The National Enquirer and the Clinton Foundation Friday, Aug 26 2016 

The previous post expressed the view that the Clinton Foundation was exactly what it purported to be: A charitable foundation, similar to the thousands of charitable foundations all over the country.

So far as we know, the Clintons don’t receive any money from the Foundation, though we expect that their travel expenses on behalf of the Foundation would be reimbursed.

If there is any evidence the Clintons profit in any way from their Foundation (aside from tax deductions), I’d be interested to hear about it.

Go the the Clinton Foundation web site, and you will see the FAQs, among which are:

Who contributes to the Foundation? Where can I find a list of Foundation donors?

We are proud to have more than 300,000 contributors; 90% of our donations are $100 or less. Like all philanthropic organizations, the Foundation depends on contributions to pursue our work around the world. While not required by any law, but in keeping with a long-held commitment to transparency, the Clinton Foundation has for years listed all contributors dating back to the Foundation’s beginning on our website.

Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation?

No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors.

If anyone has facts to show otherwise, I’ll be glad to publish them.

After the previous post was published, we had to admonish certain readers who claimed the Clinton Foundation was some sort of scam, though no facts were provided. For instance:

“You left out what the purpose of this ‘charity’ is, and who stands to benefit most. I think you might find the mud is there. Recall the saying that Democrats go into politics to get rich, Republicans are already rich so they go in for influence.”

and

“You imply it’s not possible? You hear often how charities are used as personal enrichment devices. Scandals are a dime a dozen.”

and

“Rodger, you conflate elected politician and appointed civil servant. The former gets a pass because the Supreme Court says corporations are people and can give boat loads of Free $peech to elect candidates for public office. However, we all know this is legal bribery with its corrupting influence. Who are we kidding? It really disgraces our electoral process, but that’s the system we got. The Secretary of State, on the other hand, as all appointed civil servants, must be beyond reproach. Even if innocent, there must be no appearance of impropriety to maintain confidence in the person and the office.”

and

“Its problematic because this is this is not the first time questionable campaign fund-raising practices have been associated with the Clintons. Younger readers might be interested when President Bill Clinton raised contributions by inviting donors to sleep overnight in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House.”

and

“The Clintons just can’t help themselves despite all evidence they should know better, as a past President and First Lady, lawyers both. You know you’re going to run for President in the future, why do you put yourself in these positions.”

and

“It is the smoke we are talking about, Rodger. Surely you are not so naive to think these bozos can’t hide their tracks well enough a lot of the time, and with connections good enough to get out of jail when they slip up?”

You’ll notice these comments have one thing in common: No facts; all innuendo. Zero evidence of wrongdoing.  It’s what I call the “National Enquirer method.

These readers can be excused, because they are not economists, writers or professional columnists, who are expected to have standards for presenting accusations.

Which brings us to Charles Krauthammer, who is a columnist. Here are excerpts from today’s commentary about the Clinton Foundation. He cleverly titled the article: “The bribery standard,” though he provides zero evidence of any bribery:

Clinton’s scandals are sprawling, multi-layered, complex things. They defy time and space.

“Defy time and space”? Nothing like a bit of melodrama to set the stage for a fact-free piece.

The real question (about Clinton’s Emails) wasn’t classification but: Why did she have a private server in the first place?

It wasn’t convenience. It was concealment. What exactly was she hiding?

Was this merely the prudent paranoia of someone who habitually walks the line of legality?

If she controls the server, she controls the evidence, and can destroy it — as she did 30,000 Emails — at will.

But destroy what?

“Why?” “What?” “Was?”

All those leading questions, devoid of facts.  Do they remind you of what you read in the gossip news? (“Which beautiful star was seen cuddling with which married executive at one of Hollywoods most exclusive restaurants?”)

And in that vein, Mr. Krauthammer wrote::

The foundation is a massive family enterprise disguised as a charity, an opaque and elaborate mechanism for sucking money from the rich and the tyrannous to be channeled to Clinton Inc.

Its purpose is to maintain the Clintons’ lifestyle (offices, travel, accommodations, etc.), secure profitable connections, produce favorable publicity and reliably employ a vast entourage of retainers, ready to serve today and at the coming Clinton Restoration.

It’s not “disguised as a charity.” It is a charity supervised by the Clintons, who by the way, are not paid for their work.

Apparently, “sucking money” is more exciting than “receiving donations.”

It seems Mr. Krauthammer does not want this charity to secure connections, produce favorable publicity or employ people.

And what the heck is the “coming Clinton Restoration”?

Money is not “channeled to ‘Clinton Inc.'” whatever that is.  If Mr. Krauthammer has any evidence whatsoever, that the Clintons illegally or even unethically received any money, he has a front page exclusive — a columnist’s dream.

But since I’ve not seen his byline on any front pages, and probably never will, I’m guessing he has no such evidence. It’s all speculation and grimy gossip column stuff.

So far as I know, the money is used the same way all other legitimate charities use money: For three purposes:

  1. For investment, to build up the assets of the charity
  2. To pay expenses of the charity
  3. To fund good works.

That is how charities operate. I can only imagine that Mr. Krauthammer never has been involved with a charitable foundation, else he would understand these things.

Now we learn how the whole machine operated. Two weeks ago, emails began dribbling out showing foundation officials contacting State Department counterparts to ask favors for foundation “friends.”

Say, a meeting with the State Department’s “substance person” on Lebanon for one particularly generous Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire.

This is supposed to be a scandal? “If you give to this charity, I’ll get you a meeting with an important person.”

That sort of back-scratching probably doesn’t happen more than ten thousand times a day in Washington.  I myself have received calls asking whether I’d like to attend a many-dollars-per-plate dinner to meet such-and-such politician.

And mostly the favors are far more personal than “give to this charity.” Usually, they are “give to my re-election committee.”

The next batch revealed foundation requests for face time with the secretary herself. Such as one from the crown prince of Bahrain.

To be sure, Bahrain, home of the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, is an important Persian Gulf ally. Its crown prince shouldn’t have to go through a foundation — to which his government donated at least $50,000 — to get to the secretary.

The fact that he did is telling.

What’s “telling” is Mr. Krauthammer’s putting 2 and 2 together and getting 22.

Mr. Krauthammer presents zero evidence Mrs. Clinton herself received any money or benefitted in any way from the crown prince’s donation.

Mr. Krauthammer presents zero evidence the crown prince of Bahrain needed to bribe anyone to see Mrs. Clinton (In fact, Mr. Krauthammer admits otherwise.)

Mr. Krauthammer presents zero evidence there was any connection at all, between the donation and a meeting with Mrs. Clinton.

It’s all “wink-wink, hint-hint,” completely lacking substance.  Its print amateurism and misdirection at its worst. It’s a perfect example of why the media is so mistrusted these days.

More than half the private interests who were granted phone or personal contact with Secretary Clinton — 85 of 154 — were donors to the foundation. Total contributions? As much as $156 million.

The title of the article was “The bribery standard.” Are these 85 donors supposed to be an example of “bribery”?  If so, who was bribed? The charity?

Yes, it’s obvious that access and influence were sold. But no one has demonstrated definitively that the donors received something tangible of value — a pipeline, a permit, a waiver, a favorable regulatory ruling — in exchange.

It’s hard to believe the Clinton folks would be stupid enough to commit something so blatant to writing. Nonetheless, there might be an email allusion to some such conversation. With thousands more emails to come, who knows what lies beneath?

Translation: “Obvious” means I have absolutely no evidence, but I want you to have a negative interpretation.

“No one has demonstrated definitively” also means there is absolutely no evidence, but hey, who needs evidence when rank speculation is so much more titillating.

There might be” means “I have my fingers crossed.”

And then there is yet another gossip columnist question: “Who knows what lies beneath?” which means, “I have no idea what I’m talking about, but doesn’t this sound delicious!

We are hardly bothered by the routine practice of presidents rewarding big donors with cushy ambassadorships, appointments to portentous boards and invitations to state dinners.

The bright line seems to be outright bribery. Anything short of that is considered — not just for the Clintons, for everyone — acceptable corruption.

It’s a sorry standard. And right now it is Hillary Clinton’s saving grace.

What??!  That’s it? After all the leading questions and implied bribery, that’s it? Bemoaning the idea that Mrs. Clinton must be following “routine practice,” warrants the “Bribery” headline?

To be clear, this post is not a defense of Mrs. Clinton. I much would have preferred Elizabeth Warren or even Bernie Sanders, though when it comes to honesty, Mrs. Clinton is light years ahead of Donald Trump (He of Trump University and multiple bankruptcies).

Rather this post is a protest against the “Enquirization” of the media and of the political discourse. The “I’m only askin'” excuse for spreading innuendo is disgusting.

Donald Trump does it all the time. “Is Obama really a citizen.” “What was Cruz’s father doing near Lee Harvey Oswald?” And let’s not forget his silly insinuations about Mrs. Clinton’s health.

Trump is Trump. He is amoral. We know it and we expect it of him.

But we have every right to be shocked and angered when the media, even the right wing media, descend into the muck with him.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
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 afford better health care than 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 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-tranferring 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 an 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
d

Three things to remember as you watch Trump, Clinton speeches Monday, Aug 8 2016 

Soon you will hire someone for the difficult job of being President of the U.S. As with any talent hunt, you’ll want to take into consideration certain key factors, while eliminating extraneous factors.

For example, the ability to be a good President does not rely on who cheated on a spouse, or who stole money. Personal morality never has been a good measure of Presidential effectiveness.

(Lyndon Johnson, for instance, may have been one of our least moral, but most effective, Presidents.)

Though the “job interview” speeches may seem complex, with both candidates offering excessive solutions to non-problems and bashing the other candidate for trivial offenses.

But it’s quite simple, really. There are three, and only three, issues:

1. The single biggest problem facing the U.S. economy and the world’s economy is: The Gap between the rich/powerful, and the rest, is too wide and continues to widen. (See: This is the single biggest problem facing America)

The Gap is responsible for our most serious ills:

  • Poverty: “Poor” is a relative term. The rich/powerful always have sucked the best out of the economy, leaving only the dregs for the rest.
  • Street crime: Have you noticed that most street (as opposed to white collar) crime occurs in poor neighborhoods and/or by poor people? Having little wealth and power, and with no hope of obtaining more, the poor resort to physical crime.
  • Gun violence: Street crime not only includes gun violence, but fear of street crime breeds the need for guns, which breeds more gun violence.
  • Poor health and early death: Unaffordable health care and bad (but cheap) food, shorten lives.
  • Lack of education: No one knows how many millions of children are born with native intelligence, but are unable to use that intelligence because they cannot afford a good education. The cost to America’s growth, well-being, power and prosperity is immeasurable.

By enabling poverty, street crime, gun violence, poor health, early death, and lack of education, the Gap adversely affects everyone — the entire nation — even including the rich.

When you listen to each of the candidates’ proposals, ask yourself this: Will this proposal help narrow the Gap between the rich/powerful, and the rest?

2. The single biggest Lie about our economy is: “Federal taxes fund federal spending.” (See: Monetary Sovereignty and Free Lunch)

This “Big Lie leads to:

  • Unnecessary, regressive taxes: The FICA tax, which purportedly funds Medicare and Social Security, in reality, funds neither. Even if FICA were eliminated, Medicare and Social Security could continue paying benefits, forever. The only thing FICA (and sales taxes, and income taxes on the non-rich accomplish is to widen the Gap)
  • Unnecessary reductions in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other social programs. The false belief that the federal government “can’t afford” these programs, leads to ongoing attempts to reduce benefits.
  • Lack of federal spending to support infrastructure, research & development, scientific progress, and education.

When you listen to each of the candidates’ proposals, ask yourself this: Will this proposal reduce FICA, sales taxes and/or income taxes on the non-rich? Will it increase funding for social programs and science?

3. The single biggest consideration about the candidates is: What are their qualifications?

  • Will they do what they say they will do? What is their history? Whether in business or in government service, have they done what they promised to do?
  • What is their experience? When hiring for any job, past experience is one of the most important attributes a candidate can have.
  • Are their proposals truly feasible? One can promise to bring everlasting peace, and defeat all our enemies, but is this reality?
  • What is the nature of their lies? All politicians lie. The real question is not whether they lie, or even how much they lie, but how will their lies affect you? A lie about a personal indiscretion is much less important than a lie about one’s experience.

When you listen to each of the candidates’ proposals, as yourself this: Considering the nature of the candidate, is this proposal possible or even likely to occur?

In summary, ask yourself three simple questions:

  1. Will this proposal help narrow the Gap between the rich/powerful, and the rest?
  2. Will this proposal reduce FICA, sales taxes and/or income taxes on the non-rich? Will it increase funding for social programs and science?
  3. Considering the nature of the candidate, is this proposal possible or even likely to occur?

Those questions will help you wade through the clutter, the obfuscations, the personal insults and the moral digressions, and decide who should be President of the United States.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
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 afford better health care than 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 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-tranferring 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 an 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

–Virtually everything that happens in economics is engineered by the rich: Kansas version Tuesday, Jun 16 2015 

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

Mitchell’s laws:
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
●The single most important problem in economics is
the gap between rich and poor.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the gap between rich and poor.
●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.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

=========================================================================================================================================================================================================================

Would it be too much to speculate that 99% of the literate world is completely clueless about the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty? Or is 99% an underestimate?

Surely, only a small percentage of the people, even those living the nightmare of the euro, understand what has happened to them. All they seem to understand is they are poor when pre-euro, they were not poor.

And not only don’t they understand that they have surrendered the single most valuable asset they have — their Monetary Sovereignty — but they don’t know why this was done, and who engineered it.

(Hint: The rich, of course.) Virtually everything that happens in economics is engineered by the rich.

And now we look at our brethren in Kansas, a monetarily non-sovereign entity, just like Greece, Italy, France and the other euro nations.

What’s The Matter With Kansas And Its Tax Cuts? It Can’t Do Math
Forbes: Business, JUL 15, 2014 @ 1:31 PM
Howard Gleckman, CONTRIBUTOR

The tax cuts in Kansas have been breathtaking. In 2012, at (Governor Sam) Brownback’s urging, the legislature cut individual tax rates by 25 percent and repealed the tax on sole proprietorships and other “pass-through” businesses.

In 2013, the legislature cut taxes again. It passed a measure to gradually lower rates even more over five years. By 2018, the top rate, which was 6.45 percent in 2012, will fall to 3.9 percent.

Kansas is a Republican state. Although the Democrats love the rich, they do save a bit of affection for the poor. The Republicans, by contrast, worship the rich, to the total exclusion of anyone having fewer than a hundred million in assets.

So when the Republicans cut taxes, they cut the taxes that mostly affect the rich: income taxes. And when they increase taxes, they increase the taxes that mostly affect the not-rich: sales taxes.

Brownback To Sign Historic Sales Tax Hike After Bruising Budget Battle

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback’s signature personal income tax cuts emerged mostly intact from a grueling legislative fight to close a budget deficit that arose after revenue failed to match the conservative governor’s predictions of an economic boom.

Brownback and his GOP allies managed to avoid backtracking on past reductions on income tax rates.

Instead, they raised the state’s sales tax to one of the highest rates in the nation and smokers will be paying 50 cents more for each pack of cigarettes.

Get it? The rich-owned Republicans cut those pesky income taxes on the rich, and then replaced them with sales taxes that mostly impact the middle and low income people. It’s a direct transfer of dollars from poor to rich.

Two bills approved by Kansas legislators in the waning hours of their session will raise $384 million during the fiscal year beginning July 1, to avert a deficit prohibited by the state constitution.

The sales tax will rise to 6.5 percent from 6.15 percent and the cigarette tax will jump to $1.29.

Republicans who pushed the plan said its tax increases have to be seen in the context of the income tax cuts in 2012 and 2013, which the Legislature’s top tax analyst said could be worth $900 million annually.

Isn’t it beautiful?

The rich saved hundreds of millions of dollars a year, and the poor and middle classes will pay for it — and they have no idea what has been done to them.

So long as it’s positioned as anti-Obama and/or anti-liberal, that’s sufficient for them.

Ah, the bliss of ignorance.

We close this post with a sample of economic ignorance as expressed in the above-referenced Forbes article by Howard Glickman:

One cannot credibly argue that tax cuts increase revenue or even pay for themselves. They didn’t for Ronald Reagan. They don’t for Sam Brownback.

They won’t for the next politician who tries — whether he (or she) is in Washington, D.C. or in some state capital.

As has become the norm, Mr. Glickman and Forbes equate the Monetarily Sovereign federal government (which neither needs nor uses tax dollars) and the monetarily non-sovereign state governments (which both need and used tax dollars).

The rich-owned media help perpetuate that myth of equivalence, because it allows them to fool the public, and to transfer dollars from the 99.9% to the .1%, as requested by the .1%.

What do conservatives conserve? They conserve the riches of the rich.

Now that’s engineering.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

==========================================================================================================================================================================
The Ten Steps to Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded free Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Federally funded, 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. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all their forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)
10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

Initiating The Ten Steps sequentially will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.-

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.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

THE RECESSION CLOCK

Long term view:
Monetary Sovereignty

Recent view:
Monetary Sovereignty

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

As you know, the federal government has run out of dollars. How stupid? Very stupid. Friday, May 8 2015 

Mitchell’s laws:
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the gap between rich and poor.
●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.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive,
and the motive is the Gap.

======================================================================================================================================================================================================

As you know, the federal government has run out of dollars — John Boehner told me — so the government needs to cut spending:

In Congress, Income Inequality Comes With Breakfast, Lunch
AP|By CHARLES BABINGTON and LAURIE KELLMAN, Posted: 05/03/2015

Many of the Capitol’s food servers, who make the meals, bus the tables and run the cash registers in the restaurants and carryouts that serve lawmakers, earn less than $11 an hour.

Some make nothing at all when Congress is in recess.

You see, it’s important that the federal government not spend the dollars it has the unlimited ability to create, and what better place to save money than on poor people’s salaries?

Members of the House and Senate collect their $174,000 annual salaries whether Congress is making laws, taking a break or causing a partial government shutdown.

Well . . . ahem . . . not all salaries need to be cut. After all, our Congress has been so effective, we need to reward them with big money, in addition to campaign “contributions” (aka “bribes) and many other perks.

But, lest you think Congress doesn’t know how to be generous:

Both Bailey and Tesfahun (two Capitol servers mentioned in the article) said they once received a pay raise of 3 cents an hour.

It’s too bad the whole thing isn’t handled by private industry, which as everyone knows, not only is more efficient than the government, but more concerned about its employees:

All (Capitol food workers) work for Restaurant Associates, a major New York-based contractor that handles food services for the House and Senate.

The House privatized its food operations decades ago. The Senate ran its own operations, at heavy losses, until 2008. That’s when the then-Democratic majority said taxpayer subsidies were unsustainable, and Restaurant Associates won the contract to take over. (Senators approved the 2008 switch in a voice vote, which any dissenter could have blocked).

Well, that’s just a teensy little lie, because:

1. Taxpayers do not fund federal spending. Unlike state and local governments, the federal government creates dollars ad hoc, simply by paying bills (i.e. sending dollars into the private sector).
2. Thus no federal spending is unsustainable.
3. You hand over spending to the private sector, because you want them to cut spending, which means sending fewer dollars to employees and suppliers — all in the private sector. And you don’t want to be blamed for the abysmal salaries. (That is known as the Pontius Pilate defense — Matthew 27:24)

Anyway, as Republican John Boehner said, “We’re broke.” He meant the federal government, which mysteriously seems to have lost its ability to create its own sovereign currency.

So, being “broke,” the government needs to increase taxes.

Repeal of Estate Tax Rewards Billionaires, Punishes Working Americans
Posted: 04/15/2015

Recently, the House voted for a budget that would end tax credits for many working families that put $1,000 a year in their pockets, on average.

The Republican budget also would cut $5 trillion in funding for benefits and services that make groceries, health care and college more affordable, pay for road improvements, and invest in scientific research.

Yes, we’re broke, so obviously we have to stop feeding those “takers.”

House conservatives (also) plan to eliminate the estate tax, which is paid only by multi-millionaires and billionaires.

An estate has to be worth at least $5.4 million before a dime in taxes gets paid. If the estate is passed on by a couple, it has to be worth nearly $11 million.

Well . . . we have to reward those “makers,” who give politicians the big political contributions, don’t we?

Abolishing the estate tax — which only affects the wealthiest two-tenths of one percent of families — will cost $269 billion over the next 10 years.

For $269 billion, we could replenish the fund that maintains our highways and transit systems (164 billion), and let every low- to moderate-income 4-year-old attend a good preschool ($75 billion).

Or, for $269 billion we could send 9 million striving Americans to community college tuition-free at a cost of $60 billion; keep college affordable for millions more by reversing proposed budget cuts to Pell Grants ($89 billion), which help pay for tuition for needy kids; and ensure there’s enough food on the table for children, seniors, veterans and their families by restoring $125 billion in cuts to food stamps made in the Republican budget.

Of course, since the government really does not need tax dollars, it simply could (should) reverse those ill-conceived spending cuts, regardless of tax collections.

And here is the important part:

The estate tax (is) the only federal levy that curbs the growth of huge inherited fortunes.

America thinks of itself as a classless society, but the nation’s richest one-tenth of one percent holds as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent combined, according to a recent academic study. Translation: 120,000 households own as much stuff as 110 million families.

We are not a classless society. America actually is closer to India, with its castes ranging from Brahmins to “untouchables,” than to the “all men are created equal” society we claim.

The single biggest financial problem facing America is the widening Gap between the rich and the rest — a Gap purchased the rich via political contributions (bribery) and by promises of lucrative employment later (more bribery).

They call it the “death tax” to imply every family losing a loved one pays it. But, 99.8 percent of American families are untouched by the estate tax.

Opponents claim families are forced to sell farms and small businesses to pay the tax. In fact, no family farm has ever been sold to pay the estate tax. Of the millions of small businesses and small family farms, only 20 paid any estate tax in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center.

So the need to cut costs is a lie, and the need to cut taxes on the rich is a lie.

And the voting mopes are stupid enough to fall for the same lies, year after year after year.

How stupid? Very stupid.

And sad.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
The Ten Steps to Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Federally funded, 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. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)
10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

Initiating The Ten Steps sequentially will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.
——————————————————————————————————————————————

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.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

THE RECESSION CLOCK
Monetary Sovereignty

Monetary Sovereignty

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

Next Page »