Ten Steps to Prosperity: Step 2. Federally funded Medicare — Parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

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

It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

If you were to select the single best measure of a nation’s greatness, you would be hard-pressed to find one better than the healthcare of its people.

Background:

As we learned previously, our Monetarily Sovereign nation never can run low on its own sovereign currency, the U.S. dollar, and also has the unlimited ability to determine the value of the dollar (i.e. prevent inflation).

Further, federal deficits build the economy, while federal surpluses or deficit reductions (i.e. “austerity”) weaken the economy. Given those facts, what should the federal government do. More generally: What is the purpose of government?

The fundamental purpose of any government is to enhance the wellbeing of its people — all its people — rich and poor, old and young, strong and weak.

In this series describing the Ten Steps to Prosperity, we suggested eliminating FICA as the first Step. For the second Step, we suggest:

Step 2: Federally funded Medicare — Parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

Fortunately, most of the hard work is done. We already know how to do Medicare. We have encountered and addressed all the functional difficulties. No operational mysteries remain.

We now need to do just four things:

Change the minimum age of recipients to zero
Change Part D to a federally funded program, rather than a private insurance funded program.
Expand Medicare benefits to include even those benefits now covered by private Supplementary insurance.
Fund long-term care insurance.

Image result for long term care

The purpose is to make affordability a non-issue. There is no moral justification for the richer being able to afford better healthcare than the poorer. Under American law, all people are to be treated equally.

A courtroom judge who habitually gives better outcomes to rich claimants and rich defendants is in violation of the law. Similarly, a police officer, a firefighter, a public librarian, should not offer better treatment and service to the rich.

Yes, of course, it happens. But, it’s illegal and more importantly, it’s immoral.

Further, there is no economic justification for some Americans having no healthcare insurance or incomplete healthcare insurance. Poor health leads to costly absences and poor work performance from school and from work. In short, sick students and sick employees do not do well.

Simply improving American health would improve education, and improve business productivity and efficiency.

There is not a single, logical reason why the U.S. federal government does not underwrite healthcare for all. As Americans we all deserve it; as people we all need it. Our businesses would benefit from it. And our Monetarily Sovereign federal government can afford it.

The U.S. federal government does not keep dollars on hand to pay bills. Instead, it creates dollars, ad hoc, by paying bills.

Funding “Medicare for all” would cost the federal government nothing.

Why? Because after paying for “Medicare for all,” the federal government would still own exactly the same number of dollars as it owned before it paid. Spending is cost-free to a Monetarily Sovereign govenment.

By contrast, today, our private sector, i.e our economy, absorbs a huge cost burden of healthcare.

In an earlier post, we described H.R. 676, Medicare for All. Here are some excerpts from that post:

Look around the world, and you will see the “best” nations providing the best health care and the “worst” nations providing the worst health care.

The U.S. Declaration of Independence says, “. . . [all men] are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Surely, good health is part of that trio.

Because private healthcare insurers do not provide affordable coverage to the broad populace, Medicare and Medicaid were great improvements. But the problem of significant uninsured and underinsured remains.

For a nation that views itself as the world’s leader in most things, this is unacceptable.

Obamacare, aka “Romneycare,” was an attempt to include more people, but it is a complex, convoluted, inefficient program no one fully understands, and it still leaves many uninsured.

For years, I have favored providing full Medicare for everyone — a Medicare coverage so complete that neither Medicaid nor supplemental policies would be necessary.

And such a bill exists — almost. It is H.R. 676, Medicare for All:
“To provide for comprehensive health insurance coverage for all United States residents, improved health care delivery, and for other purposes.”

Some features of the bill:

All individuals residing in the United States (including any territory of the United States) are covered under the Medicare For All Program entitling them to a universal, best quality standard of care

The health care benefits under this Act cover all medically necessary services, including at least the following:
(1) Primary care and prevention.
(2) Approved dietary and nutritional therapies.
(3) Inpatient care.
(4) Outpatient care.
(5) Emergency care.
(6) Prescription drugs.
(7) Durable medical equipment.
(8) Long-term care.
(9) Palliative care.
(10) Mental health services.
(11) The full scope of dental services, services, including periodontics, oral surgery, and endodontics, but not including cosmetic dentistry.
(12) Substance abuse treatment services.
(13) Chiropractic services, not including electrical stimulation.
(14) Basic vision care and vision correction (other than laser vision correction for cosmetic purposes).
(15) Hearing services, including coverage of hearing aids.
(16) Podiatric care.

No deductibles, copayments, coinsurance, or other cost-sharing shall be imposed with respect to covered benefits.

The Program shall pay physicians, dentists, doctors of osteopathy, pharmacists, psychologists, chiropractors, doctors of optometry, nurse practitioners, nurse midwives, physicians’ assistants, and other advanced practice clinicians.

Medicare for All not only would cover everyone, but by eliminating deductibles, co-payments and coinsurance, it eliminates the need to shop around for additional coverages, or even to worry about which form of Medicare to acquire.

Finally, “Medicare for All” simplifies America’s healthcare. In addition to eliminating the “middleman” (the healthcare insurance agencies) there would be:

No need for a complex, convoluted, expensive supplementary plan like ACA (Obamacare)
No need for Medicaid
No need for the massive medical and long-term care functions of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
No need for expensive, long-term care insurance policies.

It would be the simplest possible plan: Everyone would receive care according to their needs. Period.

In short, we currently have a system in which there is a high cost to the public, for mediocre or no service (orange colored states) to a significant percentage of Americans .

We should replace it with a system in which there is no cost to anyone, for far better service to all Americans: Federally funded, comprehensive Medicare — Parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

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 The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ANNUAL ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (Social Security for All) (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Guaranteed Income)) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefitting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Bill Black’s take on why the Dems lost

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

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

I respect and admire Professor Bill Black, which is why I am pleased by his recent article paralleling much of November 12th’s post: The one, very simple reason why Hillary lost.

Unfortunately, Black’s article misses one important point, which I will discuss.

Here are some excerpts from Black’s article:

Hillary Clinton, during the closing 40 days of her campaign, showcased repeatedly her promise to assault the working class with continuous austerity.

The assault on the working class via austerity was such a core belief of the New Democrats that their candidate highlighted that assault even as the polls showed massive, intense rejection of her candidacy by the white working class.

These were the people who enthusiastically crowded Trump’s speeches. As we said on November 12,

“They were the Democratic base, though they didn’t realize it, and Trump was telling them what they wanted to hear.”

Black continued:

It is morally wrong, economically illiterate, and politically suicidal for the New Democrats to continue to assault the working class via austerity, “free trade” (sic) deals, and financial deregulation.

The only thing worse is to then insult the working class for reacting “badly” to being pummeled for decades by the Party that once defined itself as the party of working people.

We’ll never know how differently the politics would have played if Obama, instead of systematically echoing and giving credibility to all the arguments of the people who want to destroy him, had actually stood up for a different economic philosophy.

But we do know how his actual strategy has worked, and it hasn’t been a success.

We had said:

“The new Democrats forgot about their base. The Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton Democrats were not Democrats at all. They were Republicans in Democratic clothing.

“They were conservatives.

“They were the Bill Clinton who ran a federal surplus, thereby guaranteeing a recession that cost his base their jobs, and afterward asked for, and received $200,000 per speech.

“They were the Barack Obama who wanted a “Grand Bargain,” which included cuts to Social Security and Medicare and cuts to the overall budget, all of which would impact the working class far more than the idle rich, thereby widening the Gap between the rich and the rest.

“They were the Barack Obama who refused to prosecute, and still refuses to prosecute, any of the wealthy banksters who caused the Great Recession that took the homes, jobs, and savings from the Democratic base.”

The Democratic liberal base, composed of ordinary, working class, compassionate Americans, is far, far larger than is the Republican conservative base of the rich, the bigots, and the religious extremists.

This massive majority would have voted for an “LBJ” Hillary, but instead were offered an “Obama” Hillary

Bill Black said:

Ever since the birth of the New Democrats, their adherents have embraced austerity.

This act of mutual economic and political self-destruction has become so core to their identity that Hillary unhesitatingly made it one her most important closing pitches during the last 40 days of her campaign against Trump.

At the very moment when her pollsters were warning her that she could lose due to working class hostility, she chose to showcase her hostility to the working class by promising to inflict eight more years of austerity on them.

Despite intense criticism from progressives of her austerity threats, Paul Krugman never urged her publicly to promise to end austerity’s assault on the working class.

Similarly, no one on her official campaign team had the courage and strength to tell her to stop and reverse her position.

A November 14, 2016 Krugman column revealed the hold his past dogmas still had on him.

Eight years ago, as the world was plunging into financial crisis, I argued that we’d entered an economic realm in which “virtue is vice, caution is risky, and prudence is folly.”

Specifically, we’d stumbled into a situation in which bigger deficits and higher inflation were good things, not bad. And we’re still in that situation — not as strongly as we were, but we could still very much use more deficit spending.

Many economists have known this all along. But they have been ignored, partly because much of the political establishment has been obsessed with the evils of debt, partly because Republicans have been against anything the Obama administration proposes.

Krugman still does not understand sovereign money. A budget deficit for a government with a sovereign currency is not a moral issue. Budget surpluses are not a “virtue” and deficits are not a “vice.”

The economic issue is strictly pragmatic – what size budget deficit or surplus is best for the overall economy?

Bernie Sanders’ economic stimulus proposals were far superior to (Clinton’s) proposals.

The 2009 fiscal stimulus was far too small; the federal government had made a dire mistake in moving toward austerity in 2010 rather than increasing substantially the size of the stimulus package.

Krugman was out to defeat Bernie’s candidacy for the nomination. Had Bernie won that nomination he would now be President-elect.

Sanders was the one candidate for the nomination that embodied what Krugman said the Democratic Party desperately needed – ending the hold of “the political establishment obsessed with the evils of debt.”

Krugman has been unable yet to summon the integrity and courage to admit how badly he served the Nation and the millions of Americans that rejected that “political establishment.”

Amen, brother.

Except . . . Except, let’s not be too naive about Sanders. He didn’t tell the truth, either. In fact, he broadcast The Big Lie.

His signature “Medicare for All” proposal was to be “paid for” by taxes. He campaigned on the “the success of the Affordable Care Act,” that Rube Goldbergian plan that forces some Americans to pay the medical bills of other Americans.

Despite having Professor Stephanie Kelton on his team, and therefore understanding the truth, Sanders did not have the courage to explain why federal deficits are absolutely necessary for economic growth.

Nor did he have the courage to explain why federal taxes do not fund federal spending. He said:

GETTING HEALTH CARE SPENDING UNDER CONTROL
We outspend all other countries on the planet and our medical spending continues to grow faster than the rate of inflation. Creating a single, public insurance system will go a long way towards getting health care spending under control.

Bernie tacitly claimed that spending was a problem, that need to get “under control,” when in fact, more federal deficit spending benefits the entire economy.

When dollars are pumped into the economy (by paying doctors, hospitals and pharmaceutical companies) the economy is stimulated. Businesses that serve doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies prosper and hire more employees, whose increased income and spending benefits other businesses and employees.

That is how economies grow.

Sanders did not have the courage to say it. Instead, he perpetuated the myth of “unsustainable” deficits just as much as the Republicans did.

See for yourself. This was what Sanders said about his Medicare for All plan:

THE PLAN WOULD BE FULLY PAID FOR BY:

A 6.2 percent income-based health care premium paid by employers.

A 2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households.

Progressive income tax rates.

Taxing capital gains and dividends the same as income from work.

Limit tax deductions for rich.

The Responsible Estate Tax.

Savings from health tax expenditures.

No, Bernie. The plan would not be “paid for” by taxes. Federal taxes do not fund federal spending. Stephanie Kelton knows that. And you know that, because Stephanie surely must have told you.

So despite Bill Black’s kind words, Sanders did not “end the hold of ‘the political establishment obsessed with the evils of debt.'” Sanders didn’t even try.

In fact, he strengthened that “hold” by incorporating it into his own plan.

Oh, somewhere in this favoured land the sun is shining bright,
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light;
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children
shout,
But there is no joy in the middle class; mighty Sanders has struck out.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the rich and the rest.

Implementation of The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ANNUAL ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

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

Now that you have voted, here is what you voted for

You may have thought you were voting for people — Trump, Clinton or someone else, but in fact you were voting for programs that will affect your life. So now that voting is over, you might as well learn what you voted for.

Those of you on the “ABC” (Anyone But Clinton) team must feel great to have dispatched the evil witch, and now you have a chance to “Make America Great Again.”

The following post tells you where your jump from the frying pan has taken you.

Here are some excerpts from an article in today’s Chicago Tribune, a right-wing newspaper that opposed Trump (as did almost every newspaper in America):

President-elect Donald Trump’s stunning victory Tuesday has delivered to GOP congressional leaders the gift they dreamed of, even if they never quite believed it was within reach: a Republican president to sign Republican bills passed by a uniformly Republican Congress.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), who rose to prominence based on his plans to dramatically scale back federal spending, said Wednesday that Trump “earned a mandate” in his victory to enact years of conservative promises and that Republican lawmakers stood ready to help.

These days, every political victory, no matter how narrow, is termed a “mandate” by the winning party.

Trump’s “mandate” is pretty much the same “mandate” Bush had over Al Gore, when Gore received more votes and Bush won the electoral college. Last I heard, Clinton actually received more votes than Trump.

“This is the kind of unified Republican government that we set out to deliver,” Ryan told reporters. “I think we are going to hit the ground running.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also called the election a rejection of Obama’s policies and said Republicans would work with Trump to overturn them — and to fill the Supreme Court vacancy they have kept open for eight months.

Once again we will have a conservative Supreme Court, which may please those who agree with the “Citizens United” (money is speech) decision that allows the rich to spend unlimited dollars to elect candidates favoring the rich, and with the “Hobby Lobby” (corporations are people) decision saying a corporation has religious rights that supersede the religious rights of its employees.

If you have noticed a certain bent in conservative Court rulings it’s this: The rich should have more rights than the not-rich.

Among the first priorities next year is likely to be an effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. McConnell said that would be “pretty high on our agenda” and that he “would be shocked if we didn’t move forward and keep our commitment to the American people.”

Obamacare (originally Romneycare) was created as a result of the Big Lie, the lie that federal taxes fund federal spending. They don’t.

Unlike state and local taxes, which do fund state and local government spending, federal taxes are not in any way related to federal spending. That is the fundamental difference between a monetarily non-sovereign (state and local) government and a Monetarily Sovereign (federal) government.

The public’s ignorance of the Big Lie has done more damage to the American economy than all the wars in U.S. history.

Yes, Obamacare should be replaced, but not with another jury-rigged, anti-middle-class, Rube Goldbergian program based on the Big Lie. It should be replaced with a federally funded, single-payer, comprehensive Medicare for every man, woman, and child in America.

The more money the federal government spends on Medicare, the more stimulus dollars will enter the economy and the faster the economy will grow.

(By the way, don’t let the oft-used “inflation” excuse confuse you. Being Monetarily Sovereign, the government has total control over both the supply and the demand for [i.e. the value of] the U.S. dollar.) The government can cause or stop inflation any time it wishes.

Ryan told reporters that he also expects to work with Trump to scale back regulations for coal mining, ranching and other industries.

If there is one thing conservatives hate it’s those pesky regulations that prevent the rich from polluting the air, exacerbating global warming, cheating food and drug buyers, and taking America’s land for themselves.

And puh-leeze let’s not regulate those downtrodden banksters, who created the Great Recession. Those poor $100 million a year folks would be able to make $200 million if only you and the government would let them do whatever they want.

Wicker predicted Republicans would get to work immediately on replacing the health-care law, swiftly confirm Trump’s first pick for the Supreme Court and work toward a bipartisan infrastructure package.

In reality, “bipartisan” means, “We have the votes, so shut up. (Does infastructure include a wall on the American/Mexican border? Just wondering.)

Conservatives are expected to push anew to slash domestic programs and to reduce the size of entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.

Is that what you thought you were voting for? Read it again: The Trump Republicans want to reduce entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.

Fortunately, you and your children won’t need either Social Security or Medicare. Right?

The problem is not that money is lacking. There is plenty of money — an infinite amount, really. The problem is that your life is not harsh enough, and the ultra-rich are not happy about that. You, the servant class, don’t deserve all that “free stuff.” Only the rich deserve free stuff in the form of tax loopholes.

The overriding goal of the rich is not to make more money, but to widen the Gap between them and you. That is accomplished by giving the rich more and/or by giving you less.

The Gap is what makes the rich, rich. Without the Gap, no one would be rich (We all would be the same). And the wider the Gap, the richer they are. A man making $100 is rich if everyone else makes $10.

That widening Gap is the single, most important problem facing the American Economy.

When you and your children receive less Social Security and a more restrictive Medicare (both programs having been invented by liberals) don’t be surprised. It’s what you voted for. Didn’t anyone tell you?

Last year, Trump said that he would eventually insist on a balanced budget but did not elaborate.

“Right now, we’re so under, we’re so far under that you can’t go too quickly,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News. “But I would absolutely insist on it relatively soon.”

If you believe that a balanced budget (i.e increased taxes and reduced spending) will grow the economy, then you also must believe that your anemia can be cured by applying leeches or by draining your blood into a pail.

While your personal lifestyle depends on many factors, money always is the lifeblood of an economy. The federal government not only has the unlimited ability to create U.S. dollars, but also has the unlimited ability to control the value of the U.S. dollar (i.e. inflation).

There is absolutely no reason to run a balanced budget, and in fact, a balanced budget would lead to recession or depression.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
THE RECESSION CLOCK

Monetary Sovereignty
Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

Deficit reduction puts less money into the economy, thereby recessing the economy. Recessions begin an average of a year after the red line (Federal Debt Held By The Public) slides to its bottom.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recessions, which have been cured only when the growth lines have risen.

Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

And if deficit reductions are bad, surpluses are even worse, because they actually remove dollars from the economy. U.S. depressions tend to come on the heels of federal surpluses.

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

Bill Clinton ran America’s last surplus, immediately after which we were fortunate to have “only” a recession — in 2001 — rather than a depression.

“On Tuesday, America demanded disruption,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), a Trump critic who nonetheless said Wednesday he would “do everything in my power” to hold Trump to his pledges to overturn the Affordable Care Act, pursue congressional term limits and nominate conservative judges.

Congressional term limits are wise for the same reason Presidential term limits are wise. The longer Congresspersons hold their jobs, the less responsive they are to the public good.

But, can you imagine Congress voting for term limits? Trump’s wisest proposal has the least chance of passing.

Another Trump critic, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (said) “We have wars to win, threats to be dealt with, and a stagnant economy which must be revived. I believe there is consensus to be had on keeping trade free but fairer, rebuilding our military, restoring our standing in the world, reforming our tax code, repealing and replacing Obamacare with an alternative that empowers patients while reining in costs, and confirming conservative justices to the Supreme Court.”

“Empowers patients,” is political doubletalk meaning reducing patients’ benefits and increasing their costs. Implied in all this are two fundamental, conservative beliefs:

More money must be spent on the military.
This money must come from the working class.

Tax “reform” always seems to mean increasing a regressive tax on the working class, like a sales tax, a flat tax or more FICA, while taking care of the very rich idle class.

The working class voted Republican, but the Republicans will disappoint the working class. Sadly, while the Democrats lean (ever so slightly) more to the left, they too have disappointed the working class, because they have become right-wing.

The Democrats too, espouse the Big Lie as a reason to limit social programs. For both parties, it has become a matter of faith that social programs promote laziness, and the only way to eliminate poverty is to punish the impoverished — i.e. to whip the slaves until they are willing to work.

The myth is that cutting social programs is the best way to prod the working class into greater effort.

Until at least one politician has the knowledge, the courage and the power to publicly demonstrate the fallacy of the Big Lie, America will forever be plagued with booms and busts, and after each cycle, the working class will be worse off than before.

Historically, the Republican’ bases are the rich and the Christian fundamentalists. Hillary Clinton lost because the Democrats forgot their own historical base, the working class.

All those thousands of people attending Trump speeches were actually Democrats. They just didn’t know it, because the Democratic party ignored them in its drive for dollars.

Clinton was not a Democrat. Obama was not a Democrat. The last real Democrat was Lyndon Johnson, who did many great things before enmeshing himself in the Vietnam war.

Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968
Appointed Thurgood Marshall (first black Supreme Court justice)
Voting Rights Act of 1965
$11 billion tax cut
Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Public broadcasting
Higher Education Act
Established the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities
Outlawing most racial segregation
Medicare
Medicaid
Aid to education
Head Start
Food stamps
Work study
Environmental protection
Reduced poverty from roughly 23 percent to 12 percent

Those were liberal initiatives. If you feel they are worthwhile, don’t allow anyone to use the world “liberal” as a pejorative.

Bottom line: The election was based on ignorance.

The Democratic Party was, and has been, ignorant for using the Big Lie as an excuse to ignore their base: The working class.

The Democrats also have been ignorant in allowing the Republicans to characterize liberalism as socialism and communism. Liberalism is what Jack Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson did. Socialism and communism are what Mao and Castro did.

If the working class understood the realities of liberalism and of the Big Lie, they would vote liberal every time. The Democrats ignorantly allowed the Republicans to steal the Democrats’ “natural” base.

The working class voters were ignorant about what Trump and the right wing plans to do to them. They voted for change, without considering the fact that change can be bad.

And in fact, if the Republicans accomplish their goals, the change will be horrible for the working class and for the entire country, except for the rich, who will prosper.

To win back the Presidency and the Congress, Democrats must re-embrace Roosevelt/Kennedy/Johnson liberalism while teaching the public the facts about Monetary Sovereignty, the Ten Steps to Prosperity (below), and the Big Lie.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

P.S. Within a year, no one will remember voting for Trump — but we will remind you.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the rich and the rest.

Implementation of The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ANNUAL ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefiting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

If you don’t like Medicare for All, read this:

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

……………………………………………………………………………………..

Step #2 of the Ten Steps For Prosperity reads:

FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”

Click the link, read the article, then read this:

National Public Radio: Cuts In Texas Medicaid Hit Rural Kids With Disabilities Especially Hard

Last year, the Texas legislature approved a $350 million cut in Medicaid reimbursement rates to early childhood intervention therapists and providers.

The cuts, made to help balance a billion dollars in property tax relief, affect the most vulnerable Texas children — those born extremely prematurely or with Down syndrome or other genetic conditions that put them at risk for developmental delay.

Medicare for All, funded by the federal government, would pay for everything Texas Medicaid — i.e. the citizens of Texas — now pay. No federal taxes would be needed, and Texas’s citizens could save hundreds of millions in taxes.

The problem is the Libertarian belief that federal government should be small. Why should a huge, wealthy nation have a small government? No real reason.

Presumably, they believe a small government is preferable to children’s health.

For months, providers of in-home physical, speech and occupational therapies have continued to serve children who have disabilities, despite mounting financial losses.

Now some have had to shut their doors, curtail services or halt their home-visit programs, leaving many children without treatments their parents feel are crucial to the kids’ well-being.

That’s what’s happened to 2-year-old Haylee Crouse, who lives with her three brothers and sisters in the small town of Whitehouse, in East Texas.

When she was just 8 days old, Haylee contracted newborn meningitis. It left her with some mental and physical deficits, and she started having periodic seizures.

But at the age of 9 months, Haylee started getting home visits and treatments from physical, occupational and speech therapists, several days a week.

“They were a lifesaver to her and to our family,” Amanda Crouse, Haylee’s mother said. “They worked her hard. For example, she was not rolling over. They taught her how to roll over. They then taught her how to crawl, pull up on the couch and then, finally, she learned how to walk.”

The state’s cuts to its Texas Medicaid Acute Care Therapy Programs have meant that the one provider of early childhood intervention treatment in Tyler can no longer do so.

And so, that’s it.

On the 2-year-old’s last day of therapy, Crouse said, “her therapist actually cried. Gave her a hug, said goodbye.

Parents and grandparents of children who have disabilities flocked to Austin in March to implore the state Senate not to do this.

Mothers wept in frustration as they testified before the Texas Senate Finance Committee about the vital these early interventions play in their children’s quality of life.

Mrs. Crouse, please tell little Haylee this: Texans can’t afford to help sick Texas children, and the federal government can’t help because it’s too big.

I’m sure Haylee will understand.

Republican Sen. Jane Nelson, who heads the Texas Senate’s finance committee, tried to reassure anguished parents that the state would make sure there would be no interruption of services, whatsoever.

“Every eligible child for these services will continue to receive them. And we’re going to monitor it and we’re going to make sure that happens.”

But that’s been a promise the state has not been able to keep, and it’s in the rural parts of Texas where collapse of service has already begun.

This is how they “Make America Great, Again”: Ignore sick children.

“Sometimes you need to talk to some of the parents before you just decide to cut a program,” said Waymon Stewart, the executive director of the Andrews Center in Tyler.

Stewart predicts that children with profound disabilities will suffer most from the closure of his program and others like it, especially in rural regions.

It’s not uncommon for early childhood intervention therapists to have to drive an hour each way to get to far-flung patients. For children who are prone to seizures, or who have to be connected to machines for daily living, long trips in the car several days a week for treatment in other clinics are simply not going to happen, he says.

The cuts made in the state capital took a $312,000 bite out of his center’s budget, forcing him to terminate 20 employees.

“It really hit us hard,” Stewart said. So we were really digging into reserves to try to make this program last, and we did for a year.”

But after that, he said, “we just decided to give our notice. We couldn’t continue to do it unless the rates were changed.”

In Wichita Falls, 235 miles away, the same thing has transpired at the North Texas Rehabilitation Center, which serves 10 North Texas counties.

Mike Castles, the center’s president, said they hung on for a year, but it cost them more than $200,000 in losses. So, after 30 years of service to thousands of North Texas families, that’s it for them too.

“It’s all about money,” he said. “There’s just so much money to make this all work. We tried to for a year; it got worse instead of better with even more bad news coming for this fiscal year.”

The mark of a great nation is not how many atomic bombs it has, or how many billionaires. The mark of a great nation is how it cares for its most vulnerable.

Medicare for all would cost you taxpayers nothing. But the rich, the Tea Partyers, the Libertarians, and especially the health insurance companies, don’t want you to understand that.

They want “small government” so that only the wealthy and powerful can live the American dream. The rest of you: Just keep struggling.

And don’t worry about sick kids. They’re just “takers,” aren’t they?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The single most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the rich and the rest.

Implementation of The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ANNUAL ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefiting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: