Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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 ultimately leads to civil disorder.
●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.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive.
=====================================================================

Old joke: “I carry this stick as protection against snakes”
“There are no snakes around here.”
“See how well it works!”

We are a nation that prides itself on freedom. It is the defining aspect of America. The phrase, “This is a free country,” always is on our lips. The national anthem refers to America as, “the land of the free and the home of the brave.”

But what does that mean? Are we really the land of the free?

Nowhere in the Declaration of Independence is there said anything about personal freedom. The document refers only to “free and independent states.” The states are to be free, not the people.

. . . That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States . . .

Nor does the Constitution mention freedom:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It expresses the desire to “secure the Blessings of Liberty,” but what “liberty”? No one knows, and in any event, this Preamble has no legal significance. It’s a wish list from the writers.

Not one of the 27 Amendments to the constitution mentions personal freedom, the closest being Amendment I, which talks about freedom of speech and the press.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Clearly, we are not free to do as we wish. Every law that ever has been passed, impinges in some way on our freedom. When we speak about America being “the land of the free,” we usually speak of freedom from government tyranny. But when does freedom end and tyranny begin?

Once, we were free to kill native Americans. We were free to own slaves. We were free to buy alcohol, then not free, then free again – except for those below a certain age. We are free to build a house, drive a car, vote, except . . . except for the myriad restrictions on building a house, driving a car and voting.

Freedom is not a bright line; it is a fuzzy line, and nowhere is it fuzzier than when we consider that little phrase in the Preamble to the Constitution: “provide for the common defense.”

All governments are given that assignment. To “provide for the common defense,” a government is asked to identify harmful people, then prevent them from harming us.

Trials do that. Someone harms someone, is arrested, tried, convicted and punished. But most trials are after the fact. The harm already has been done. The victim has been victimized.

We expect our government to be more proactive. We want our government to identify and stop people who are planning to harm us. And that is where we really lose our freedom.

During WWII, the U.S. government identified Americans of Japanese heritage as being potential enemies. We took them from their homes and placed them into concentration camps. It was perfectly legal:

Wikipedia: In 1944, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion. The United States Census Bureau assisted the internment efforts by providing confidential neighborhood information on Japanese Americans. The Bureau’s (unlawful) role was denied for decades, but was finally proven in 2007.

When American citizens filled out their census forms, they unwittingly provided the government with information used illegally to take away some of their freedoms. And this is a perfect introduction to the subject of this post: “Is Obama protecting us from snakes or walling us in?”

President Obama responded to reports that the National Security Agency is collecting vast numbers of phone records and collaborating with tech companies to track users:

“Now, the programs that have been discussed over the last couple of days in the press are secret in the sense that they’re classified, but they’re not secret in the sense that, when it comes to telephone calls, every member of Congress has been briefed on this program”

Translation: This secret invasion of your privacy by the federal government is not really secret. The government knows about it.

The president insisted if any agency wants to actually listen to a call, they would have to get permission from a court to do so.

“When it comes to telephone calls, nobody is listening to your telephone calls.”

Translation: Nobody is listening to your telephone calls (trust me). Listening to your calls requires court permission, which the courts always give, so yes, lots of people are listening to your calls.

” . . . you can’t have 100 percent security and also then have 100 percent privacy. Were going to have to make some choices as a society. “

Translation: No matter how much freedom you surrender, you never will have 100 percent security. Never. The “war on terror” will be endless. It is the greatest device in U.S. history, for taking away your privacy and your freedom. The government can do anything it wishes in the name of fighting terror. No limits.

And as for you making choices, forget it. Everything’s secret, so how can you make any choices? The government will make your choices for you.

And by the way, the government will use drones to kill American citizens, without trial. That’s another choice the government made for you.

On Thursday, Rep. Mike Rogers (R) of Michigan, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said the telephone metadata program had thwarted a terrorist attack within the past few years.

Translation: A Congressman said it, so it must be true.

But, wait. Just one attack thwarted? In the past few years??

Last year alone, Chicago alone had 506 murders. And the government tracked all of our phone calls to prevent one terrorist attack? Exactly how much freedom did we surrender, and what did we get for it? Don’t ask. It’s a secret.

But, from whom is it a secret, and why?

Is it a secret from terrorists, who surely must realize their phone calls not only would be tracked, but bugged? I mean, if you were a terrorist, wouldn’t you be careful about your phone calls? Wouldn’t you use pre-paid phones, switch phones, use coded Twitter messages, Facebook messages, etc.? That’s pretty basic stuff, isn’t it?

