity. Thus, inflation is not caused by federal spending but rather by scarcity.

As we said, this has been discussed before on this site.

But past Republican parties, though heavily favoring the rich over the poor, were not led by demonic, psychopathic dictator wannabe who would burn down your house and our entire nation for the chance to rule the ashes.

IN SUMMARY

The federal government is uniquely Monetarily Sovereign. It cannot unintentionally run short of dollars.

When you are told that Medicare and Social Security benefits must be decreased and FICA taxes must be increased, that is a lie, and the person saying it is a liar, ignorant, or both.

The federal “debt” is not a problem, not even a debt, not paid for by your grandchildren, and is necessary for economic growth.

Efforts to decrease the federal “debt” are, in reality, efforts to make the rich richer by widening the Gap between the rich and the rest. The wider the Gap, the richer they are.

Unfortunately, when you try to explain this to your friends, their previous indoctrination will prevent them from believing what is in their self-interest.

So they naively will continue approving and justifying federal tax increases and federal benefit decreases, much to the amusement of the rich, who have blessed themselves with tax loopholes and income not subject to FICA taxes.

All you can do is to keep fighting, and forgive them, for they know not what they do.

 

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

The Reason.com fountain of disinformation

The difference between misinformation and disinformation is that the former can be accidental and unintentional, while the latter is intentional. While the Libertarian website, Reason.com, always has spewed wrong ideas, I have come to believe they now are well into the disinformation stage. In short, they have transitioned from loud-mouth, bar-stool buffoons to louder-mouth Tucker Carlson.
Trump's Indictment Start of a 'Political Purge,' Says Tucker Carlson – Rolling Stone
I admitted that even I don’t believe what I say. Why should you?
Here is the latest headline:

Reason.com – Free Minds and Free Markets Nobel Prize–Winning Economist: Democrats Are Committed ‘To Spending Other People’s Money’ Vernon Smith weighs in on Biden’s budget, how government causes inflation, and why bailing out Silicon Valley Bank was a bad idea. NICK GILLESPIE AND JUSTIN ZUCKERMAN | 3.29.2023 2:45 P

I caught up with the 96-year-old recently in Southern California and conducted a long interview about his life and work that will appear as a Reason podcast.

Here’s part of our conversation about President Joe Biden’s massive $6.8 trillion budget plan, the role of government spending and Federal Reserve policy in causing inflation, the bailout of Silicon Valley Bank, and why Smith believes “it’s very hard to keep Democrats [from] wanting to make the world better by spending other people’s money.“

I must admit that the headline and the introductory paragraphs told me I would not be able to stomach listening to the entire drivel. Here are my comments based on just the above:
Alan Greenspan says US recession is likely | CNN Business
Greenspan: A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency.
Starting with the simplest, there is no Nobel Prize in economics, nor should there be. It’s called The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel. It’s like me injuring myself and awarding me the Rodger Mitchell medal in memory of the Military Order of the Purple Heart. Or, having taking some pictures at my family Thanksgiving dinner, I award myself the Mitchell Award for Best Picture in memory of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences Awards for Best Pictures. Also, there should be no real Nobel Prize in economics because economics has not yet graduated to science levels. It is a philosophy that lacks proof, but exists on intuition and belief. Sciences make verifiable predictions. Economics makes predictions that can’t be verified. They are little more than hunches. Economists are like stock market chartists with their “head and shoulders” graphs, histograms, and MACDs, all of which sound scientific but in reality are balderdash. “GOVERNMENT SPENDING CAUSING INFLATION” Next, there is no evidence that federal spending causes inflation. It is a common belief in economics circles, but it is based on the logical intuition that if you have more of something its value declines. Sadly, Facts don’t agree with intuition. Money is unlike other commodities. It always is in demand. If we have plenty of oil, we don’t use more. There becomes a surfeit that needs to be stored at a significant cost. The price goes down. When there is too much, production can’t be shut down in and instant; when there is a shortage, production can’t be started instantly. If we have plenty of food, we don’t begin to eat more. The extra must expensively be stored or allowed to rot. The the price goes down. When there is too much or too little, production can’t respond quickly. By contrast, the federal government quickly can produce more dollars when needed, simply by giving them away or spending them. In the unlikely event there ever are too many dollars, the government could tax them away. Another major reason why money is unique: If you have plenty of money, you still want more. Storage not only is free, but receives interest. The usual rules of supply and demand don’t operate. Having plenty of money does not reduce the price of money. It actually can increase the value of money, because investing opens new areas for more investing. That is why we see graphs like this:
There is no relationship between federal debt (red line) and inflation (blue line).
The peaks and valleys in the above graph do not match. There is no cause/effect relationship.
There is a strong relationship between inflation and oil supplies (green, as evidenced by oil prices).
The peaks and valleys match. There is a cause/effect relationship. “BAILOUT OF SILICON VALLEY BANK” The bailout of the Silicon Valley Bank (SVP) was necessary to prevent massive losses to the economy and to individual depositors.
Bernanke: Fed's slow response to inflation was 'mistake' | The Hill
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.
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a measure of the economy by being a measure of spending (GDP = Federal and Nonfederal Spending + Net Exports). Adding dollars to the economy increases GDP; taking dollars from the economy reduces GDP. Dollars held by banks are dollars in the economy as part of the M2 money supply measure. Allowing SVP depositors to lose money would reduce GDP, which would be recessionary. Gillespie and Zuckerman advocate punishing the bank and those responsible by allowing them to fail, the classic “cut one’s nose to spite one’s face” situation. Because banks operate under a profit motive, their leaders face the ongoing temptation to engage in higher-risk activities. When these activities fail, the banks, not having infinite funds with which to pay off depositors, fail. The prevention and cure is to have all banks owned by the federal government, an entity that is not motivated to take higher risks and has the infinite ability to pay depositors. There is no public purpose for banks to be privately owned. Bank depositors already are insured (up to $250,000) by the federal government. Federal ownership would expand that protection while decreasing risk. “SPENDING OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY” This pejorative trope, though often expressed, is based on the false notion that the federal government spends federal tax dollars. While state and local governments, being monetarily non-sovereign, do spend taxpayer dollars, the federal government operates differently.
Alan Greenspan says US recession is likely | CNN Business
Greenspan: There is nothing to prevent the federal government from creating as much money as it wants and paying it to somebody.
Being Monetarily Sovereign, the federal government has the infinite ability to create dollars.

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.” 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.”

The federal government neither needs nor uses tax dollars. Even if it stopped collecting taxes, the federal government could continue spending forever. The primary purpose of federal taxes is to control the economy by taxing what the government wishes to discourage and by giving tax breaks to what the government wishes to encourage. A secondary purpose is to insure acceptance of US dollars by requiring them to be used for taxes and other payments. Reason.com, that Libertarian, anarchist organization, has become more far right-wing of late, and following in the Fox News / Tucker Carlson tradition, has resorted to exaggeration  and outright lies — i.e misinformation and disinformation — to push its anti-government agenda. The federal government is very good at one thing: Creating dollars. Thus it has no profit motive. Its motives revolve around its voter constituency. The more it can do to please its voters, the more votes it can acquire. The Republican constituency is the rich, and the Republicans know it. The Democrats’ constituency is the not-rich, but the Democrats don’t understand economics. So, despite creating such social programs as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and poverty-fighting plans, the Democrats repeatedly fall into the trap of not recognizing Monetary Sovereignty. Thus, they go along with the “can’t afford it” excuses for not implementing Medicare for All, Social Security for All, free college for all and other social programs that would benefit America. Meanwhile, the Libertarians join hands with the Republicans to widen the Gap between the rich and the rest. Disgraceful. The next time you read any Libertarian or Republican wish list, ask yourself, does this help the not-rich or does it widen the Gap between the rich and the rest? Then vote accordingly. 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

The Basis for Economics in Four Words: Monetary Sovereignty and Gap Psychology

Two of the most important economic realities are Monetary Sovereignty and Gap Psychology. Together, these realities govern the US government’s control over America’s economy — or they should, if voters understood them.

1. Monetary sovereignty means the federal government has unlimited control over its own currency. It establishes all the laws that govern the creation and value of dollars.

At its discretion, the government can create, destroy, and revalue dollars. Therefore, it does not need to tax, borrow, or have any income to spend as it wishes. It can set inflation at any level it deems appropriate.

It makes all the decisions concerning dollars.

2. Gap psychology suggests that individuals tend to distance themselves from those with lower income, wealth, or power, while seeking proximity to those with higher income, wealth, or power.

Since “rich” is a relative term, increasing one’s wealth requires widening the income, wealth, and power gap below while narrowing the gap above.

(A person who has $10,000 is rich if everyone else has $2,000, but he is poor if everyone else has $50,000.)

This is accomplished by gaining more for oneself and/or by forcing others to have less. Thus, impoverishing those below or above makes one richer, while enriching those below and/or above makes one poorer.

Wealthy individuals in America, as well as in many other countries, influence the flow of information and the development of laws by financing various sectors. They support the media through advertising dollars and ownership, support economists through university funding and job offers, and fund politicians through campaign contributions and promises of future employment opportunities.

The American voting public is subject to misinformation and disinformation regarding Monetary Sovereignty and the realities of Gap Psychology.

The public falsely is told that federal Monetary Sovereignty is the same as private sector monetary non-sovereignty, which would mean the federal government would not control the currency it creates out of thin air.

As a result of this misinformation/disinformation campaign, the public often unknowingly votes against their own interests.

People have been told that federal spending to narrow Gaps is unaffordable, unsustainable, and causes inflation. As an easily avoidable result, poverty, hunger, homelessness, lack of education, and gap-widening continue.

Here are examples of newspaper articles promulgating the myths that bind us to failure:

March 8, 2023 Biden plans new taxes on the rich to help save Medicare Justin Sink and Josh Wingrove, Bloomberg News

Federal taxes do not fund federal spending. Money creation does. Therefore, new taxes on the rich will not “save Medicare.”

The government already has the infinite power to fund a comprehensive, no-deductible Medicare for every man, woman, and child in America. No federal taxes are needed or used.

By positioning the plan as requiring increased taxes on the rich, Biden dooms it to pushback from the most powerful influencers in America.

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden’s budget will propose hiking payroll taxes on Americans making over $400,000 per year and allowing the government new power to negotiate drug prices as part of an effort the White House says will extend the solvency of a key Medicare program for another quarter century.

Both “hiking payroll taxes” and “negotiating drug prices” would unnecessarily take dollars from the private sector (aka “the economy. Biden’s proposal, though perhaps well-meaning, is recessionary. It also is unlikely to pass Congress.

Because the US government is infinitely solvent, every agency is as solvent as Congress and the President want it to be.

Medicare, a government agency, is as solvent as Congress and the President want it to be, just as other agencies — the military, SCOTUS, Congress, and the White House — are as solvent as our leaders wish them to be.

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

“The budget I am releasing this week will make the Medicare trust fund solvent beyond 2050 without cutting a penny in benefits,” Biden said Tuesday in an op-ed published in the New York Times shortly before the announcement. “

In fact, we can get better value, making sure Americans receive better care for the money they pay into Medicare.”

Every dollar paid into the Medicare “trust fund” is destroyed upon receipt.

All those dollars come from the M2 money supply measure, and when they reach the Treasury, they instantly disappear from any money supply measure. Thus, they functionally are destroyed.

The Medicare “trust fund” is not a real trust fund. A “trust fund” implies a secure source of funding. However, a federal trust fund is simply an accounting mechanism used to track inflows and outflows; it does not set aside receipts or invest them in private assets.

In private-sector trust funds, receipts are deposited and assets are held and invested by trustees on behalf of the stated beneficiaries. In federal trust funds, the federal government merely tracks receipts and disbursements. The receipts are recorded as accounting credits in the “trust funds,” and then combined with other receipts that the Treasury collects and spends.

Further, the federal government owns the accounts and can, by changing the law, unilaterally alter their purposes and raise or lower collections and expenditures.

At the touch of a computer key, the US federal government could double or triple the number of dollars in the Medicare “trust fund,” without collecting a penny more or less in taxes.

The crocodile tears for the impending “insolvency” of the trust fund are a stage performance for the uninformed voters.

At this point, it’s appropriate to mention that despite disinformation to the contrary, federal deficit spending is not “socialism.” Socialism is government ownership of production and distribution, not government spending.

The word “socialism” is used as an epithet to convince the naive public not to ask for federal benefits.

The president’s budget, which will be released Thursday, proposes raising Medicare taxes from 3.8% to 5% on annual income above $400,000, and eliminating a loophole business owners and higher-earners can exploit to avoid additional taxes, according to a White House fact sheet.

The sole benefit, if the dollars actually are collected, would be to narrow the Gap between the rich and the rest, while impoverishing the economy.

But the rich will find loopholes to exploit, so the whole proposal is a combination of misinformation and naivety.

Biden’s plan would also help bolster Medicare reserves through some $200 billion in prescription drug reforms over the next decade by allowing the insurance program to negotiate costs on more medications and sooner after they come to market.

To the extent the federal government successfully cuts prescription costs, fewer dollars will flow from the Monetarily Sovereign US government to the monetarily non-sovereign private sector, a recessionary effect.

The moves are part of a concerted effort by the White House ahead of looming negotiations over the debt ceiling and government funding, where Republicans vow to seek deep cuts to federal spending.

The debt ceiling is an anachronism based on ignorance. It does nothing to eliminate future spending, but risks punishing legitimate creditors to the federal government, a potentially earth-shattering event.

Though Republicans claim to want spending cuts, they had been unable to identify significant areas for reductions. Now, they are aiming at previously “untouchable” defense, education, health care, welfare, pensions, and interest, which account for 93% of the budget.

The Republicans never wish to cut Defense because defense contractors are big, powerful providers of campaign cash.

Republicans would love to cut Education, Health Care, Welfare, or Pensions, but that might cost them votes, and they already have enough election problems with their stance on abortion.

With high inflation, it’s untouchable because of their legal commitments and the false narrative that high rates fight inflation. By subscribing to myths, the Republicans have backed themselves into a corner.

The only sensible and honest step would be to:

  1. Eliminate the debt ceiling.
  2. Acknowledge the fact that a Monetarily Sovereign government neither needs nor uses tax dollars or borrowing, because it pays all its dollar obligations by creating new dollars, ad hoc.
  3. Acknowledge the fact that inflations are caused not by federal spending but rather by scarcities of key goods and services (energy, food, construction materials, electronic parts, labor, etc.) and that these scarcities can be cured by federal deficit spending to obtain and distribute the scarce items.

Unfortunately, the government has devoted so much time and money to promulgating myths that it is now unable or unwilling to promulgate the facts.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has vowed the GOP won’t touch Medicare or Social Security, programs that share bipartisan support, particularly among elderly voters.

But Democrats, including Biden, have repeatedly highlighted past GOP efforts to overhaul the entitlement programs by reducing eligibility or benefits.

Ahead of the budget release, White House officials have challenged McCarthy to specify where he would pursue cuts.

The Republicans likely will settle for either or all of three demands:

  1. Demand cuts to Healthcare by cutting Obamacare and increasing deductibles and age requirements for Medicare and/or
  2. Demand cuts to poverty aids and/or
  3. Demand cuts to Social Security via increases in age requirements.
All of those would increase the Gap between the rich, to whom the Republicans are beholden, and the rest of America, but would cause a backlash from voters.

Democrats are hoping Biden’s budget, which would reduce the deficit by $2 trillion over the next 10 years, will provide a political advantage by keeping benefits intact, with higher taxes on the wealthy helping to offset rising costs.

Because federal taxes are destroyed upon receipt, they would offset nothing. But, in the unlikely event that taxes are appropriately administered, they would help narrow the Gap between the rich and the rest.

That is why the Republicans will not allow higher taxes, but instead might risk opting for the 1-3 (above) penalties against the “not-rich.”

Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, also known as Part A, pays for hospital stays, nursing facilities, and hospices.

It is currently projected to reach insolvency as soon as 2028, according to the most recent Medicare Trustees report.

“This modest increase in Medicare contributions from those with the highest incomes will help keep the Medicare program strong for decades to come.

My budget will make sure the money goes directly into the Medicare trust fund, protecting taxpayers’ investment and the future of the program,” Biden said in his op-ed.

Neither the federal government nor any federal agency can be insolvent unless Congress and the President so decide. Tax dollars do not go anywhere. They are destroyed. The “trust fund” is replenished at the whim of Congress through legislation.

It’s important to note that Medicare Part B, like military spending, is funded through federal spending rather than specific taxes. While all of Medicare could be financed in this manner, it is complicated by the existence of a misleading “trust fund.”

Proposed changes to Medicare’s ability to negotiate prescription drugs would also benefit seniors on Medicare by lowering their out-of-pocket costs, the White House says.

Biden’s budget will specifically propose capping the cost of certain generic drugs, like those used to treat hypertension and high cholesterol, to $2 per prescription per month.

The budget also eliminates the fee patients have to pay on up to three mental or behavioral health visits per year.

The negotiation of prescription drug prices accomplishes nothing for the government and impoverishes drug manufacturers and the private sector. The federal government has the infinite ability to pay for drugs, whatever their prices.

Sending fewer dollars to the health care industry will cut economic growth.

========================================

Biden to offer deficit reduction plan Tax proposals are aimed at trimming $3T over 10 years By Jim Tankersley The New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden on Thursday will propose policies aimed at trimming federal budget deficits by $3 trillion over the next 10 years as his administration embraces the politics of debt reduction amid a fight with Republicans over raising the nation’s borrowing

Trimming $3 trillion from the federal budget is identical to taking $3 trillion from the private sector, which unnecessarily will reduce Gross Domestic Product growth and usually causes a recession.

Reduced deficit growth (red line) leads to recessions. Note the downward trajectory of the red line at vertical gray bars. Increased deficit growth cures recessions. Note the upward trajectory during recessions, which cures them.

As always, ignorance about Monetary Sovereignty will lead to economic hardship. That is the usual effect of ignorance.

House Republicans have refused to raise the nation’s debt limit, which caps how much money the federal government can borrow, unless Biden agrees to steep cuts in federal spending.

To help increase federal revenues and reduce the nation’s reliance on borrowed money, Biden is expected to announce a new tax on American households worth more than $100 million that would apply to both their earned income and the unrealized gains in the value of their liquid assets, like stocks.

What Is an Oasis in the Desert?

Taking dollars from the private sector and sending them to the US Treasury is like pumping water from an oasis and pouring it into the sea.

The voting public does not understand that it makes no sense to take dollars from the economy, which relies on dollars for growth, and give them to the federal government, which can create dollars at will.

Taking federal taxes from the private sector is like pumping water from an oasis and pouring it into the sea.

The federal government has run deficits every year since 2000, spending more money than it receives in tax revenue.

Translation: The economy has received more dollars from the government than it has sent to the government. This is necessary for economic growth.

The deficit ballooned under President Donald Trump after the onset of the pandemic recession, which spurred Congress to approve trillions of dollars in relief for individuals, businesses and state and local governments.

It remained elevated in 2021 under Biden, who signed a $1.9 trillion economic aid package he signed soon after taking office, but declined last year.

Deficit spending under Trump and Biden prevented recessions that otherwise would have been caused by COVID-related shortages.

Federal deficit spending grows the economy. The lack of federal deficit spending causes recessions. This lesson has not been acknowledged by Congress, the President, or the voting public.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects the deficit will grow slightly this fiscal year, to $1.41 trillion from $1.375 trillion, then continue to rise for the course of the decade, topping $2 trillion in 2032.

Translation: The federal government is projected to pump 1.41 trillion to three trillion growth dollars into the economy.

From 2024 to 2033, the budget office projects, deficits will total more than $20 trillion, driving gross federal debt to nearly $52 trillion.

Translation: The budget office projects that the Monetarily Sovereign US government will have pumped a net total of 52 trillion growth dollars into the economy, at no cost to taxpayers (Taxes don’t fund spending).

Through laws he has signed and executive actions he has issued, Biden has approved policies that would add about $5 trillion to the national debt over a decade, according to estimates by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget in Washington.

Translation: The CRFB projects that $5 trillion will be added to Treasury Security deposits over the next 10 years.

Summary Monetary Sovereignty and Gap Psychology are two of the most essential realities of the US economy. Because the public has not been given the facts about these realities, voters have voted against their own best interests.

The current budget stalemate between the Republicans and Democrats is a manifestation of the misinformation/disinformation campaigns so detrimental to the US economy, and especially to Americans who are not rich.

Ignorance is expensive.

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