Mitchell’s laws:
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor, which leads to civil disorder.
●Cutting the deficit is the government’s method for taking dollars from the middle class and giving them to the rich.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The penalty for ignorance is slavery.
==========================================================================================================================================
Background: Readers of this blog know of my belief that economic ignorance is not the reason why the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the Fed, Congress and the hundreds of PhD economists they employ, do not seem to understand Monetary Sovereignty. Not one of them.
They do not seem to understand that the U.S. government, unlike the governments of the states, counties and cities, and unlike you and me, has the unlimited ability to create its sovereign currency, the dollar. So it never can be “broke,” as the Speaker of the House famously lied, nor should the U.S. handle its finances like a family does, as the President frequently lies.
On rare occasion, one of these people lets slip the fact that he does indeed understand, as when Chairman Greenspan said, “The United States can pay any debt it has, because we always can print more money.”
Given that fact, which is well known to the politicians and the media, the only reason I can imagine, for all the lying by our leaders is this: They are paid to lie by the top ,1% income group. The politicians are paid via campaign contributions and the media are paid via ownership and advertising.
The .1%’s reason for the lies: Austerity widens the gap between the .1% and the 99.9%, and it is the gap, not absolute dollars, that makes rich people rich and powerful, and allows them to rule.
Last night, I was telling my wife about my belief that President Obama wants to increase the gap between the rich and the middle class because he owes his soul to the rich. Her response: “Why does he care any more? He’s finished running for office.”
I responded: “He’s a politician, accustomed to taking his marching orders from the political bosses. That, not accomplishment, is how he rose through the ranks. Here is a man who never did anything noteworthy, yet became President of the United States – twice – by sucking up to the moneyed powers.
“Later, when he’s out of office, he still will want support from these people. They’ll set him up for speeches and books and various advisories, all well paying. It’s the way he always has lived, and always will.”
Then, this morning, I saw this:
$1 million donations wanted for Obama inauguration
By Jack Gillum, Nedra Pickler and Stephen Braun, Associated PressWASHINGTON (AP) — Planners of President Barack Obama’s second inauguration are soliciting high-dollar contributions up to an unprecedented $1 million to help pay for the celebration in exchange for special access.
The changes are part of a continuing erosion of Obama’s pledge to keep donors and special interests at arm’s length of his presidency. He has abandoned the policy from his first inauguration to accept donations up to only $50,000 from individuals, announcing last month that he would take unlimited contributions from individuals and corporations.
A fundraising appeal obtained by The Associated Press shows the Presidential Inaugural Committee is going far beyond Obama’s previous self-imposed limits and is looking to blow away modern American presidential inauguration fundraising records by offering donors four VIP packages named after the country’s founding fathers.
Event organizers are hoping the packages will pay for expensive events surrounding Obama’s inaugural on Jan. 21. Obama raised $53 million in private money for his first inauguration, when a record 1.8 million people packed the National Mall to see the nation’s first black president take the oath of office. The celebration has been scaled down this year, with less than half the crowd expected and a cut from 10 inauguration-night balls to two.
But the pressure is high to pay for the festivities after donors already contributed to the most expensive political race in U.S. history, a campaign that exceeded $2 billion. So far, health care executives and major Democratic Party donors — including those who’ve taken private meetings with Obama or his senior staff — are among those paying for the party.
The shifts underscore Obama’s evolving stance on changing how business is conducted in Washington. He criticized pay-for-access privileges during his first campaign, and after coming into office he pledged to have the most transparent administration in history. The president once shunned lobbyists but later gave some waivers to work for his administration. Once a vocal opponent of super political action committees — which can spend as much money as they can raise to help candidates — Obama later embraced them when faced with the mountain of cash spent by allies of his Republican campaign challengers.
Donors at the “Washington” level are offered “premium partner access” for a minimum donation of $250,000 from individuals and $1 million from corporations.
The “Adams” package also promises premium partner access for $150,000 from individuals and $500,000 from corporations.
Donors are offered “special partner access” that still includes ball tickets and the Candle Light Celebration at the National Building Museum for donations of $75,000 for individuals and $250,000 for corporations at the “Jefferson” level and $10,000 and $100,000 at the “Madison” level.
So it never ends. Even a politician who will not again will run for office, continues to suck up to the .1%, and of course, all the politicians who will continue to seek office and/or political jobs, suck even harder.
Those people who will contribute hundreds of thousands, have their reasons. They didn’t become .1%ers by tossing money carelessly. And what they want is power, and power comes from the gap. No gap, no power, and the bigger the gap, the more the power. It’s that straightforward.
So, the next time you hear that Social Security and Medicare must be “strengthened” (i.e. weakened) or “fixed,” (i.e. cut), or that social spending “breeds laziness” (i.e. “I’ve got mine; screw them.”), or that the Platinum Coin Solution is an “illegal gimmick” (i.e. “OMG, it will work”) you’ll understand the reason.
It has absolutely nothing to do with a fear the U.S. government could run out of money (it never can), nor with the phony Weimar Republic bogeyman, inflation (which we are nowhere near and easily can prevent.)
It has to do only with pushing down the 99.9% so the .1% can increase its power over them.
The question is: When are you going to get angry at what is being done to you?
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
====================================================================================================================================================
Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Medicare — parts A, B & D — for everyone
3. Send every American citizen an annual check for $5,000 or give every state $5,000 per capita (Click here)
4. Long-term nursing care for everyone
5. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
6. Salary for attending school (Click here)
7. Eliminate corporate taxes
8. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
9. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99%
No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports
#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 