Even a half witted terrorist wouldn’t be caught by “secret” phone data mining (which may be why only one attack was prevented in the past few years.) So from whom was this kept secret?

Answer: Secret from us loyal Americans. And now that it’s no longer a secret, will it be stopped? No, it will be increased. There always, always, always will be a reason for more secret intrusions on our freedoms.

The war on terror is as big a fake as is the war on drugs. Never ending, always growing, with minimal benefit. Monster organizations – the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, aided by the President, the Congress and the courts – thousands of people, millions of hours, billions of dollars, all devoted to creating the bogeyman of rampant terror, so to constrain us.

Despite popular spy movies, secrecy is overrated. Even with a direct warning from the Russians, stealing our freedoms didn’t prevent those amateurish kids, those Boston bombers, from killing 3 people and injuring lots more. Our giant anti-terror apparatus works mainly to strengthen the government’s power over us.

Perhaps, many more plots secretly were thwarted, but we’ll never know. They are secret. We must trust that the federal government is judicious with its use of private data – something like the government being judicious with private census data, when it took the freedoms of Japanese Americans.

But there is one bit of “terrorism” the U.S. comes down on, hard: Revealing the secrets of the U.S. government.

Washington Times
GOP’s Peter King: NSA leaker Edward Snowden must be extradited, prosecuted

Leading Republicans in the House have called for the extradition of the man at the heart of the National Security Agency information scandal, Edward Snowden, who is in Hong Kong.

“If Edward Snowden did in fact leak the NSA data as he claims, the United States government must prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law and begin extradition proceedings at the earliest date,” said Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee, in The Guardian, a British paper. “This is a matter of extraordinary consequence to American intelligence.”

The government can’t give us 100 percent security. Nor can the government give us 100 percent privacy. But the government will crack down on anyone who dents its 100 percent secrecy. For the government, that is the ultimate crime.

It’s of “extraordinary consequence” that the terrorists suddenly have “learned” to not make repeated phone calls to other terrorists, always using the same two phones (What a revelation that must be to terrorists!)

Or is it of extraordinary consequence that once again, the federal government has been found to be deceiving the very citizens it is supposed to protect, and then justifying it with the bogeyman of terror.

President Obama wants to frame the discussion as a tradeoff: Surrender your freedoms or surrender your safety. It’s the same appeal to fear – the same false tradeoff – every dictator in world history has used. The purpose is not to protect the populace but to dominate the populace.

With the next terrorist attack (and there always will be another), the government will institute even more draconian – and secret – laws, taking away more of our freedoms. Then more and more and more.

There never will be a time when we are told things are safe enough. Always, there will be a new danger. To protect us, the government walls us in. With each new secret threat, real or imagined, the walls are pressed in closer and closer, restricting our freedom ever more, crushing us.

Note to government: Don’t tell us you may be able to protect us via some secret means. Tell us exactly what the dangers really are, and tell us what you want to do. We’ll determine whether the “protection” is worth the cost. We can decide how cramped our jail cell will be.

Meanwhile, every day, guns kill more Americans than terrorists have killed in the past 10 years. Of course, that is not an “extraordinary consequence,” so no government action is needed.

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. Click here
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%

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

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:
1. Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
2. Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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 ultimately leads to civil disorder.
●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.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive.
=====================================================================

I subscribe to the Daily Bell, a very good online paper, which about itself says,

Welcome to The Daily Bell – home of the Internet Reformation and of Free-Market Thinking.

I’m Anthony Wile, and I work hard – together with my team of advisors, writers and editors – to bring you cutting edge, freedom-oriented, sociopolitical and economic analysis and solutions.

. . . we don’t believe in the massive solutions that are evidently and obviously run by a handful of elitist individuals for their own benefit rather than for yours or mine. We believe “smaller is better” – and that the most successful and livable societies offer people the ability to influence their communities in a positive way at a local level.

Ah, yes, the “smaller is better” slogan as in “America would be better if it were smaller in size?” No? Not that one? How about, “America would be better if its people had less (a smaller supply of) money? No? What about a smaller oil supply? Smaller research & development? Smaller highway system? Smaller rivers? Smaller mountains?

Funny, how when all your thinking begins with a little slogan, your thinking becomes little, and you find all those exceptions to your fixed beliefs — which brings me to an article that appeared in The Daily Bell, today”

The Daily Bell
Krugman Misses the Point
By Anthony Wile

Paul Krugman recently published a column called “The Unbearable Lightness of Being Right.” In it, he once again explains failures of so-called “austerity” and defends his own perspective, which is thoroughly Keynesian.

Now, within the context of free-market economics, we’ve long been anti-austerity but not for the reasons that Krugman advances. Krugman believes that austerity is wrong because governments ought to print lots of money from nothing. This is basically a Keynesian point of view and it is one he advances relentlessly.

Not sure to what Wile objects, the “lots of money” or the “from nothing.” America is big (not small) and big countries need “lots of money” to grow, or even to survive, and yes, a Monetarily Sovereign government creates money from nothing.

So what’s the problem other than “print lots of money from nothing,” though necessary, sounds oh, so reckless to the uninformed?

We believe austerity is a wrong approach from a theoretical standpoint because it is one that uses government to correct government excesses.

Wile doesn’t define “government excesses,” but whatever they may be, they surely are different for a monetarily non-sovereign government, which can spend beyond its means, vs. a Monetarily Sovereign government, which having no “means,” never can spend beyond it.

This is not to say that shrinking government is bad.

Nor does it say that shrinking government is good. But yes, he believes “smaller is better,” so a smaller government must be good. After all, that is his slogan, and the world must fit within it.

But it ought to be accomplished with a broader agenda in mind, one that acknowledges the larger failures of regulatory democracy generally.

Here we get to an important point. Never, and I mean NEVER, does Wile acknowledge the ongoing, horrific failures of austerity, everywhere in the world it has been tried.

Every depression in U.S. history has come on the heels of austerity. The Great Depression was caused by austerity, then worsened by more austerity.

The recession following Bill Clinton’s reign was caused by Clinton’s austerity. And please don’t even ask about the euro nations and their austerity.

Admittedly, saying austerity is “wrong” or “isn’t wrong” is like saying bunting in baseball is wrong.” It depends on the circumstance.

For monetarily non-sovereign governments (the euro nations, the American states, counties and cities), austerity may be “right” to the degree it’s necessary.

These governments cannot create their sovereign currency, simply because they don’t have a sovereign currency, so eventually they can run short of money. Under that circumstance, they may need austerity, heaven help them.

For a Monetarily Sovereign government (the U.S., Canada, UK, Australia, Japan, China), austerity is “wrong,” always has been “wrong” and always will be “wrong.”

Austerity removes money from an economy which by definition (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending – Net Imports) is recessive.

Further, a Monetarily Sovereign government, having the unlimited ability to create its sovereign currency, has only one reason to adopt austerity: An inflation that could be controlled otherwise.

Of course, for a Monetarily Sovereign government, there is no such thing as an inflation that could not be controlled otherwise, because such a government not only can control its money supply, but also can control its money’s value. That is what being “sovereign” over your currency means.

Thus, for a Monetarily Sovereign government, austerity always serves only to widen the gap between the rich and the rest.

Sadly, Anthony Wile, not understanding the many differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, writes an article that in essence says “bunting always (or never) is wrong.”

Those who don’t understand those differences do not understand baseball or economics and surely should not comment on either.

Even if government gets it right, it will eventually get it wrong. Austerity policies merely substitute one kind of official action for another.

Here, “austerity is seen to be neutral. Never mind that austerity always makes the poor and middle suffer. . To Wile, it’s just “one kind of official action,” maybe something like changing the design of the flag.

Krugman acknowledges none of this. He is focused, at least most recently, on a study provided by two Harvard economists whose research has come into question.

“Come into question” is Wile’s euphemism for “disgraceful bit of misleading research, that omitted all negative results and didn’t consider the fundamental differences between government financing systems.”

Krugman and others like him always start with the idea that SOME government spending is necessary and justified. The problem is always HOW MUCH. And in Krugman’s case it is even worse. He is determined to cure old spending with even more new spending.

What can one say about this inanity? Does Wile mean that SOME government spending is not necessary?? Does he mean the problem is not HOW MUCH? And what the heck does he mean by “cure old spending”?

And because of the Reinhardt Rogoff reversal, he believes his arguments are justified . . .

Well, Reinhardt Rogoff sure didn’t overturn Krugman’s position.

He is waiting for those who have endorsed austerity to repent, or at least receive additional public condemnation.

So am I, but since the austerians are bribed by the super rich, that won’t happen until the populace gets so fed up with austerity-caused destitution, they begin to drag out the Guillotines.

Here’s more:

Overall, it’s hard to think of any previous episode in in the history of economic thought in which we had as thorough a showdown between opposing views, and as thorough a collapse, practical and intellectual, of one side of the argument.

And yet nothing changes. Not only don’t the policies change; by and large even the people don’t change. Reinhart and Rogoff may get a bit fewer high-profile invites, as will Alesina and Ardagna; but Bowles and Simpson are still touring, the same people at the BIS and the OECD are still issuing dire warnings about the dangers of easy money, George Osborne is still making pronouncements, Paul Ryan is still the intellectual leader of his party.

Krugman can’t help himself. Even when addressing an economic issue, he ends up politicizing it. He is at heart a political animal, whose economic principles revolve around statism and support big government nostrums. Of course, he would not be writing for the big-government New York Times if he supported anything else.

Wile says Krugman is wrong because he’s political, as though austerity were not political.

Krugman is certainly correct about austerity, but not for the reasons he believes. Forced confiscation always reduces prosperity as price-fixing must do, by introducing distortions into the marketplace.

No, it’s not the “distortions” that are the problem. It’s the “forced confiscation.” Money and livelihoods are being stolen from the masses. Calling austerity a “distortion” is like calling smallpox a health “distortion.”

Krugman hopes for an apology, and for an admission by opponents that their viewpoints have been supported by a research paper with computational flaws. This perspective almost entirely misses the point.

Actually, Krugman hopes, not for an apology, but rather for a realization that austerity is and always has been a death sentence for an economy, and serves only to make the lower and middle classes sink deeper and deeper into misery, while the rich celebrate.

Gee, Mr. Wile. I feel the same way.

Don’t 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. Click here
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%

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

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:
1. Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
2. Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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 ultimately leads to civil disorder.
●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.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive.
=====================================================================

News about federal finance often is designed to confuse and mislead you.

This is part of the misinformation / disinformation process funded by the wealthy and enacted by the media and the political establishment. The purpose: To widen the gap between the rich and the rest and to make you assist in your own financial suicide.

Here is an example: The following excerpts describe the federal government’s sale of the General Motors stock it purchased to save the company.

Following each paragraph, we show the true meaning of what is happening.

Treasury prices GM stock sale at $34.41/share
6/6/13

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Treasury said on Thursday it was selling 30 million shares of General Motors Co (GM.N) at $34.41 each, raising roughly $1.03 billion as part of its ongoing effort to exit from the bailed-out company and reduce losses to taxpayers.

Here is the true meaning of the above paragraph:
The U.S. Treasury said on Thursday it was selling 30 million shares of General Motors Co (GM.N) at $34.41 each, taxing the economy roughly $1.03 billion as part of its ongoing effort to exit from the bailed-out company and increase losses to taxpayers.

The public offering, which coincided with GM’s re-entry to the Standard & Poor’s 500 index, will take the amount recouped for U.S. taxpayers so far to $32.53 billion.

Translation: The public offering, which coincided with GM’s re-entry to the Standard & Poor’s 500 index, will take the amount taken from U.S. taxpayers so far to $32.53 billion.

With the sale, Treasury will still hold 189.2 million shares. It has said that it plans to completely exit the holding by April 2014. It would have to sell the shares at an average price of $89.69 each to spare taxpayers from any loss.

Translation: With the sale, Treasury will still hold 189.2 million shares. It has said that it plans to completely exit the holding by April 2014. It would have to sell the shares at an average price of $89.69 each to assure taxpayers a $17 billion loss.

In summary: Unlike state and local governments (and unlike euro governments) the U.S. government is Monetarily Sovereign. It creates its sovereign currency, the dollar, at will, simply by paying bills.

The U.S. government neither needs nor uses tax dollars to pay its bills.

Dollars sent to the federal government disappear from the economy’s money supply. Rather than benefiting taxpayers, a reduced money supply impoverishes the entire private sector.

When the government sells stock to the private sector, dollars flow from the private sector to the government. This is identical to what happens when you pay taxes.

Dollars flowing from the private sector to the government = private sector loss.
Dollars flowing from the government to the private sector = private sector gain.

The only two activities that benefit taxpayers are federal tax reductions and/or federal spending increases, both of which add dollars to the private sector.

And that is something you won’t learn from your morning newspaper.

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. Click here
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%

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

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:
1. Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
2. Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY