Who is to blame for the endless failure of economics.

Why is the vast majority of the public so ignorant about even the most basic elements of economics?

5 Things Your College Professor Wished You Knew | Start School Now — **This is what my professor was taught, and what he taught me, and what I’m teaching you. Now you teach it to others. That’s how science works.**

Why do people believe the federal government, Medicare, and Social Security are running short of dollars?

Why does the harmful and financially ignorant debt ceiling persist?

Why is there poverty in America? Why is there so much street crime?

Why do the rich grow richer while the poorer fall further behind?

The wrong answers to all these questions stem from what is taught in our schools, by our so-called thought leaders.

Just as religious leaders teach from never-changing bibles, too many economics professors teach from never-changing assumptions.

But, what may be acceptable for religion is unacceptable for science.

Surprisingly few economics professors are willing to learn, understand, or teach the following facts.

Financial debt is money, and money is debt. They are two sides of the same debt/money “coin.”
Eliminating debt means eliminating money, which always is a recessionary/depressionary economic plan. GDP growth (by formula) requires debt/money growth. (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports.)
Gap Psychology dictates that the rich get richer (widen the Gap) not only by increasing their ownership of debt/money, but by reducing the not-rich’s ownership of debt/money.
Federal “debt” is not debt, but rather it is deposits into privately-owned T-security accounts. The Treasury does not use those dollars. The accounts are paid off simply by returning their balances to the account owners. No tax dollars are involved. Thus misnamed federal “debt” is not a burden on the government or on future taxpayers.
The federal government is Monetarily Sovereign. It has the infinite ability to create dollars. Thus, it does not borrow dollars. It accepts deposits into T-security accounts, the purposes of which are not to provide spending funds, but rather to stabilize the dollar and to help the Fed control interest rates.
For the same reasons, federal taxes do not fund federal spending. Even if all federal tax collections totaled $0, the federal government could continue spending, forever. Federal taxes are destroyed (i.e. cease to be part of M1 or any other money supply measure) the instant they are received by the Treasury. That is why no one can answer the question, “How much money does the Treasury have?” The best answer is, “Infinite,” which remains “infinite” whether or not tax dollars are received.
The purpose of federal taxes is not to provide spending funds, but rather to control the economy by discouraging what the government doesn’t like and encouraging what it does like.
The income/wealth/power Gap is what makes the rich rich. Without the Gap no one would be rich; we all would be the same. The wider the Gap, the richer are the rich. The best way to narrow the Gap between the rich and the rest is for the federal government to provide benefits to the rest, which the federal government has the infinite ability to do.
Street crime is a function of poverty. The best way to reduce street crime is not via increased policing, but rather by reducing poverty.
There is no public benefit to private ownership of banks. All banks should be nationalized.
Federal spending is not socialism. Federal ownership (as with, for instance, VA hospitals and national highways is socialism.)
No inflation in history has been caused by “excessive” federal spending. All inflations are caused by shortages of key goods and services, most notably shortages of food, energy, and labor. Federal spending actually can eliminate inflation by increasing the availability of the scarce goods and services.

Where does all the misinformation come from? It begins with, and is promulgated by, the “experts,” the economists.

Blame the incurious, intellectually lazy economics professors, who do not question what they were taught in college, but rather parrot it to their students, who continue the endless circle. Add to those pejoratives the word “greedy,” since this all is financed by the rich as a way to widen the Gap.

Thus today, we continue to see the same old misguided, disproven worries about federal “debt” and federal deficits, federal government “insolvency,” benefit “unaffordability,” government spending as a cause of inflation and “socialism,” and the false need for federal taxes to finance federal spending.

Remember all of the above as today, you hear the specious arguments about the “debt ceiling,” exacerbated by the stubborn partisanship that could crash the American economy and the economies of the world.

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:

Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
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:

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Is economics logically simple or simply illogical?

In one sense, economics is logically simple. One pillar of economics is based on money, or more specifically the difference between the issuers of money (i.e. Monetarily Sovereign) and the mere users of money (i.e. monetarily non-sovereign). All issuers of money create money the same way. They begin by creating laws or rules from thin air. These laws have no physical existence, and that fact gives the issuers the infinite ability to create laws. The laws, in turn, create money, which also has no physical existence. You cannot see, taste, feel, hear, or smell a law or a number, or money. What, for instance, does the number “ten” look like. Does it look like this: 10? Like this: X? Like this: Ten? Like this: 2×5? Like this: 20/2? Like this: Diez? Laws, numbers, and money merely are concepts. They may be represented by paper forms or on computer screens but the actual laws, numbers, and money exist only as ideas which is why their creation is limited only by the desires of their creators. The Monetarily Sovereign U.S. government could, if it wished, create a million laws and/or a trillion, trillion dollars, tomorrow, at virtually no cost.

The First Two Pillars of OOP | Tom McFarlin — **Monetary Sovereignty and Gap Psychology**

A functionary merely presses a computer key and presto, money is created, sent, or destroyed — from thin air, through thin air, or back into thin air. Store coupons, for instance, represent one form of money. The issuer (the store) can issue as many paper or electronic coupons as it wishes, and it sets their value. Representations of coupons can appear in a printed mailer, or the local newspaper, or online. Those who shop at, for instance, Bed, Bath, and Beyond, have come to realize there hardly is an end to the number of coupons a store can issue. Yet, that retailer does not tax anyone to provide coupons, nor does it borrow coupons. It does not need a source of coupons. Its coupon limit is the amount of merchandise it wishes to discount. The federal government doesn’t even suffer that limit. The government literally has no limit. It cannot unintentionally run short of dollars. Contrary to common myth, the federal government needs not levy taxes nor borrow. (Think about that the next time you send the Treasury your precious tax dollars or read about the useless battle about the “debt ceiling.”) That one pillar of economics, Monetary Sovereignty, though unintuitive to some, is logicallysimple: The US federal government has the unlimited ability to create dollars from thin air and to determine their value. But economics is simply illogical because the other pillar is human psychology, a study so complex and so bereft of certainty it makes quantum mechanics look like child’s play. While quantum mechanics has predictable randomness, psychology is laden with unpredictable randomness. Perhaps the very center of this randomness, as related to economics, is Gap Psychology. Gap Psychology, an extraordinarily powerful motivator, 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 between any two persons or groups is referred to as “The Gap.” Gap Psychology dictates that while you may wish to narrow the Gap above you, those above you wish to widen that Gap. Gap Psychology is the controlling motivator that makes you purchase luxury goods — cars, clothing, houses — rather than simply utilitarian products. It creates pride and shame, avarice and benevolence, desire and aversion. Beyond bare survival, Gap Psychology is the prime motivator for what we do, want, and believe. The competing desires of the “have-more” and the “have-less” create a discord that is reflected in the aims of the two opposing political directions: The liberal vs. the conservative. The real dissonance and complexity reveal themselves because all of us find ourselves, at times, in either camp. While the very top and the very bottom are less tergiversated, the vast middle majority is where much of the emotional conflict arises. “Who am I”? “What am I?” “Where am I?” This is the sort of silent introspection most common at the middle, and most influenced by Gap Psychology. You may be puzzled when someone of the middle-class shows scant concern for the plight of poor immigrants. You might have thought there would have been empathy rather than antipathy. Yet, that person merely may have reflected the powerful push of Gap Psychology — the desire to widen the Gap below.

The Namesakes of Marist College Buildings — MARIST CIRCLE — **Example of Gap Psychology**

To make matters even more complex, you also may have noted charitable generosity to the poor by someone of the middle class, and that could be a manifestation of the Gap Psychology pull — the desire of the middle to narrow the Gap above by acting as though they imagine a “have-more” acts. You will see this play out in charitable organizations, where the donation amounts are announced for all to see. Universities and hospitals take advantage of Gap Psychology when they name buildings for large donors. While this is heralded as “generosity” by the benefactors, mostly it is just a reflection of the desire to widen the Gap below and to narrow the Gap above. Another example: You might wonder why anyone other than a “have-most” would vote Republican. After all, it is the Democrats who offer the free medical, educational, and social services needed most by the middle and lower levels of society. The reasons are, first, the common ignorance about the finances of our Monetarily Sovereign federal government, and the false belief that federal taxes fund federal spending. As noted above, federal taxes fund nothing. But beyond that, there is the antipathy many of the middle class have for those below them, an antipathy so powerful they even are willing to accept less for themselves, just so those below receive less yet. For those middle-class Republican voters, widening the Gap below can be more important than narrowing the Gap, above. That example of Gap Psychology — hatred and fear of the underclass — is the primary source of bigotry. It demonstrates why the particularly virulent forms of bigotry can be found in the lower-middle classes — those who fear most the narrowing of the Gap. Dictators make use of Gap Psychology by first designating an underclass — a religion, a nationality, a political belief — then positioning that underclass as a grasping danger, and finally claiming that he, the dictator, is the only one who can widen the Gap between the underclass and the rest of the populace. Scapegoating is a symptom of Gap Psychology. Gap Psychology also becomes an even greater issue when resources are limited. From an evolutionary standpoint, it then makes sense then to distance oneself from those who have less and to join with those who have more. During recessions and depressions, Gaps tend to widen near the top, as the very rich are able to employ the rest at starvation wages, while not feeling the pinch of poverty themselves. IN SUMMARY The two great pillars of economics are Monetary Sovereignty and Gap Psychology. As a science, the former is logically simple, in that it merely states: A Monetarily Sovereign money issuer has absolute control over the money it issues — its quantity and its value — and needs no exterior source of that money. Though counterintuitive because of rampant false teaching, nothing could be simpler. The latter is simply illogical “science,” because the goal of any science is predictability, while Gap Psychology relies on the unpredictable vagarities of human emotions and behavior. Together, they determine the direction of all economics. 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:

Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
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.”

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Heritage Foundation: Ignorant, stupid, or traitors? You choose.

Are the writers for the right-wing Heritage Foundation ignorant, stupid, or merely traitors to America? Read the following excerpts and you decide:

Commentary: Dealing with America’s Olympic-sized debt problem

Rachel Greszler is a research fellow in economics at The Heritage Foundation. David Ditch is a researcher specializing in transportation issues for Heritage’s Hermann Center for the Federal Budget.
Rachel Greszler and David Ditch, The Heritage Foundation on Aug 5, 2021 Most Americans realize the federal government spent a lot of money, including three rounds of so-called “stimulus payments” that most households received. But those $3,200 worth of individual checks pale in comparison to total spending. If ordinary Americans had spent like the federal government did in 2020, the median household that earns $68,703 would have spent $131,620 and put $62,917 on the credit card, despite already being $541,287 in debt.

In our previous post, “Debt is not debt; deficits are not deficits; the government never borrows; gold never backed the dollar; inflation is not caused by federal spending,” we describe how charlatans use homonyms to deceive you. Via ignorance, stupidity, or malice, the writers for the Heritage Foundation prove our point by attempting to confuse federal finances with personal finances. The two are as completely different as flypaper is from the daily paper.

As of 2021, the U.S. debt comes out to roughly $220,000 per household. That’s enough to buy about eight years’ worth of groceries, gas, clothing, and housing for the typical household.

The above is a completely meaningless and misleading comparison, that is supposed to shock you, but not to inform you. You are not, and never will be liable for the so-called, misnamed federal “debt.” It isn’t a debt, and no one is liable for it.

And even that figure doesn’t include the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare. Without a significant reduction in the size of those programs, each household’s total debt is actually over $660,000. That’s equal to the cost of a median family home, a new car, plus over five years’ worth of a typical household’s income.

Utter nonsense. All federal liabilities are “unfunded” until the government funds them by creating dollars, ad hoc. The real purpose of the article is to groom you for acquiescence to right-wing calls for Social Security and Medicare cuts. But even if the FICA tax were eliminated, the federal government could support Social Security for All and a comprehensive Medicare for All, forever. Then follow more meaningless comparisons, all designed only to be shocking. Your household will not ever pay a single penny to pay off the so-called federal “debt.”

However, even this massive a debt doesn’t seem all that bad. Interest rates are low, and the federal government has had little problem seemingly borrowing into oblivion without consequence. (The same could be said of Greece before a financial crisis ensued.)

The fact that interest rates are low is yet more meaningless tripe. The U.S. government sets interest rates at any level it chooses, and it pays interest by creating new dollars, ad hoc, which it has the infinite ability to do. And by the way, Greszler and Ditch, is it ignorance, stupidity, or traitorousness that causes you to compare the Monetarily Sovereign United States (which has the unlimited ability to create its own sovereign currency, the dollar) with the monetarily non-sovereign Greece (which has no sovereign currency)?

But our currently low interest rate payments—equal to over $2,500 per household in 2021, or the cost of about 6 months’ worth of groceries—are on track to rise to about $6,400 per household in 2031. That’s four months of mortgage payments.

Again, more designed-to-deceive, meaningless, false equivalences between federal finances and personal finances

And that’s the equivalent of an interest-only mortgage. Those costs don’t even begin to reduce the principal amount of debt.

The so-called federal “debt” is not a debt in the usual sense. It is the total of deposits into Treasury Security accounts (similar to safe deposit boxes) which are no burden whatsoever on the government or on future taxpayers.

While ordinary Americans aren’t allowed to take out mortgages or open up new credit cards in their children’s names, the federal government does this every day.

Yet even more ignorant, stupid, or intentionally deceptive false comparisons between federal finances and personal finances. The Heritage fraud goes on and on.

The share of debt for a child born this year was $66,874. And that debt is on track to rise every year, reaching $111,552 by the time they’re 18 and either start working or head off to college. It will then hit $191,768 by the time they’re 30 and potentially raising young children.

The above implies that future children will have to pay for the so-called “debt.” It is a lie of the first order. No one will pay for the “debt” because it is not debt. It is deposits that will be paid off as they always have been: By simply returning the dollars in those T-security accounts.

Fortunately, it’s not too late to prevent the nation from going broke.

It is impossible for the United States to “go broke.” Being Monetarily Sovereign (unlike Greece), the U.S. has the unlimited ability to create dollars. If needed, it could press one computer key and create a trillion dollars tomorrow.

Congress should cut out wasteful spending such as corporate welfare and excessive compensation for federal bureaucrats.

The Heritage Foundation, being right-wing, now complains about “corporate welfare.” Do they mean the Republicans’ tax cuts for businesses? And really, how many federal bureaucrats receive “excessive compensation”? Of course, the whole thing is meaningless, because all federal deficit spending, even so-called “wasteful” spending, benefits everyone by adding stimulus dollars to the economy.

Congress should stop shirking their responsibilities by placing an increasing amount of federal spending on autopilot, and instead seek to reform programs like Social Security and Medicare that are on a path to bankruptcy.

I have no idea what “autopilot” means in this context. I suspect the authors don’t know, either. But none of it matters. The real purpose is to make you believe Social Security and Medicare should be cut. That is the goal of The Party of the Rich, the Republicans. The rich, who support Heritage Foundation, always want to widen the Gap between the rich and the rest. The wider the Gap, the richer are the rich. It’s known as Gap Psychology — the desire to widen the income/wealth/power Gap below, and to narrow the Gap above. So they repeatedly warn that Social Security and Medicare soon will run short of money, despite their being a federal agency that has available to them, infinite dollars. Neither the federal government, nor any agency of the federal government, can go bankrupt unless Congress and the President want them to.

Congress should focus on core federal responsibilities and clear away countless programs that benefit narrow interest groups at the expense of the public good.

The elderly and the poor — are they what Heritage considers to be “narrow interest groups”?? Or aren’t the rich — Heritage’s buddies — who really comprise the narrow interest groups?

Congress should recognize our looming debt disaster and step away from shortsighted spending plans.

Still “looming.” Debt-nuts like Heritage have been making the same “disaster” claim for more than 80 years, yet here we are, with the strongest economy in U.S. history.

Big problems like the unsustainable national debt won’t be solved quickly or easily. However, Congress must begin to take fiscal responsibility seriously as soon as possible.

The “unsustainable” national debt has been growing massively, and sustaining, since 1940, while organizations like Heritage have been crying “Wolf” again, and again, and again.

Otherwise, a Greece-like fate may await us.

And the article ends appropriately, with one, final, false comparison of monetarily non-sovereign Greece vs. Monetarily Sovereign America. The Big Lie is alive and well at Heritage. Even, an organization as devoted to advancing the interests of the rich vs. the rest, should be embarrassed by the above article. It is so wrongheaded and misleading as to be written by fools and approved by traitors. They do more to hurt America than do the most devoted Russian, Iranian, and Chinese spies. Perhaps The Heritage Foundation should be renamed The Benedict Arnold Foundation. 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:

Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
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.”

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

How you will be cheated out of your health care insurance

We begin with these, indisputable facts:

Fantasy Writing Diploma Course - Centre of Excellence — **The federal government has the infinite power to create laws, and these laws have the infinite ability to create dollars. The government cannot run short of laws or dollars.**

A. Federal laws are created from thin air by the federal government. The government creates any, and as many, laws it wants, so long as those laws are in keeping with the Constitution, which also was created from thin air by the government.

The federal government never unintentionally can run short of laws. It has the infinite ability to create laws.

B. Among the many laws the government created from thin air are the laws that created the U.S. sovereign currency: The U.S. dollar.

Initially, the government’s laws created as many dollars as the government wanted, and gave them the value the government wanted.

This infinite ability to create any number of dollars and to specify their value is known as “Monetary Sovereignty.”

The U.S. government is sovereign over the dollar.

This infinite ability to create dollars does not rely on tax collections. Even if the government collected zero taxes, it could continue creating dollars forever.

The federal government never unintentionally can run short of dollars or laws.

Similarly, the federal government has no need to borrow dollars, and indeed the government does not borrow dollars. It pays all its bills by creating new dollars, ad hoc.

The purpose of federal taxes is not to supply the government with dollars, but rather to control the economy by taxing what the government wishes to discourage, and giving tax breaks to what the government wishes to encourage.

C. Having absolute control over all aspects of the U.S. dollar, the federal government has absolute control over the value of the U.S. dollar, i.e. inflation. The government has the power to change the value of the dollar at will, a power it has exercised many times over the years.

Thus, the federal government has the absolute power to control inflation.

Keeping the above facts in mind, we can review the following article that describes how and why the federal government will cheat you out of your health care insurance.

Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB)
Two Ways to Reduce Prescription Drug Costs
July 26, 2021

High and rising prescription drug costs are contributing to the budgetary pressure faced by the federal government. Also, a significant number of patients face very high out-of-pocket costs.

Interesting choice of words: “budgetary pressure.” The government not only creates infinite dollars from thin air; it also creates infinite budgets from thin air. And it changes those budgets at will.

So, yes, the cost of drugs easily could exceed the budget, but since the government never unintentionally can run short of dollars, there is no financial pressure.

Any budgetary pressure the government may feel is self-inflicted and essentially meaningless. (Visualize Jeff Bezos budgeting $5,000 to buy a TV set, and discovering the TV set costs $5,001. He may feel budgetary pressure, but will not feel financial pressure.)

Our two new briefs focus on options to reduce prescription drug prices. They include:

Medicare Part B could inject price competition into drug classes that have clinically comparable options but wide price variation – blunting the advantage that higher-priced drugs have under the current formula.

Injecting Price Competition into Medicare Part B Drugs

Currently, Medicare Part B, which covers outpatient physician services, pays for physician-administered drugs by reimbursing physicians the average cost for each specific drug plus a 6 percent add-on percentage of that cost. This arrangement creates misaligned incentives that blunt price competition and advantage higher-priced drugs – especially within drug classes that have clinically comparable options but a wide variation in prices.

This policy option looks at implementing “clinically comparable drug pricing,” where Medicare payments for physician-administered drugs would be set at a single price for groups of drugs within the same therapeutic class. That price would be set at the weighted average of prices manufacturers charge for each of the clinically comparable drugs.

This reform should encourage physicians to administer lower cost drugs and manufacturers to lower prices to maintain market share. The policy would reduce Medicare costs and would likely result in savings for Medicare Advantage plans and commercial payers.

The federal government pays its bills by creating dollars ad hoc. Thus, the government legitimately can be said to have infinite dollars. Federal taxes do not fund federal spending. Tax dollars are destroyed upon receipt by the Treasury.

So, there is no economic value to price competition. In fact, each penny the federal government sends into the economy is economically stimulative, at no cost to anyone.

However, the CRFB seems to claim that physicians make more money when physician-administered drugs are priced higher, and this can influence the choice of drugs. I am not sure how prevalent this situation is, but in any event, there is no fair way to prevent it.

The “weighted average” approach can penalize patients by making some of the more effective, costlier-to-produce drugs unavailable.

As a rule, price competition shifts costs from the government to the private sector, which penalizes the economy as a whole, while also penalizing drug research and development.

Over the next decade (2021-2030), implementing “clinically comparable drug pricing” could:

Reduce total (gross) Medicare spending by at least $122 billion in just three drug classes.
That includes $56 billion of savings to fee-for-service Medicare, $37 billion in lower beneficiary premiums and cost sharing, and $29 billion in savings for the Medicare Advantage program.

In more accurate words, implementing “clinically comparable drug pricing” could reduce the federal stimulus to economic growth by $122 billion in just three drug classes, while having no financial benefits for the private sector..

The policy would also generate private sector spillover savings. For example, in the rheumatoid arthritis class of drugs, the policy could reduce commercial drug costs by at least $21 billion.

Actually, there could be zero private sector spillover savings, if the government simply would pay, but the pharmaceutical industry would receive $21 billion less from the government.

Limiting Evergreening for Name-Brand Prescription Drugs
To encourage medical innovation, the FDA grants temporary market exclusivities to new name-brand drugs. These exclusivities prohibit generic drug competitors’ access to the market for a limited period.

However, drug manufacturers are often able to take advantage of the current rules, using “evergreening” strategies to extend their exclusivity periods and either delay generic drug market entry or limit the number of patients who switch to a new generic.

One evergreening tactic manufacturers employ involves introducing a new “line” or version of their drug shortly before a generic competitor is released.

This new line can be granted its own exclusivity period. For example, a manufacturer may introduce an extended-release formulation just before a generic of the original immediate-release formulation enters the market. This can allow a brand manufacturer to maintain market share in the face of generic competition – increasing its profits and increasing payer and patient costs.

New FDA exclusivity rules could lead to meaningful savings for consumers, commercial insurers, and government payers. The policy change could also speed up the market entry of brand extended-release and other reformulations, providing clinical benefits to patients.

Under a comprehensive, no-deductible, Medicare-for-All plan, there would be no cost for consumers, and government payers (who have infinite dollars) need no dollar savings. More stimulus dollars would be pumped into the economy by federal spending.

As for commercial insurers, they probably would go the way of the manufacturers of street corner phone booths, horse-drawn wagons, Betamax, and audio cassettes. Medicare for All could offer better service at no cost (and no need to ask for permission to have surgery).

Over the next decade (2021-2030), this policy could:

Reduce federal deficits by at least $10 billion.

I.e. reduce federal economic growth and job stimulus by $10 billion

Save Medicare Part D $7 billion in drug costs and Medicare beneficiaries $4 billion in lower premiums and cost sharing.

I.e., reduce federal economic growth stimulus by $7 billion. If Medicare for All were free, as it should be, premiums would be cut hundreds of billions of dollars, and there would be no need for cost-sharing.

Reduce federal and state Medicaid drug spending.

Medicare for all would eliminate the need for federal and state Medicaid drug spending.

Reduce private sector drug costs by $9 billion.

There is no economic need for the private sector to spend anything for drugs.

In Summary:
Incredibly, the CRFB seems to prefer saving money for the infinitely endowed federal government at the expense of the money-deprived.

The CRFB suggestions are based on these myths:

Federal finances are like private finances
The federal government is funded by federal taxes
The federal government can run short of dollars.

In truth, the federal government has infinite dollars available, has no need for tax dollars, and never can run short of its own sovereign currency. It needs to run deficits in order to grow the economy and prevent recessions, and it has absolute control over every aspect of the U.S. dollar including inflation.

Spending by the rich encourages the media, the politicians, and the economists to promulgate these myths. The purpose is to widen the income/wealth/power Gaps between the richer and the poorer, aka Gap Psychology.

Here are the CRFB notables, whose mission in life seems to be to help the rich become richer by widening the Gap between the rich and the rest. They have been quite successful.

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:

Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
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.”

Ten Steps To Prosperity:

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

Share this:

Commentary: Dealing with America’s Olympic-sized debt problem

Share this:

Share this: