How even the government lies to you about the federal debt and the debt/GDP ratio

I posed a question to the AI Copilot. It had to do with something I read on a government website regarding the federal Debt/GDP ratio: https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/#the-growing-national-debt,

I asked Copilot about the following explanation by the government:

“Comparing a country’s debt to its gross domestic product (GDP) reveals the country’s ability to pay down its debt.

This ratio is considered a better indicator of a country’s fiscal situation than just the national debt number because it shows the burden of debt relative to the country’s total economic output and therefore its ability to repay it.

The U.S. debt to GDP ratio surpassed 100% in 2013 when both debt and GDP were approximately 16.7 trillion.”

Copilot’s response:

The Treasury’s explanation is operationally false for a monetarily sovereign government. It reflects political messaging and gold standard era framing, not how the modern U.S. monetary system actually works.

But let’s break it down carefully, because this is exactly where public communication diverges from monetary reality.

1. The Treasury’s statement is based on a false premise. They say: “Debt to GDP reveals the country’s ability to pay down its debt.”

This is not true for a currency issuing government. A monetarily sovereign nation (U.S., U.K., Japan, Canada, Australia) ssues its own currency, cannot run out of that currency, cannot involuntarily default, does not need revenue to spend, does not need to “repay” its debt with taxes, creates dollars when it spends, and deletes dollars when it taxes.

So, the idea that GDP determines “ability to repay” is nonsensical in a fiat system. It would be like saying, “An airline’s ability to issue more airline points depends on its revenue.”

No. It issues the unit, as many as it chooses, and makes all the rules regarding the unit.

2. Why does the Treasury still say this? Because public facing explanations are political, not operational. The Treasury is simplifying for a public that overwhelmingly believes that the government is like a household, taxes fund spending, borrowing is needed to finance deficits, debt must be repaid, and that high debt is dangerous.

If the Treasury wrote the operational truth it would say: “Federal debt is simply the total of Treasury security deposits at the Fed, and the U.S. can always create dollars to redeem them.”

But Congress would melt down, and half the political system would accuse them of endorsing “unlimited spending.” So, they stick to the old narrative because it is familiar, politically safe, rhetorically useful, and aligned with public intuition

It is not aligned with monetary operations.

3. The real operational meaning of “federal debt”: Federal “debt” = total Treasury security deposits at the Fed.

These are interest bearing dollars, held in securities accounts, created by keystrokes, and redeemed by keystrokes. They are not borrowed funds. They are not a burden. They are not something the government must “pay back” with taxes.

They are the private sector’s savings.

4. Why debt/GDP is not a measure of ability to pay. Because the U.S. government does not use GDP to obtain dollars, does not need income to spend, does not need to “earn” dollars, does not need to “save up” dollars, and does not need to “repay” anything in the household sense

The U.S. can always credit reserve accounts to redeem securities.

Japan proves this: Its Debt/GDP ≈ 260%. Its inflation ≈ low, interest rates ≈ near zero, and solvency risk ≈ zero

If debt/GDP measured “ability to pay,” Japan would have collapsed decades ago.

5. So what does debt/GDP actually measure? Not solvency. Not ability to pay. Not financial risk.

It measures how many interest-bearing dollars the private sector has chosen to store at the Fed relative to annual economic output.

That’s it. It is a ratio of stock to flow, not a measure of capacity.

6. The clean takeaway: The Treasury’s explanation is obsolete. Debt/GDP does not measure ability to pay. It measures nothing about solvency. It persists because it is politically convenient and publicly intuitive.

It is the economic equivalent of continuing to teach that the Sun revolves around the Earth because it’s easier for people to understand.

Then I asked Copilot what it thought about this comment on the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget’s website: “The Medicare Trustees project that the Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund will be insolvent in 2033 with a 75-year shortfall of 0.56% to 1.38% of payroll.”

CoPilot AI said:

1. “Medicare HI trust fund insolvency” is an accounting fiction, not an operational constraint The Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) “trust fund” is not a real savings account. It is a ledger inside the Treasury — a bookkeeping device created by statute.

It does not contain: money, assets, investments, anything that can “run out.” It contains numbers. When CRFB says the trust fund will be “insolvent,” they mean the accounting balance will hit zero under current law.

But operationally, Medicare payments are made by the Treasury. Treasury payments are cleared by the Fed. The Fed marks up bank accounts. The U.S. cannot run out of keystrokes. So “insolvency” is a legal constraint, not a financial one. Congress can change the law at any time.

2. The U.S. government does not need payroll taxes to fund Medicare. CRFB says the shortfall is “0.56% to 1.38% of payroll.” This implies Medicare is funded by payroll taxes.

Operationally, that is false. Payroll taxes do not fund Medicare, do not fund Social Security, do not fund federal spending at all. They simply delete dollars from the private sector.

Medicare spending is funded the same way all federal spending is funded: by the Treasury instructing the Fed to credit bank accounts. There is no pile of money that must be refilled.

3. Why does CRFB talk about “insolvency”? Because CRFB is a deficit hawk advocacy group whose mission is to promote spending cuts, entitlement cuts, and fiscal austerity. Their framing is political, not operational.

They rely on household analogies, trust fund myths, gold standard thinking, and fear of “running out of money.”

This is persuasive to the public but it’s not how federal finance works.

4. What actually happens if the HI trust fund hits zero? Two possibilities:

A. Congress changes the law. This is what has happened every time in history. Congress simply authorizes continued payments.

B. Payments continue anyway. Even if Congress did nothing, the Treasury can still make Medicare payments because the U.S. cannot run out of dollars; the Fed clears all payments; the trust fund is not a funding mechanism

The only thing that stops payments is Congress choosing to stop them. Not insolvency. Not lack of money. Not debt levels. Not debt/GDP. Not trust fund balances.

5. The clean takeaway Medicare cannot become insolvent in any financial sense. The “trust fund” is an accounting construct, not a real funding source. CRFB’s framing is political, not operational.

The only real constraint is Congressional willingness, not financial ability.

Tell this to your Congresspersons each time they lie to you about the federal government’s financial need to raise your taxes and/or to cut your benefits. FICA could be zero; Benefits could be tripled; And the government would remain solvent.

If you don’t complain, they’ll keep lying, and you’ll pay for those lies, day after day after day. It’ s very expensive to sit back and simply hope things will change.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell

Search #monetarysovereignty

Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;

MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell;

https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

What is the worst thing that has happened to Social Security and Medicare?

The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax supposedly funds two major programs:

Social Security provides benefits for retirees, disabled individuals, and survivors of deceased workers. It’s designed to offer a safety net for individuals who can no longer work.

Medicare provides health insurance for people 65 and older and for some younger people with disabilities. It helps cover hospital care, medical services, and, in some cases, prescription drugs.

Uncle Sam is picking someone's pocket — **Great news! You can take money from your right-hand pocket and put it in your left. Think of it as a gift from me.**

That is what you are supposed to believe. Unfortunately, FICA funds nothing. That is because of Monetary Sovereignty. All FICA dollars are destroyed upon receipt by the Treasury. They begin in the M2 money supply measure, but upon arrival at the Treasury, they cease to be part of any money supply measure. Effectively, they are destroyed. Due to the misinformation and disinformation you have been given, many bad things have happened to your Social Security and Medicare. Here are just a few:

1. Trust Fund Shortfalls: The Social Security and Medicare “Trust Funds” are not real trust funds. They are merely balance sheets showing additions and subtractions. Congress controls them totally and can change the numbers at will.

Their sole “purpose” (if one can label it a purpose) is to make you falsely believe you should accept smaller benefits. The trust funds and FICA were created and exist only to limit your benefits.

2. Demographic Changes: The government says that an aging population is causing more people to draw benefits while fewer workers are paying into the system.

While those facts are true, they lead to the lie that Social Security and Medicare are running short of money. Your FICA dollars do not fund Social Security or Medicare, and the “trust funds” do not pay for benefits.

The FICA receipts are recorded as accounting credits and combined with other Treasury receipts. The federal government owns the accounts and can unilaterally raise or lower collections and expenditures.

All Social Security and Medicare benefits are funded by creating new money, which the federal government can do endlessly.

3. Increase in Full Retirement Age (FRA): The Social Security FRA has been increased from 65 to 67 for those born in 1960 or later. This means people have to wait longer to receive full benefits.

4. Higher Earnings Subject to Social Security Tax: The maximum income subject to Social Security tax has been increased over the years.

5. Higher Medicare Premiums: Larger Medicare premiums are deducted from Social Security checks for most retirees.

6. Up to 85% of your SS benefits are subject to income tax. You giveth via FICA and the government taketh — and then taketh again via income tax.

Uncle Sam with tons of money — **Sorry, kids, but I’m running out of money. I’ll have to cut your benefits.**

7. At most, Medicare only pays 80% of your costs while paying reduced fees to doctors and hospitals. (Have you noticed that doctors and hospitals always receive less than they bill?)

In short, you and your medical team receive less than you should.

While all of the above are financially unnecessary and based on the false premise that federal spending is funded by taxes (like state government spending is), at least they are apparent. People can see that they receive fewer net dollars from the government. The following is the worst because it looks like a benefit but isn’t:

8. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) allows Medicare to negotiate prices for certain high-cost drugs under Medicare Part B and Part D

These drugs treat conditions like heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. The negotiations are projected to save Medicare beneficiaries $1.5 billion in out-of-pocket costs when the new prices take effect in 2026.

Sounds great? It’s supposed to. Now, think about it. Where will the money come from? Numbers 1 through 7 obviously take dollars from the private sector, otherwise known as “the economy,” and transfer them to the government, which neither needs nor uses them. The government already has infinite dollars. When it spends dollars, it simply passes a law and creates new ones. It can do this endlessly at no cost other than pressing a computer key.

Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan: “A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency. There is nothing to prevent the federal government from creating as much money as it wants and paying it to somebody. The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print the money to do that.”

Former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke: “The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. It’s not tax money… We simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account.”

Uncle Sam has infinite dollars — **Let me get this straight. Do you really believe I have Trust Funds, and they are running short of dollars???**

Fed Chairman Jerome Powell: “As a central bank, we have the ability to create money digitally.”

St. Louis Fed: “As the sole manufacturer of dollars, whose debt is denominated in dollars, the U.S. government can never become insolvent, i.e., unable to pay its bills. In this sense, the government is not dependent on credit markets to remain operational.”

Number 8, which masquerades as a benefit to the private sector, is just a transfer of dollars from one part of the economy (the people who work for pharmaceutical companies) to another (the people who pay FICA). No new dollars are created, which means no new benefits are created. The government forces one part of the economy to pay another and claims it is providing you with a benefit. Even worse, the charade supports the false belief that federal spending is funded by federal taxes, specifically the lie that FICA funds SS and Medicare. It is akin to the lie that your employer pays half of FICA, when in fact, you pay all of it. Your employer includes the cost of FICA when determining your salary. That is why employers love to classify workers as “independent contractors.” It allows them to pay higher salaries at less cost. One day, probably not during my lifetime, the American public will understand that federal government financing differs from state/local government financing. The former is Monetarily Sovereign. The latter is monetarily non-sovereign. If you don’t know the difference, you don’t understand federal government finance. Click this link to begin understanding. The people have not been informed that federal taxes fund nothing and that the government pays for everything by creating new dollars ad hoc. So what is the purpose of federal taxes if not for funding spending? Read this. The people need to be informed that the government has 100% control over the U.S. dollar it invented. It can give dollars any value (inflation). Historically, it has often arbitrarily changed the value of the dollar. It can pay for anything, no matter how many dollars are needed. Yes, the federal government could pay for comprehensive, no-deductible, free Medicare for every man, woman, and child in America. And yes, it could pay everyone a free Social Security benefit, eliminating poverty, homelessness, illiteracy, hunger, and inequality in America. And yes, it could pay to make America, as the Bible said, “. . . the light of the world. A city set on a hill . . . .” And it could do it all without collecting a penny in taxes. So long as you accept the lies, you will continue to be like cattle grunting and mooing toward the slaughter. And sadly, I can’t see that changing during my few remaining years. Rodger Malcolm Mitchell Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell; MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell; https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The case for waste

We often have written about government waste:

*Sen. Rick Scott “bravely” opposes wasteful federal spending, but even here, he’s wrong.

*The Wasteful Spending Myth and The Big Lie

*The 5 ways to eliminate wasteful federal spending

*There is no wasteful federal spending

There are other examples, but listing them would be wasteful — of your time and mine. I looked online for claims about federal government wasteful spending. Here are a few of the hundreds I found:

Camo Uniforms for the Afghan Army: The Pentagon spent $28 million on camouflage uniforms for the Afghan National Army that were unsuitable for the desert environment.

Hipster Anti-Smoking Campaign: The National Institutes of Health spent $5 million on a campaign targeting hipsters to stop smoking, including paying them to blog about quitting.

Quail Cocaine Study: Over $500,000 was spent to study how cocaine affects the sexual behavior of Japanese quails.

Hamster Fights: More than $3 million was spent on research involving hamster fights to study aggression1.

Solar Panels for Veterans Affairs: The Department of Veterans Affairs spent $8 million on solar panels that were never used.

The Federal Register–every member of Congress automatically receives a new copy every day, at a $1 million annual cost, even though the contents are available for free online.

I could waste time listing dozens more, but these alone “waste” about $45.5 million a year, which is sufficient to outrage a Congress that voted for these expenditures and the media, which wasted time writing about them, but only on slow news days. Before I comment further, perhaps we should try to agree on something fundamental: What is “waste”? I suggest waste is anything that costs significantly more than its benefits over any agreed-upon period. For instance, let me start with the gross basics: When a bear poops in the woods, is that poop considered waste? No, because it costs the bear nothing and benefits the forest by providing growth nutrients. Based on that definition, are the above examples of waste truly waste, or are they more like that cost-free, beneficial bear poop?

United States one-dollar bill - Wikipedia — **This is not a dollar. It is a bearer instrument saying the bearer owns a dollar. The dollar itself is just a number in an account.**

Let’s assume there was no benefit to those cameo uniforms, anti-smoking campaigns, quail cocaine studies, etc. Did they fall under the costs-more-than-its-benefits criterion for waste? I say, “No.” Every one of them took dollars from a federal government that has the infinite ability to create unlimited dollars at the touch of a computer key. So the cost was negligible — perhaps similar to the bear’s cost in expending the effort to squat. As former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said, “The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost.” But what was the benefit? Every one of those endeavors added dollars to the Gross Domestic Product. Not only did they grow the economy as a whole, but they benefitted specific individuals. Businesses employed people to create those uniforms, the solar panels, and the printed federal register. People were paid dollars to run the hamster and cocaine studies. Those people used their newly earned dollars to buy things from other businesses with employees. The new money flowed through the economy, benefiting thousands and then thousands more. It is quite possible that down the line, you yourself might have received dollars that began with the quail cocaine study.

A man stands on a dune in the middle of a desert — **Should he be afraid to waste sand?**

One might object, “Taxpayer dollars were spent. The money came from somewhere.” In reality, not one dollar, not even one cent, of taxpayer money was spent. The federal government (unlike state and local governments) pays all its bills with newly created dollars. Like the first U.S. dollars, created from thin air in 1794, and all subsequent trillions of dollars, the dollars that paid for “wasteful” federal spending were created at no cost, from thin air. Here’s how it’s done now:

1. To pay an invoice, the federal government creates instructions (not dollars) from thin air. The instructions are in the form of a check or wire.
2. The instructions tell the creditor’s bank to increase the balance in the creditor’s checking account (“Pay to the order of _____.”)
3. The bank obeys those instructions by pressing computer keys. The instant the bank presses those keys, new dollars appear out of thin air and are added to the M2 money supply.
4. The instructions then are passed to the Federal Reserve which first “clears” them by tallying them against the government’s checking account ( Treasury General Account).
5. Finally, the creditor’s bank is informed that the check has cleared so it can balance its books.

Everything is just numbers in accounts based on instructions and laws. So long as the federal government can create laws, it can create instructions and dollars. The government has no limits other than the self-imposed. Many people don’t understand that all dollars are just numbers in accounts. There are no physical dollars. Even a dollar bill is not a dollar. It is the title to a dollar. Just as a house title is not a house, and a car title is not a car, a dollar bill is not a dollar. It is a bearer instrument saying, in essence, “The bearer of this bill is the owner of a dollar.” Eventually, that paper instrument will be shredded, but dollars, having been created from thin air, are immortal until someone pays off a debt somewhere in the world, at which time dollars will be destroyed. In summary, all dollars are digital entries—numbers, nothing else. There are no physical dollars. The federal government controls all those entries by passing laws. To talk about federal waste is akin to saying that the federal government wastes numbers. It’s like worrying that the federal government will run short of the number “seven.” The federal government can pass a law saying that the Social Security “Trust Fund” now has an additional ten trillion dollars, and those dollars would instantly exist. It is illogical to claim that the federal government wastes the dollars it has the infinite ability to create. You cannot waste what is available in unlimited quantities. The real federal waste comes not from faulty spending but from failure to use resources infinitely available. The real waste comes from statements like these:

The Social Security Trust Fund will run out of money in (year).
FICA funds Social Security and Medicare.
Federal trust funds pay for (program).
The Medicare Trust Fund will run out of money in (year).
The debt ceiling is a prudent way to (_____).
The federal government should live within its means.
The federal debt is too high.
The federal deficit is too high.
The federal debt or deficit is unsustainable.
Government spending causes inflation
The federal government can’t afford to pay for (program).
Federal taxes fund federal spending.
Federal funding of (program) is a waste of money
Federal funding of (program) is a waste of taxpayer money.
Federal benefits for (program) must be cut or taxes increased.
The federal government should lend, not give, money to (anyone or anything).
Federal finances are like personal, business, or local government finances

Not one of these commonly heard statements is correct. Not one. They all mark the writer or speaker as ignorant about our government’s Monetary Sovereignty or as wanting to widen the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest. When you read about federal government waste, remember this: When a Monetarily Sovereign government, having unlimited funds, doesn’t spend to feed the hungry, house the poor, or protect its people, that is the worst possible waste, the waste of the government’s power to do good. Rodger Malcolm Mitchell Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell; MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell; https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Even Warren Buffett gets MS wrong. Is it so hard to understand?

Because the populace has been pumped with wrong information about Monetary Sovereignty (MS), what should be easily understood is widely misunderstood. Does even the great Warren Buffett not get it? He understands federal finance and strongly favors Social Security, yet does even he not know how that program is financed? We have tried to make the simple even simpler with such posts as:

The Miles and Points Roller Coaster - Trips With Tykes — Airlines are sovereign over their mileage points. They cannot run short of points and can give them any value they choose. They are in “points debt” because they issue more points than they receive back from customers.

At its core, Monetary Sovereignty is dead simple. It merely says:

The U.S. federal government created an arbitrary number of dollars and gave them an arbitrary value by passing laws.
The government retains the power to pass infinite laws, create infinite dollars, and give dollars any values it chooses.
Because of these powers, the government cannot run short of dollars. It pays all its obligations with newly created dollars and does not need tax dollars.
Even if the federal government didn’t collect a penny in taxes, it could continue spending forever. No payment, however large, is a burden on the federal government or on federal taxpayers.

The posts gave examples of Monetary Sovereignty with airline mileage points, Monopoly dollars, and store coupons. In each case, the issuer cannot run short of the points/dollars/coupons because all are numbers on computers typed at the creator’s whim.

Warren Buffett | Biography, Books, Worth, & Facts | Britannica — **Warren Buffett**

Yet, despite that simplicity, even great financial brains seem confused:

A shareholder once asked Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger if Social Security is a ‘government-sponsored Ponzi scheme for retirees’ — their answer was received with laughter and applause. Story by Jing Pan

Social Security has long been a subject of intense discussion in America, but investing legend Warren Buffett’s position on the issue is unmistakably clear.

During Buffett’s company, Berkshire Hathaway’s annual shareholders meeting in 2005, an audience member posed a blunt question: “I’m asking for your opinion on Social Security. Shall we call it the government-sponsored Ponzi scheme for retirees?”

Buffett’s answer was wrong.

He explained that, while it was proposed as insurance because that was “the only way [President Franklin] Roosevelt could get it passed,” Social Security is essentially a “transfer payment by the people who are in their productive years to the people who are past their productive years.”

And Buffett liked that mechanism.

“I think that the obligation for the people who do well in this society is to provide a reasonable level of sustenance for those beyond their productive years,” he said.

No, no, no. Social Security is nothing like “a transfer payment from people in their productive years to people past their productive years.” And while he may imply there is a moral obligation for the productive people to aid those past productive years, that is not how Social Security operates.

No, Target Is Not Giving You A 50% Off Everything Coupon For Liking A Page On Facebook – Consumerist — Target is sovereign over its coupons. It cannot run short of coupons; it makes all the rules re. its coupons, and it runs “coupon deficits” (receives fewer coupons than it issues) and is in “coupon debt” (the total coupons issued is more than the coupons received.)

If it did, two things would be necessary:

1. Social Security would have to be supported by more affluent people, which it is not. Even the FICA tax, which ostensibly supports SS, is collected mostly from medium-to-lower salaried people — and only from the first $160K of salary.

I wonder whether Mr. Buffett collects any salary at all. If he obtains all his income via stock gains, dividends, interest, and other non-salary sources, he doesn’t pay FICA. No “transfer” there.

2. More importantly, and contrary to popular belief, FICA does not fund Social Security (or Medicare.) All federal spending is funded by newly created dollars.

Tax dollars, which begin, in the M2 money supply measure, suddenly disappear from any money supply measure when they hit the U.S. Treasury. They effectively are destroyed.

Ask yourself , “How much money can the federal government spend in any given year? Given that the government has the infinite ability to create dollars, how many dollars can it spend? Right, it can spend infinite dollars. It never can run short. What is any number added to infinity? Infinity. Those FICA dollars disappear into an infinite dollar hole, never heard from again. The fake Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds, which supposedly receive FICA dollars and spend those dollars on benefits, do no such thing. In fact, they aren’t even trust funds. They are bookkeeping mechanisms that only record inflows and outflows. They aren’t “trust funds” if the federal government can add to them, take from them, or revise them in any way and at any time it chooses? If you go to any federal finance website, you will see how the government implies or even states outright that federal taxes fund federal spending. Yet, clearly, this isn’t true. Even if the federal government collected zero taxes, it could continue spending forever. That is the reality of all large Monetarily Sovereign entities. Consider the European Union, which is sovereign over the euro:

Press Conference: Mario Draghi, President of the ECB, 9 January 2014 Question: I am wondering: can the ECB ever run out of money? Mario Draghi: Technically, no. We cannot run out of money.

No large Monetarily Sovereign nation can run short of its own sovereign currency — unless it wants to. Why would it want to? To foster the false belief that benefits to the middle- and lower-income groups are unaffordable and unsustainable without benefit cuts or tax increases. That is the basis for the Big Lie: “Social Security and Medicare can’t continue unless we cut your benefits or increase your taxes.” Who benefits from the Big Lie: The rich who run America. They are rich because of a wide financial Gap between them and the rest of us. The wider the Gap, the richer they are. There are two ways the rich widen the Gap:

They increase their net income with tax dodges for which they bribe politicians.
They reduce your net income by falsely claiming that benefits are unaffordable and unsustainable. They bribe the media and politicians to tell that lie.

Although Mr. Buffett seems to try to claim the high ground by “complaining” that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does, it’s hard to believe he doesn’t understand the realities of Monetary Sovereignty. Therefore, I believe he intentionally lies about Social Security being a “transfer payment by the people who are in their productive years to the people who are past their productive years.” Sadly, you receive the Big Lie from three groups the rich bribe: Politicians, news media, and educators. And there are the lies coming from the rich, themselves. That Niagara Falls of false information drowns out the truth, which is why the simplicity of Monetary Sovereignty is so difficult for many people to understand. Rodger Malcolm Mitchell Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

……………………………………………………………………..

The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: