–Fairness, competition and why we despise the poor

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.
======================================================================================================================================================================================

The August 2012 issue of Nature Magazine contained an article that partly bears on the subjects of fairness, competition and why we despise the poor. Here are a few excerpts:

Human responses to unfairness with primary rewards and their biological limits
Nicholas D. Wright, Karen Hodgson, Stephen M. Fleming, Mkael Symmonds, Marc Guitart-Masip & Raymond J. Dolan

In humans fairness has been studied extensively using games played for money. In the Ultimatum Game (UG) one player (the Proposer) is given an endowment (e.g. £10) and proposes a division (e.g. keep £6/offer £4) to a second player (the Responder), who then accepts (both get the proposed split) or rejects (both get nothing) the offer.

Conclusion: In the UG, humans typically reject low, “unfair” offers — even at a cost to themselves. Offers below 20% are rejected about half the time.

I believe the conclusion is flawed, because it generalizes without considering specific examples. Imagine the following examples:

1. You stand in line at a restaurant. Fifteen people are ahead of you and the maitre de has told you you’ll be seated in half an hour. A stranger butts into the line ahead of you. You’re angry. Perhaps an argument ensues. Possibly even a fight. Why?

2. You stand in that same line. A stranger butts into the line behind you. Are you angry? Probably not. Why not?

3. You stand in that same line. A dear friend comes up to you, and you gladly let him precede you, while the people behind you are irate. You aren’t angry at the friend, but may be angry at the people behind you, who are angry. Why?

4. You stand in that same line. A politician walks to the front and immediately is seated. Are you angry? Why?

The list can go on and on, with circumstances altering how you feel. Why the differences? Fairness? Perhaps, yet the butt-in was as unfair behind you as ahead of you.

Competition? Perhaps. The butt-in allowed someone to get ahead of you — to “beat” you. Yet, that “beating” cost you only two minutes — not enough to cause any strong sense of emotion you may feel. And you actually invited a butt-in by a friend.

So, what is going on here?

Recently, I had a long conversation with a dear friend. For many years, she has worked in human resources departments of major corporations. She feels that the many forms of federal financial support for the poor lead to sloth.

She said that based on her experience, a large (but unknown) percentage of the people who get fired actually want to be fired, so they can get poverty benefits without having to work.

In her view, a great many people are malingerers, who readily take unfair advantage of the system. She is angry at those people. She feels that if the social safety nets were removed, or at least reduced, more people would be willing to work — even at unpleasant jobs and for low wages.

My dear friend is a decent human being, who unfortunately has bought into the myth perpetrated by the rich, that in essence, the bad traits of poor people cause their misfortune.

Why does she feel that way, and how did the rich manage to brainwash the middle- and lower-income groups into hatred, which even includes self-hatred?

In above examples #1, #2 and #3, the key is stranger vs. friend and in front of you vs. behind you. We are social, tribal animals.

Evolution has programmed us to fight an outsider who beats us in any competition, but to support members of the tribe, and especially support those closest to us — family members, for instance.

Example #4 gives an example of a leader receiving preferential treatment. As a tribal animal, we are programmed to follow leaders, but we still may be angered, depending on how we feel about the leader’s importance, or about the leader as a person.

A Chicagoan may be far more angry at an alderman jumping the line than at the President of the United States receiving preferential treatment.

Putting everything together, this is my conclusion: The rich have bribed the politicians and the media, to dehumanize, and make us despise, the poor.

Consider the lead stories on last night’s 10 o’clock news: Crime and murder, especially in poorer neighborhoods. Night after night after night.

We have been brainwashed by incessant news stories of lawlessnes by poor people, to accept the notion that poor people inherently are evil. Even poor people feel that way about other poor people.

Idaho Statesman
Does Idaho welfare really keep adults from working?
By Audrey Dutton

The Cato Institute argued that six of Idaho’s welfare programs, including federal programs the state administers, are keeping Idahoans out of the workforce.

The libertarian think tank placed a value of more than $17,000 on welfare benefits for a single mother with two children. Cato put that on par with a job that pays about $11,000, supplemented by tax credits.

The organization — an opponent of taxpayer-funded welfare — said Idaho and federal lawmakers should cut benefits or better enforce work requirements.

The Cato Institute did not answer questions from the Statesman about whether its analysis considered welfare recipients’ ability to work.

We won’t discuss the merits of an $11,000 job (one step above slavery), nor will we respond to glib comments that a lousy job is better than no job at all. (It isn’t.)

The Cato Institute is paid by the rich to draw an ugly picture of impoverished people, a picture that through relentless repetition, has become “truth.”

Being evil, poor people are ascribed with all manner of bad traits. In addition to being criminals, they are thought to be immoral, lazy, cheating, lying, stupid (though crafty), filthy and satisfied to live in poverty, so long as work is not required.

Whatever bad happens to poor persons is thought to be a well-deserved result of their own actions or inactions. And worse, doing something beneficial for poor people is felt to perpetuate their nefarious actions.

So, when the right-wing incessantly talks about “small governement” (their euphemism for cutting food stamps, Aid to Dependent Children, free school meals, housing assistance and above all, free medical care, aka Obamacare and even retirement, i.e. Social Security), the middle- and lower-income groups nod dumbly in assent.

America has been brainwashed into despising the poor, and we are all-too-ready to cut any benefits to those worthless non-humans, especially since, as the Cato institute wrongly claims, these benefits are funded by us taxpayers.

And that is the other part of the story — the competition part. Not only do we need someone to live below us (so we can win the competition), but we resent a stranger surviving by using our assets.

The false belief that federal benefits are paid for by federal taxes, has been fostered by the rich, who own the media and who bribe the politicians. (Note to all: Federal taxes do not pay for federal spending.)

And why do the rich do this? You know the answer: To widen the gap between the rich and the rest. It is the fundamental, all-consuming motivation of the rich. It is why a billionaire might keep working.

In summary, we are being, and have been, brainwashed to despise the poor. This belief gives us permission to accept social benefits being cut. And then, it is but a small step toward believing our own benefits should be cut.

The rich have convinced us to be complicit in our own misfortune.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

====================================================================================================================================================
Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Send every American citizen an annual check for $5,000 or give every state $5,000 per capita (Click here)
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
8. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here)

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

THE RECESSION CLOCK

As the lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the lines rise.

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Hurray, we eliminated Obamacare!! So . . . now what?

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

Extreme, right-wing nuttiness continues unabated:

Conservative groups plan to target Republican lawmakers over Obamacare in their own districts
Chris Moody, Yahoo! News– 8/23/13

A conservative advocacy group that recently launched a series of online political ads that call Republicans “chickens” for what the group considers lackluster efforts to defund the Affordable Care Act are planning to hold events near lawmakers’ district offices in the next week.

Activists from an organization called For America Inc. plan to join Tea Party Patriots on a five-state “Exempt America Tour” urging GOP lawmakers to refuse to support any government-spending bill unless it defunds the health care law known as Obamacare.

I remember using the epithet “chicken” back in the 6th grade. What kind of people still use that term?

Anyway, the For America, Inc. group apparently feels it’s macho brave to shut down the U.S. government — or else. It’s something like what an infant does when he lies on his back, kicks his feet, and screams, until he gets his way.

Never mind the hardships falling on the people who rely on federal spending (virtually all of us), and never mind the economic recovery that will disappear without federal spending. The important thing is to destroy all things Obama. That is the right-wing, common sense way to run a government.

And, I almost hate to mention this, but what is the right-wing plan for health care insurance? Oh, there is none? Just, do without?

Wait, here is the For America, Inc. “plan”:

ForAmerica’s mission is to reinvigorate the American people with the principles of American exceptionalism: personal freedom, personal responsibility, a commitment to Judeo-Christian values, and a strong national defense.

We believe in limited government with Constitutionally-enumerated powers only. We believe that the size of the federal government should be dramatically reduced and that government’s regulatory stranglehold on the free enterprise system should be lifted. We believe in freedom.

Translation: “We want less government spending on Social Security, health care, education, roads and bridges, medical research, bank deposit insurance, bank regulation, stock market regulation, food safety regulation, drug safety regulation, air and water quality regulation, aid to the poor — really everything you can think of, except the military.

“We are self-sufficient dudes. So long as we have our semi-automatic guns, we want less government help for our fellow Americans, and more spending on a strong army. Hasn’t that always worked, everywhere in the world?

“And once we get rid of Obamacare, we’ll just let you fend for yourself. You’ll be free — free to be poor, free to be sick and uneducated, free to eat tainted food, take tainted medicine, drink tainted water and breathe polluted air, free to drive on unpaved roads over crumbling bridges, free to take orders from the rich, while you live in a cardboard box under a bridge.

“You’ll have religious freedom, too, so long as it’s Judeo-Christian, not Baha’i, Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Shinto, Sikhism or any of those other religions we don’t like (and frankly, we aren’t all that sure about Jews and Mormons).

“Strong army; weak economy. Our model is North Korea. That Kim Jong-il, he knows how to run a country.

“And that’s exactly how we’ll do it.”

So here we are in America, caught between the Democrats’ right-wing incompetence and the Republicans’ extreme right-wing nuttiness. Once Obamacare is gone, then what?

Michele Bachmann??

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

As the lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the lines rise.

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Welcome to slavery in America. Lincoln never imagined this.

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

BACKGROUND
As you’ve seen in previous articles (for instance, No, it’s not your imagination. The upper 1% really are screwing you more. Saturday, Jul 7 20120) the GINI ratio is a calculation of the gap between the richest and the rest. The higher the number, the greater the gap. Every year the number is higher; every year the gap is greater:

Monetary Sovereignty

The above-referenced article listed “Ten suggestions (for the upper 1%) about how to screw the lower 99% even more, and increase the income gap.” Here is a quick outline of the “10 Suggestions.” Read the article itself for more details:

1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax.
2. To “save” Social Security, claim it’s insolvent, reduce benefits and increase the starting age and tax benefits.
3. To “save” Medicare, claim it’s insolvent, and reduce payments to doctors, hospitals and other health care providers.
4. Cut government employment and payments to government suppliers.
5. “Broaden” the income tax base. Include more people in the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT).
6. To reduce “big government” cut food stamps, unemployment compensation, Medicaid, aid to education, job training and all other federal aid programs.
7. Cut financial assistance to the states.
8. Spread the myth that the U.S. government is insolvent, like Greece, and that federal taxes and borrowing pay for federal spending.
9. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts, bail them out when their investments go sour and never accuse a banker of criminal activity.
10. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court to maximize the political power of the rich.

TWO MORE METHODS
With 10 simple ways to screw the average American, you would think the super-rich would be satisfied. But no, here are 11th and a 12th methods, countenanced by the bribed politicians:

I. Replace full-time, experienced workers with part time, inexperienced workers at much lower salaries.

naked capitalism
Barbara Garson: How to Become a Part-Time Worker Without Really Trying

Big companies squeeze down even more on workers by turning what were once full-time jobs into part-time positions to avoid providing benefits and to push pay even lower. 21% of the jobs lost during the Great Recession were low wage, meaning they paid $13.83 an hour or less. But 58% of the jobs regained fall into that category.

Employers have used the downturn to dump entire departments and to reorganize themselves so that the same work, the same jobs, requiring the same skills, would henceforth, in good times and bad, be done by contingent workers. During the course of the Great Recession corporate profits went up by 25%-30%, while wages as a share of national income fell to their lowest point since that number began to be recorded after World War II.

Not only are salaries lower for part time workers, but these poor souls receive no benefits. They cannot afford health care or health care insurance. But even the middle class is under huge financial pressure from increasing health care and health insurance costs.

II. Make sure college, the source of hope for financial growth, is unaffordable:

Bloomberg
College Costs Reaching a Breaking Point?
By Karen Weise

Standard & Poor describes a spiraling problem for colleges: As they raise tuition, more families need aid to afford school. Students take out more debt. Colleges are increasingly directing their aid to wealthier families—who need it least.

And uniquely among all debts in America, student debt is not dischargeable via bankruptcy. If you owe money to the federal government (the one lender in America that creates its own money, so should not ask for repayment), you essentially are locked into a debtor’s prison of unaffordable, unending debt draining away your ability to grow financially.

WELCOME TO SLAVERY
Experienced, full-time workers are being replaced with inexperienced, part-time workers, at lower salaries and no benefits. Meanwhile, working class Americans are denied college — their one path to financial security — by a combination of unaffordable tuitions and unaffordable college loans.

The rich have created a brilliant, 12-part plan. It will force you, your children and your children’s children to spend your lives working harder and harder for less and less, completely at the mercy of the rich.

If you accept the twin myths that the federal government “can’t afford” paying benefits, and that federal spending causes inflation, then welcome to slavery in America. Lincoln never imagined this.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

As the lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the lines rise.

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Does federal deficit spending lift corporate profitability?

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

Often, I receive notes from folks on the right, who hating government and professing macho self-sufficiency, tell me government doesn’t create anything or do anything or benefit anything, and that all the benefits come from the hard work of private people and private companies.

In one sense, these folks are correct, as everything ultimately does come from people (so far, until the machines take over ala “Terminator”), but diminishing the vital role of government seems especially ignorant of fact.

I won’t get into the myriad scientific, environmental and social initiatives funded by the federal government. To deny them is to be deliberately obtuse.

Rather, I’ll allow those on the right to stew over the following graph:

Monetary Sovereignty

The red line shows annual changes in federal deficit spending. The blue line shows annual changes in corporate profitability.

There are many causes for corporate profitability and unprofitability, and deficit spending is just one of them, so the lines are not perfectly in parallel — but pretty close for economics, a science in which every effect has multiple causes.

So, unless one wishes to believe that corporate profitability somehow stimulates federal deficit spending, or that the whole thing is one giant coincidence, and not cause-and-effect, we are left with the fact that federal deficits increase corporate profits.

This makes logical sense, if for no other reason than deficits pump dollars into the economy, and dollars are what fund work. Corporations are part of the “private people and private companies” that ultimately accomplish everything.

[You may believe that not only is government spending useless, but corporate profits are equally useless, in which case please return to chipping your stone ax prior to skinning a mastodon.]

During recessions, when the federal government and the public temporarily remember the need for deficit spending, corporate profits actually rise.

But after the recessions end, when the government and the public forget what cured those recessions, and “stimulus” becomes a bad word, the government cuts deficit spending, and corporate profit growth begins to fall — as is happening, now.

And the whole ridiculous charade begins anew.

Now, yet again the public has turned against what lifted us from the last recession and we yet again are in the deficit cutting mode, and we yet again head for recession, and corporate profit growth yet again is falling.

Yet again and yet again and yet again and yet again — learning nothing from yesterday.

Isn’t it amazing how the world’s most intelligent species can be so ignorant?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

As the lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the lines rise.

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: