–Letter to Tony Hunter, president, publisher and CEO of Chicago Tribune Company. Probably fruitless.

Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================
I had a very brief correspondence with Tony Hunter, president, publisher and CEO of Chicago Tribune Company, which culminated in my sending him the following note. I do not expect him to answer. The editors of the Tribune often write about economics, but have shown no inclination to understand economics.

So, why did I write? Just tapping on the sleeper’s shoulder. Who knows which tap will awaken someone there. I hope you will continue contacting your politicians and media. You may be the one to end the nightmare.

Tony,

Would you be willing to publish a short (condensed to less than 1,000 words) OpEd article telling the other side of the deficit story? Here’s a sample:

The Myth of Federal Deficits

The federal deficit discussion is based on the false belief that federal finances resemble our personal finances. The federal government is not like us. You and I, Chicago, Cook County, Illinois and every business are “monetarily non-sovereign.” To pay bills, we need income coming from an outside source – a salary, a loan or, in the case of state and local governments, taxes.

Uniquely, the federal government does not need income to pay its bills; it merely sends instructions to banks to mark up creditors’ accounts. A check from the federal government is not money. It is a set of instructions to your bank to mark up the numbers in your checking account. Because the federal government is “Monetarily Sovereign,” it has the unlimited ability to send these instructions, endlessly.

Unlike state and local governments, the federal government does not rely on taxes. Whether federal taxes fall to $0 or rise to $100 trillion, neither event would affect the federal government’s ability to pay bills, that is, to send instructions to banks. The federal government is the only entity in America that has this ability, though certain other foreign governments have it in their own nations: Canada, Australia, China, etc.

What about inflation?

The only limit to federal spending is not taxes, or debt or deficits or debt/GDP or any other popular measure. The limit to federal spending is inflation. We have had inflation over time because the Federal Reserve believes some inflation is beneficial, so it establishes a target rate at about 3%. The Fed has the power to cause 0% inflation, or even deflation. Historically, U.S. inflations have not corresponded with federal deficits but rather with oil prices.

So, why do we pay taxes at all?

Prior to 1971, the U.S. was on a gold standard. Its ability to pay bills was limited by its gold supply. When gold was in short supply, the U.S. borrowed, which meant federal debt or taxes were needed to reduce the debt. On August 15, 1971, President Nixon ended the gold standard. Today, even were there not one ounce of gold in Fort Knox, the federal government retains the unlimited ability to pay its bills.

Though the world of economics changed on that August day, politicians, the media and even old-line economists never changed their theories. They continued to believe federal borrowing and taxing were necessary. When underlying facts change, but beliefs don’t change, the beliefs are wrong.

How will we ever pay off our debt?

The federal deficit is the difference between taxes collected and federal spending. Federal debt is the total of outstanding Treasury Securities (T-bills, notes and bonds). A law, created many years ago, during the gold standard, requires the Treasury to sell T-securities in the same amount as the federal deficit. Were it not for this obsolete law, there would be no T-securities and thus no federal debt.

To purchase a T-bill, you instruct the federal government to reduce the balance in your checking account and to increase the balance in your T-bill account. The government “pays off” by increasing the balance in your checking account and reducing the balance in your T-bill account. Except for interest, this process does not add money to the economy, so has virtually no inflation implications.

The federal government could eliminate all federal debt, tomorrow, merely by instructing banks to credit the accounts of T-security holders, while debiting their T-security accounts – a simple act of accounting. Because the relationship between federal deficits and federal debts is only a legal one, there could be deficits without debt, and debt without deficits. The two are not functionally related.

Why not reduce the deficit?

By definition, a small economy has less money than does a large economy. So for an economy to grow, its money supply must grow. When the federal government deficit spends, money enters the economy via credits to checking accounts. Deficit spending increases the money supply, while federal surpluses decrease the money supply. That is why every depression in U.S. history, and the vast majority of recessions, have resulted from decreases if federal deficit growth, and all recoveries have corresponded with increases in deficit growth.

Today, we try to recover from the most serious recession since the Great Depression. We were saved from another depression by federal deficit spending that began to grow dramatically in 2008. Unfortunately, federal deficit growth began to decline at the end of the recession and has been in decline for what soon will be three years. This, together with the ongoing Congressional demand for reduced deficits, signals the probable return of recession in 2012.

What should be done?

Ending a recession and returning to prosperity requires adding money to the economy. There is no other solution. I suggest the following three steps:

1. End FICA: This regressive tax takes money from salaried workers and from business. Social Security and Medicare should be financed the same way all of the other 1,000 federal agencies are financed: By direct federal support.

2. Reduce income taxes gradually. Increasing the standard deduction by $10,000 each year.

3. Increase federal support for the states (which are monetarily non-sovereign) on a per-capita basis. The states then could support their counties and cities, while reducing local taxes. Each $1,000 of per capita support would add about $300 billion to the federal deficit.

In Summary

The federal government is unique. The rules that apply to you and me, do not apply to the federal government. It cannot run short of money. It cannot go “broke” as Rep. Boehner claimed. It can pay any debt. Our economic growth requires ongoing increases in the money supply, that is, increases in federal deficit spending. The only limit to federal spending is inflation, which not only is nowhere near, but can be controlled by the Fed.

Reducing the deficit will cause recessions, depressions and a decrease in quality of life for us, our children and our grandchildren.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com


==========================================================================================================================================
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. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–They, who caused America’s decline, meet to urge America’s fall

Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================

Here is an Email I recently received. I share it with you so you can understand the depths of debt-reduction madness in America, and learn who the participants are. As America sinks from its once-lofty status as “The Greatest Nation In The World,” you’ll know whom to blame.

Urging the Super Committee to GO BIG: $4 Trillion and Beyond

The “Super Committee” has been charged with making recommendations that would reduce deficits by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years. Unfortunately, more is needed to fix the budget and put the debt on a sustainable path. In order to meaningfully address our nation’s fiscal challenges, the Super Committee should go much further.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget along with the Concord Coalition and the Bipartisan Policy Center invite you to attend a forum that will bring together leaders from across the spectrum to discuss the path ahead for the Super Committee and the reasons it should ‘Go Big.’

Moderators:
Peter Cook, Chief Washington Correspondent, Bloomberg Television
Maya MacGuineas, President, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Panel 1 — Going Big: Why the Super Committee Must Exceed Its Mandate

Erskine Bowles, Co-chair, National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform
Jim Nussle, Co-chair, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and Former Director, Office of Management and Budget
Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Dave Cote, CEO, Honeywell International
Alice Rivlin, Former Director, Congressional Budget Office and Former Director, Office of Management and Budget

Panel 2 — Public Response and Special Interests: The Politics of Going Big

John Spratt, Former Chairman, House Budget Committee
Pete Domenici, Former Chairman, Senate Budget Committee
Charles Kolb, President, Committee for Economic Development
Dave McCurdy, President and CEO, American Gas Association
Bill Novelli, Former CEO, AARP
Andy Stern, Senior Research Fellow, Georgetown Public Policy Institute

Panel 3 — Deficits and Growth: The Political and Economic Picture Today and Tomorrow
Senator Mark Warner (D-VA)
Governor John Engler, President, Business Roundtable
Alan Greenspan, Former Chair, Federal Reserve Board
David Stockman, Former Member of Congress and Former Director, Office of Management and Budget
Jane Harman, President, CEO, and Director, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Smithsonian Institution and Former Member of Congress

I award the participants five dunce caps for abysmal failure to understand even the basics of Monetary Sovereignty.

Anyone who does not understand the great damage these people are causing America, should investigate the unnecessary losses to Social Security, Medicare, FEMA, research and development in all sciences, the ecology, homeland security, the military, aid to the poor, the middle class, the postal service, the arts, roads and bridges, food and drug inspection and myriad other federal services.

Because of these people, and like-minded others, you and your children and your children’s children now have, and will continue to have, worsening lives. That is the future these people have given us.

(Note to all of the above participants: I am running a large dunce-cap deficit, but am in no danger of running short – just like dollars and the federal government.)

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com


==========================================================================================================================================
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. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Debt reduction madness: How Congress continues to diminish America

Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================

Washington Post: “Obama backs ending Saturday mail as part of deficit proposals”

“9/20/11: By Ed O’Keefe: The Obama administration inserted itself Monday into a years-old fight over the future of the U.S. Postal Service, backing proposals to end Saturday mail delivery and to raise postage rates beyond the rate of inflation.”

The support for the proposals came as part of broader White House ideas to pay down the federal deficit. . . . But Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who is pushing competing proposals, called Obama’s ideas a “thinly veiled attempt to offset continued operating losses with a taxpayer-funded bailout.”

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), another lawmaker closely tracking postal affairs, said ending Saturday mail “will only make matters worse and accelerate the Postal Service’s death spiral.

Never mind that taxpayers do not pay for federal spending. And never mind that the postal service, a vital part of the American economy, is being sacrificed to deficit (i.e. money) reduction madness.

Washington Post: Senate to try to force confrontation with House over FEMA dollars

9/21/11: By Rosalind S. Helderman: Senate Democrats plan to add billions of dollars for disaster relief to a House-authored measure to fund government when the fiscal year ends at the end of September, a move that could force House Republicans to decide whether to hold-up the must-pass bill over additional dollars for disaster victims.

The House will vote Wednesday on a continuing appropriations measure designed to fund government through Nov. 18.
[…]
The House measure includes $3.65 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s disaster relief fund, which has run almost dry as a result of a series of tornadoes, fires and storms.
[…]
In their version of the bill, $1.5 billion of FEMA funding, which would become available to the agency immediately upon the bill’s passage, would be balanced out with a cut to a program that offers loans to auto manufacturers to encourage the production of energy efficient cars.
[…]
“I was disappointed to see the House shortchanged the Federal Emergency Management Agency,” Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said on the floor of the Senate Tuesday, announcing he would move to amend the House resolution with additional dollars.
[…]
Democrats will need the support of Senate Republicans who backed boosted FEMA funding last week to send the bill back to the House. Assuming they get it, the House will then have to decide whether to accept the funding or reject it, as the possibility of a shutdown no one wants looms.

So here is Congress, debating whether to reduce postal service or to help victims of tornadoes, fires and storms or to encourage production of energy efficient cars. Why must we choose? Why must our Monetarily Sovereign nation – once the greatest nation in the world, with the unlimited ability to pay any bill of any size — now repeatedly be forced to make such decisions? Why has our America become so feeble and hesitant?

Because Congress is victim to debt-reduction madness, and we are victim to Congress. It’s as though children were voting the best way to do brain surgery. And everyone is surprised we, the patients, are dying.

“Down and down we go
We’re in a deadly spin
Hating this spin we’re in
Our helpless panic grows
Down and down and down we go.”

(Alice Cooper: “Deeper”)

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com


==========================================================================================================================================
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. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Are we the next Japan? Ask Richard Koo

Mitchell’s laws: Reduced money growth never stimulates economic growth. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================================================

Richard Koo is chief economist for the Nomura Research Institute. He is one of the very few prominent economists, not with the University of Missouri, Kansas City, who understands Monetary Sovereignty. Recently, he was interviewed by MONEY magazine senior editor, Kim Clark. The interview ran in the October 11th issue. I urge you to read it.

According to Clark, Koo says:

“Government spending is the key to getting the economy back on track — and that 2009’s massive stimulus package didn’t go far enough.”

Actually, I predicted back in an April 9, 2008 letter to the Chicago Tribuen, that the various stimulus plans were too little, too late.

Here are some excerpts from the Koo interview:

Clark: Some people look at Japan and say the government spent huge sums on public projects and there was no real growth, so spending didn’t really cure the economy.
Koo: The early ’90’s recession in Japan was far worse than people realize. Commercial real estate prices nationwide in Japan fell 87% from the peak. Imagine U.S. housing prices down 87%. The fact that the Japanese government halted what could have been an enormous drop in GDP in the early ’90’s speaks to the success of its economic policies.

Clark: But Japan did suffer a major recession again in 1997.
Koo: The Japanese made a horrendous mistake in 1997. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the International Monetary Fund said to Japan, “You are running a huge fiscal deficit with an aging population. You’d better reduce your deficit.” When the government cut spending and raised taxes, the whole economy came crashing down. I see exactly the same pattern in the U.S. today. If the government acts to cut the deficit while people are continuing to pay down their debts, then we could have a second leg of decline that could be very, very ugly.

Sound familiar? Japan cut its deficit and a major recession resulted. This is why I have predicted a major U.S. recession or depression for 2012.

Clark: So are you saying that the stimulus package didn’t go far enough?
Koo: Obama kept the economy from falling into a Great Depression. . . The economy is still struggling, so people say that money must have been wasted. Not true. The expiration of the package is behind the economy’s weakness now. Yes, the Bush tax cuts were extended . . but tax cuts are the least efficient way to support the economy . . .because . . . a large portion will be . . . used to pay down consumer debt. Government spending is much more effective.

Clark: Congress recently committed to slash our defict by $2.5 trillion . . .
Koo: (In Japan), the cutback caused a second recession. Think about the Great Depression; war spending is what finally pulled the economy out. The Japanese government didn’t do enough spending in the early 1990s and added another 10 years to the problem. If the U.S. avoids that mistake, maybe in a couple of years you will be out of this mess.

Here we have Japan, a Monetarily Sovereign nation just like the U.S., that went through exactly what we are going through, and made exactly the same mistakes we are making. What have our politicians, media and old-line economists learned from Japan’s experience. Apparently, nothing.

Are you angry enough to write to your political leaders and your favorite media? If not, when?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com


==========================================================================================================================================
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. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY