–You never will know what you have lost. Part III

Mitchell’s laws:
●The more budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor, which leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

Today’s Washington Post published an excellent article that bears on the idiocy of the “small government” beliefs, as expressed by the Tea Party and adopted by the Republicans (and to a lesser extent by the Democrats).

I urge you to read the full article, but here are a few excerpts,

It’s time to get serious about science
By Jim Cooper and and Alan I. Leshner, Published: September 9, 2012
Jim Cooper, a Democrat, represents Tennessee’s Fifth Congressional District in the U.S. House. Alan I. Leshner is chief executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and executive publisher of the journal Science.

Some policymakers, including certain senators and members of Congress, cannot resist ridiculing any research project with an unusual title. The United States may now risk falling behind in scientific discoveries as other countries increase their science funding. It’s time for researchers to fight back, to return a comeback for every punch line.

Toward that end, we are announcing this week the winners of the first Golden Goose Awards, which recognize the often-surprising benefits of science to society. Charles H. Townes, for example, is hailed as a primary architect of laser technology. Early in his career, though, he was reportedly warned not to waste resources on an obscure technique for amplifying radiation waves into an intense, continuous stream.

Similarly, research on jellyfish nervous systems by Osamu Shimomura, Martin Chalfie and Roger Y. Tsien unexpectedly led to advances in cancer diagnosis and treatment, increased understanding of brain diseases such as Alzheimer’s, and improved detection of poisons in drinking water. The late Jon Weber as well as Eugene White, Rodney White and Della Roy developed special ceramics based on coral’s microstructure that is now used in bone grafts and prosthetic eyes.

It is human nature to chuckle at a study titled “Acoustic Trauma in the Guinea Pig,” yet this research led to a treatment for hearing loss in infants. Similar examples abound. Transformative technologies such as the Internet, fiber optics, the Global Positioning System, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computer touch-screens and lithium-ion batteries were all products of federally funded research.

Yes, “the sex life of the screwworm” sounds funny. But a $250,000 study of this pest, which is lethal to livestock, has, over time, saved the U.S. cattle industry more than $20 billion. Remember: The United States itself is the product of serendipity: Columbus’s voyage was government-funded. Remember, too, that basic science, the seed corn of innovation, is primarily supported by the federal government — not industry, which is typically more interested in applied research and development.

Federal investments in R&D have fueled half of the nation’s economic growth since World War II. Federal support for basic science is at risk: We are already investing a smaller share of our economy in science as compared with seven other countries, including Japan, Taiwan and South Korea.

Since 1999, the United States has increased R&D funding, as a percentage of the economy, by 10 percent. Over the same period, the share of R&D in the economies of Finland, Germany and Israel have grown about twice as fast. In Taiwan, it has grown five times as fast; in South Korea, six times as fast; in China; 10 times.

In the United States, meanwhile, additional budget cuts have been proposed to R&D spending for non-defense areas. If budget-control negotiations fail, drastic across-the-board cuts will take effect in January that could decimate entire scientific fields.

Last year, I wrote two posts on this subject: “You never will know what you have lost.” and “You never will know what you have lost. Part II”

The earlier post ends with this comment:

The lame who might have walked. The blind who might have seen. The children who might have given to America. The tornados and hurricanes and earthquakes that might have been foreseen or stopped. The money that investors might have saved. The inventions never invented. The recessions and depressions that might have been avoided. The wars that might have been won or prevented. The life-saving drugs that might have been developed. The people who might not have died too soon. The beauty never created. The ideas lost. The better world that might have been. You never will know.

And we trade all this potential for the reality of a meaner, uglier, less elegant life, especially for the lower classes, who will be affected most by deficit reduction, though we all will be affected. What a waste, given the tools we’ve been given, that we intentionally should deprive ourselves and our children and our grandchildren of the benefits a society can offer, and instead retreat toward the days of hardscrabble anarchy.

What have we lost? What will we lose tomorrow? You never will know.

And that is the invisible cost of “smaller government and deficit reduction — all unnecessary in a Monetarily Sovereign nation.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

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

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

John Kass and the war myth

John Kass used to be a pretty good investigative writer for the Chicago Tribune, at least he was when he stuck to what he knows best: Dirty Chicago and Illinois politics, ala Mike Royko. Kass was an equal opportunity rock kicker, who uncovered political snakes and slime, Republican and Democratic — and of course there was, and still are, plenty of snakes and slime for him to uncover, in our fair city and state.

Of late however, he must have received “The Word” from the wealthy owners and editors of the Chicago Tribune. So for the past few weeks, every one of his columns has been devoted to national politics and economics, two subjects of which he knows little to nothing. Per boss’s instructions, his sole focus has been on blasting Obama.

I can’t blame anyone for kissing up to the boss, although Kass always has smirked at political sycophants. So it’s ironic and a bit sad, to see this once-effective writer turn into “Kissup Kass,” writing just what his masters want, neither more nor less.

Anyway, the above is just a prelude to the central theme of this post: The war myth.

Kissup Kass mentioned the myth in todays (September 9, 2012):

Under Obama’s watch, the national debt has ballooned, passing into the trillions and trillions, numbers inconceivable only a decade ago. And China holds our paper.

Yet there he was, offering more government, not less, while parading that savage icon of massive federal spending and authority, Franklin Roosevelt.

“I won’t pretend the path I’m offering is quick or easy. I never have,” said the president. “You didn’t elect me to tell you what you wanted to hear. You elected me to tell you the truth. And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades. It will require common effort, shared responsibility, and the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one.”

Many historians have concluded that Roosevelt’s big-government moves only made the Depression worse, and that only a world war got the economy going.

I wish I had a dime for every time someone told me that federal deficit spending hurts the economy but wars stimulate the economy. And I never stop being amazed at the lack of logic those two opposing ideas convey.

Let’s get this straight. The only historians that agree with Kissup must be morons, for wars do not stimulate economies. Wars only kill people. It’s the federal deficit spending for wars that stimulates economies. The federal purchase of all those bullets, tanks and bombs, plus the massive salary total for all the soldiers, pumps huge numbers of dollars into the economy, and those additional dollars stimulate the economy.

There are many ways to measure economic growth, but Gross Domestic Product (GDP) may be the most popular, an here is how GDP is calculated.

Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending – Net Imports

Those of you having even a smidgeon of algebraic knowledge will recognize that increasing GDP without increasing Federal Spending would be quite difficult, and in a practical sense, well nigh impossible (because Federal Spending also boosts Non-federal Spending). This is why the “small government” preachers either are ignorant, intentionally trying to sabotage the economy or merely are kissing up to rich people. There are no other alternatives.

The wealthiest among us are only too happy to see the economy tank, because during recessions and depressions, the gap between the rich and the others, widens.

Obama did have an opportunity, after his party lost the House in 2010, to pivot and change political course like a Chicago version of Bill Clinton, but he remains, stubbornly, a man of the left, and government is the hammer in his hand.

Here, Kissup refers to the myth that Bill Clinton’s surpluses benefited the economy. But, federal surpluses reduce the domestic money supply, which always leads to recessions and depressions, exactly what Kissup’s masters want. Clinton’s deficit reductions beginning in 2002, and culminating in the surpluses of 1998-2001, led to the recession of 2001

Finally, if you think I’m being harsh and childish by referring to John Kass as “Kissup,” you’re right. However, readers of Kass’s column will recognize the irony. Kissup repeatedly refers to politicians by his own invented nicknames. His name for Mayor Emanuel is “Rahmfather” and Mayor Daley was “shortshanks.” (I know. I don’t get it, either.)

Bottom line, the media barons have “influnced” even good writers to toe the right-wing line, which includes the false notion that the federal debt and deficit are too large. The purpose: To increase the gap between the income groups. And wars stimulate only because they stimulate federal spending. Killing people doesn’t grow the economy.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Is America better off today than it was when Obama took office?

The Republicans ask, “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” The implication is that we are not better off, and perhaps even worse off.

There are many criteria for “better off,” two of which are Gross Domestic Product and Unemployment. To my knowledge, the Republicans have not been specific about what measure they are using.

President Obama took office in January, 2009. The following graph shows the trends for real Gross Domestic product (red line) and real per-capita GDP figures (blue line).

The economy seems to have hit its low point at the very beginning of Obama’s term, and has grown, since.

The civilian unemployment rate (green line) rose during Obama’s first year in office, reaching its peak in 2010, and has fallen since, to below where it was when he took office.

As I said, there are many measures of “better off,” but GDP and Unemployment seem to be the most referenced, and by those measures, the answer to the questions would be, “Yes, we are better off.”

That said, other data point in both directions. The poverty level is rising. Obamacare will reduce the number of people who have no health insurance. Real Disposable Personal Income is up.

All signs point to the unpleasant fact that the gap between the 1% and the 99% is growing. The rich are better off; the poor are worse off and growing more numerous. And historically, this has led to revolution.

Note to the rich: Cut taxes on the 99%. Increase social benefits — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, aid to education, aid to the poor — help the states, help small business, reduce working hours. Follow the 9 steps, below.

If you want to keep what you have, close the gap, or the people will rise up and take what you have, away.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–We are in a never-ending war. On which side are you?

Mitchell’s laws:
●The more budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor
●Austerity starves the economy to feed the government, and leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

We are at war. Since the beginning of civilizations, we have been at war. The war is between our ruling class and the rest of us.

Governments rule and are ruled. There are many forms of government: Democracies of various kinds, dictatorships, theocracies, tribal. The list is endless, as every form has subdivisions, exhibiting sometimes subtle differences. But all have certain similarities.

They all have a ruling class, whose power depends on gaps between them and the general populace. The greater the gaps, the greater the power held by the ruling class. And just as power corrupts, widening the gaps corrupts.

Gaps come in many flavors. Examples are: financial (rich vs. poor), police/military (strong vs. weak), moral (good vs. evil), informational (educated vs. uneducated), gender (male vs. female) or some combinations thereof. In all cases, the goal is to set the ruling class further and further apart from the ruled.

Consider a theocracy: It takes money from its followers, enriching itself at the expense of the donors. Poorer people are told to give their money to wealthy churches, widening the financial gap.

A theocracy makes laws that followers (but not the leaders) are compelled to follow, lest they be punished by ostracism, torture or death. Thereby, the police/military gap is widened.

Theocratic leaders claim morality, with all others being labeled “sinners.” And the religious leaders create, then translate, religious documents (Bible, Koran, et al) according to their whim, making them the educated ones, while all others are ignorant. Finally, theocracies almost universally have been misogynist, anti-gay and xenophobic, with “outsiders” viewed as threats to the power of the domestic elite.

Consider the United States federal government: It taxes its citizens, though being Monetarily Sovereign, it has neither need for, nor use of, tax money. The US makes the laws we all must follow (based on its sole interpretation of morality). It enlists into the army and police, men and women from the private sector to enforce those laws, strengthening itself at the expense of the private sector, both morally and physically.

As now seen in Syria, (and in America, whenever the #Occupy movement protests), and indeed in every nation where tread-upon people demand redress from their leaders, the ruling class demands a strong police/military, to enforce “law and order.”

At the direction of the ruling class, the U.S. government controls the dissemination of information; it lies, denies and omits facts, thus creating, then preying upon, the ignorance of the populace.

The U.S. remains a male-dominated society, as witness the makeup of Congress (16% female) and CEOs of Fortune 500 companies (4% female).

Thus, the US ruling class covers many gaps: financial, police/military, moral, informational and gender. The wall between the U.S. and Mexico, and the various anti-immigrant, anti-minority state laws are symbols of a renewing xenophobia — a typical gap.

The question often is asked: If the United States government has the unlimited ability to create dollars, why does it siphon tax dollars out of the private sector? It has no need to widen the financial gap, since that gap is infinite.

The reason: The leaders of the US government are supported by, and beholden to, the wealthiest among us. And to these wealthy people, widening the financial gap is paramount. Psychologically, the financial gap is more important than the score. You might think you would be happy to earn $1 million per year, especially if everyone you knew earned “only” $50K per year. But how would you feel if all your friends earned $100 million per year, and you still earned “only” $1 million?

Salaried people are more concerned about the income gap between them and their co-workers, than their salary itself. Give them a $100 raise and they are happy– until they learn another worker was given a $200 raise. Meanwhile, the boss cares very little about any gap between employee A and employee B. He might even use it as leverage against them. He is more interested in the gap between him and his peers – and his workers. The U.S. is the wealthiest nation on earth, that gap being of great pride to us all.

Our ruling class “encourages” taxes favorable to themselves. They own newspapers and television stations that falsely tell the public social benefits must be reduced or taxes increased, lest these benefits “go bankrupt.”

Not only do our leaders maintain the most damaging and regressive tax in American history (FICA), but they even tax the Social Security benefits people ostensibly have “paid for,” and repeatedly delay providing those benefits – all because the ruling-class owns and controls the media and the politicians, who lie that Social Security can go bankrupt.

Our Monetarily Sovereign federal government easily could provide health care insurance to every man, woman and child in America. Instead, our politicians, at the behest of the ruling class, tell the 99% their own benefits must be reduced. Our Monetarily Sovereign government easily could support every retired person in America, without FICA. Instead, our politicians, at the behest of the ruling class, tell the 99% such support would cause inflation, bankrupt the system, and be “unsustainable” (a favorite word of the rulers).

The power of the people begins with population. If the Syrian revolution succeeds, it will be because the people are able to sustain greater losses and continue to fight. The ruling class is few in number. In a democracy, the power of the people comes is expressed with the ballot. But that power can be subverted by misinformation, a tactic the 1% have used for millennia.

The purpose of this blog is to provide information. Because of previous brainwashing, many people initially resist anything that counters the propaganda of the ruling class (as delivered by the politicians and the media.).

So we continue to pound away at the facts: The U.S. government never can run short of dollars, never can go bankrupt. The government can pay for Social Security and Medicare for everyone. FICA is harmful, unnecessary and saps the strength of the middle- and lower-classes. Federal taxes take dollars from the economy, do not support the government and should be reduced.. Federal deficits are necessary to grow the economy. Inflation easily can be controlled, even with massive, deficit spending.

When people ask me, “If taxes are not necessary, why does the government levy them?” my only thought is, “Don’t you get it? We’re in a war. It’s like asking why your enemies are shooting at you. The ruling class wants to defeat you. Don’t let them convince you to give them your bullets.”

When you vote in any election, ask yourself which candidate is more likely to widen the gap between the ruling class and you. Ask:

●Which candidate and party is more closely aligned with the ruling class and more likely to increase the gap between rich and middle classes?
●Which one makes greater demands for a strong police to enforce “law and order” against public protest?
●Which candidate and party is less likely to support citizen movements like unions and #Occupy?
●Which one is more likely to reduce legal protections for the 99% via “deregulation”?
●Which one leans more toward theocratic and religious extremism?
●Which candidate backs “widening the tax base” (increasing the number of poor people paying tax), while cutting taxes on the rich?
●For which candidate and party are the ruling-class owners of newspapers and TV stations more likely to vote?
●Which candidate favors reduced federal support for social programs – Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, food stamps and other poverty programs?
●Which one is less xenophobic, favoring an easier path to citizenship (adding to the population of the 99%) and better relations with foreign nations?
●Which candidate and party leans more toward women’s rights and the rights of minorities?

And finally, ask yourself:
●Which candidate has more consistently advocated the positions I want?

We are in a war. Like it or not, you are a soldier in one of the armies. Which is your army? Cast your vote accordingly.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: