–These people step on your back, to lift themselves up. Campaign to fix the debt.

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.
●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.
==================================================================================================================================================================

There is a group deceptively named, “Fix the debt.org,” whose sole mission is not to fix anything, but rather to cut the federal spending that benefits the poor and middle-income people (the 99%), and to modify tax laws to benefit the 1% richest among us.

At the end of this post, you’ll see the usual “widen the Gap” (between the rich and the rest) suspects — Bowles, Simpson, MacGuineas, Peterson et al.

As part of their well-funded campaign to justify their reverse Robin Hood — taking from the poor and giving to the rich — they have published Common Myths About the Debt.

Here are some excerpts:

Our nation’s debt has reached unsustainable levels, nearly twice the historical average and on track to grow even greater unless Congress acts.

They never mention what is “unsustainable” about the federal debt, which is nothing more than the total of T-security deposits in private accounts at the Federal Reserve bank.

Is your bank savings account “unsustainable”? No? Neither is mine. But, for reasons beyond logic, your accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank supposedly are “unsustainable.”

Why? To cut federal benefits — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, aids to the poor, aids to education, unemployment compensation and all other spending that benefits the 99% and narrows the Gap.

(So-called) “Myth”: Deficit levels are falling and therefore, debt is no longer a concern.

(Phony) “Fact”: Over the next decade, our debt is on track to grow by almost $8 trillion. Even though debt may remain stable as a share of the economy for a few years, its growth will accelerate after 2018 and exceed the size of the entire economy by the mid-2030s.

An ever-rising debt path will inhibit long-term economic growth, increase the cost of living, leave the government unprepared for national emergencies, and increase the risk of a fiscal crisis.

Real Fact: Yes, the total of deposits in T-security accounts might exceed Gross Domestic Product. So?

It’s like saying your deposits in your bank savings account will exceed your spending. So? In both cases, it’s a meaningless comparison, meant to scare us about nothing.

And exactly how will these deposits “inhibit long-term economic growth, increase the cost of living, etc., etc.”? Answer: They won’t. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Federal spending stimulates long-term economic growth, does not cause inflation (See: Oil Causes Inflation), and has nothing to do with government preparedness or fiscal crises.

(So-called) “Myth”: There is no harm in waiting to solve our debt problems.

(Phony) “Fact”: The longer we wait to confront our debt problems, the larger the required benefit cuts or tax increases will need to be for each individual. And it will be harder to protect the most vulnerable in society from bearing the burden.

Real Fact: No benefit cuts or tax increases are necessary. To “pay off” the debt (i.e. redeem the T-securities), the Federal Reserve Bank does exactly what any bank does: It takes existing dollars from the T-security accounts and transfers them to private checking accounts.

Even if the federal “debt” (total of T-security accounts) were $999 trillion, they still would not be a burden on the federal government, on you or on me.

As for the fake worry about “the most vulnerable in society,” these are the people who are most injured by austerity (aka deficit reduction).

(So-called) “Myth”: Deficit reduction is just code for austerity, which will ultimately hurt the economy.

(Phony) Fact: A comprehensive and gradual deficit reduction plan can replace austerity with more targeted and pro-growth reforms that promote economic recovery and accelerate long-term wage growth.

For example, the Congressional Budget Office found that a $4 trillion deficit reduction package would help the economy, increasing average income by $7,000 by 2039. Average income would be 9 percent higher than if policymakers allow debt to rise rapidly.

Real Fact: They actually don’t deny that debt reduction is, in fact, austerity, which never has worked to grow an economy, anywhere in the world. There is no known economic mechanism by which taking $4 trillion out of an economy would “help” the economy and increase average income.

(So-called) “Myth”: Deficit reduction will harm low-income and vulnerable populations.

(Phony) Fact: Every recent bipartisan deficit reduction plan has included progressive reforms that ask more from those who can afford it, protect low-income programs, and offer new enhancements for the most vulnerable.

Real fact: Note the carefully crafted words, “bipartisan” and “included.”

“Bipartisan” excludes all right-wing “screw-the-poor” plans. And “included” doesn’t mention that on balance, right wing plans always widen the Gap.

(So-called) “Myth”: The debt can be solved by cutting waste, fraud, or foreign aid.

(Phony) Fact: Even if we eliminated all waste, fraud, and foreign aid, we would still have not dealt with the long-term drivers of the debt. Specifically, we need to slow the unsustainable growth of entitlement spending, which currently makes up 60 percent of the budget.

Mandatory and interest spending will nearly double in the next 40 years due to population aging and rising health care costs.

Real Fact: Since the “debt” is not a problem, one should not refer to “solving” it or calling it “unsustainable.”

Yes, entitlement spending is at the heart of this. The rich, and their toadies, don’t want you to collect on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, School Lunches, any aids to the not rich, etc.

Looks like we can forget about the right-wings desire to “protect the most vulnerable.”

The federal government being Monetarily Sovereign, Federal interest payments are no burden whatsoever.

Even were interest payments 100 times their current level, the government could pay them without difficulty. And those payments stimulate the economy, by putting dollars into consumers’ pockets.

(So-called) “Myth”: The debt can be solved with faster economic growth.

(Phony) Fact: Economic growth must be part of the solution, but it can’t solve the debt problem alone. The amount of growth required would be unprecedented. Productivity growth would have to be 50 percent higher over the next quarter century just to hold debt at its current record-high levels.

Real Fact: This is an intentionally confused statement, pretending to indicate that the federal government pays its debts with Gross Domestic Product.

Total nonsense.

Economic growth doesn’t “solve” a debt non-problem. The federal debt is not paid with GDP. The federal debt (aka T-securities) are paid with dollars that already exist in T-security accounts.

Interest is paid with dollars that are created ad hoc, by our Monetarily Sovereign government. Even if GDP were $0, the federal government could pay off any size debt, instantly.

(So-called) Myth: Taxing the wealthy more will solve the debt problem.

(Phony) Fact: Our debt problems are too large, and the top 1% too few, to solve the entire problem by raising taxes on the wealthy.

Our debt problems are large enough that they should be solved by both tax reform to reduce tax breaks and spending reform to slow the growth of entitlement programs.

Again, totally confused.

First: Federal debt is not a “problem,” not for you, not for me, not for the federal government. It is bank accounts, similar to saving accounts. Is your bank savings account a “problem”?

Second: Federal taxes do not pay for anything. Even if all federal taxes were eliminated, the federal government could continue to spend, forever.

Third: To the right wing, “tax reform” means some form of “flat tax” or “broadening the tax base” — taxes that for right-wing “fairness,” cost the poor a larger percentage of their income than the rich. Classic examples: FICA and sales taxes, both of which are highly regressive.

Fourth: There’s that “slow the growth of entitlement programs” mantra again, the real goal of the rich.

You don’t need Social Security and Medicare, unemployment insurance or food stamps, do you? And anyone who accepts them is a good-for-nothing sloth. Right?

After all, everyone knows that you people taking money from the government are lazy, do-nothing slackers trying to game the system. It’s the rich who work their fingers to the bone (washing their yachts, planes and limousines) who are the real Americans.

As mentioned at the start, here is that list of people who are oh-so-concerned about our most vulnerable — the poor, the sick, the elderly, the out-of-work, the school children — that they spend billions to reduce entitlements.

Why? Very simple. The Gap is what makes the rich rich. Without the Gap, no one would be rich, and the wider the Gap, the richer they are.

The following are just a few of those who tell the BIG LIE (that federal debt is “unsustainable), and who would like to push you down, then step on your back, to lift themselves up.

Recognize any names?

Campaign to Fix the Debt
Co-Chairs:
Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Former Mayor, New York City, New York; Senator Judd Gregg, Former U.S. Senator, New Hampshire; Governor Ed Rendell, Former Governor, Pennsylvania

Co-Founders:
Erskine Bowles, Co-Chair, National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform; Senator Alan Simpson, Co-Chair, National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform

Members:
Governor Phil Bredesen, Former Governor, Tennessee; Senator Kent Conrad, Former U.S. Senator, North Dakota; David Cote, Chairman and CEO, Honeywell International; Senator Pete Domenici, Former U.S. Senator, New Mexico; Congressman Vic Fazio, Former U.S. Congressman, California; James B. Lee, Jr., Vice Chairman, JPMorgan Chase & Co.; Maya MacGuineas, President, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget; Congressman Jim McCrery, Former U.S. Congressman, Louisiana; Senator Sam Nunn, Former U.S. Senator, Georgia; Congressman Jim Nussle, Former U.S. Congressman, Iowa; Michael Peterson, President and COO, Peter G. Peterson Foundation; Steven Rattner, Chairman, Willett Advisors LLC; Alice Rivlin, Former Director, Office of Management and Budget; Mayor Scott Smith, Former Mayor, Mesa, Arizona; Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Former Mayor, Los Angeles, California; Ambassador Robert Zoellick; Former President, World Bank

===================================================================================
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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. 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)

The Ten Steps 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

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

Sneak attacks: Cut Social Security. Increase the gas tax. Widen the Gap between the rich and the rest

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

Most people understand that increasing taxes in not a successful way to grow an economy. Taking dollars from consumers’ pockets depresses an economy.

Similarly, net federal spending adds dollars to consumers’ pockets. And, increased consumer spending stimulates the economy.

Those are basic economic facts.

Yet, amazingly, there are people whose mentality does not allow them to connect those dots. They sneer at all federal spending as “socialism,” and claim that federal deficits (i.e. net federal spending) actually depress the economy.

They claim that taking money out of the economy (aka “austerity”), in some unknown way, is stimulative. They have been brainwashed by the rich.

Those people refuse to understand the differences between a Monetarily Sovereign government (the U.S., Canada, Australia, China et al) and a monetarily non-sovereign entity (Florida, Cook County, Chicago, General Motors, euro nations, you and me).

Seemingly, they cannot visualize why financial prudence for one are acts of financial imprudence for the other. So they fret and fuss about deficits and debts, which can be harmful for monetarily non-sovereign entities, but are necessary for Monetarily Sovereign governments.

Presumably, such people would believe that because vultures thrive on rotted meat, humans too, would thrive on rotted meat. In their world, differences of case are ignored.

Not understanding the simple facts of Monetary Sovereignty, those people vote for political representatives who are paid by the rich is to take money from the pockets of the poor and middle-income groups, thus widening the Gap. between the rich and the rest.

Then, of course, after having voted for criminals, they complain about political criminality.

For example:

On Day One, the new Congress launches an attack on Social Security
Michael Hiltzik, LOS ANGELES TIMES

Well, that didn’t take long.

As one of its first orders of business upon convening Tuesday, the Republican House of Representatives approved a rule that will seriously undermine efforts to keep all of Social Security solvent.

(Before we continue, you should understand that the author is ignorant of Monetary Sovereignty, so he discusses Social Security “solvency,” when in fact, it is impossible for an agency of a Monetarily Sovereign government to become insolvent — unless the government wants it. Nevertheless, he understands the harm caused by austerity.)

The procedural rule enacted by the House Republican caucus (requires that) “benefit cuts or tax increases improve the solvency of the combined trust funds.”

In practical terms, it mandates either benefit cuts across the board, which aren’t politically palatable, or a payroll tax increase, which isn’t palatable to the GOP.

“It is hard to believe that there is any purpose to this unprecedented change to House rules other than to cut benefits for Americans who have worked hard all their lives.” – Max Richtman, Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare

The rule change reflects the burgeoning demonization of disability recipients, a trend we’ve reported on in the past. it’s been fomented by conservative Republicans and abetted by sloppy reporting by institutions such as NPR and “60 Minutes.”

This obeys the popular Republican meme that anyone (except big corporations) who receives money from the government, is a lazy slacker, trying to game the system. That includes the disabled, the sick, the unemployed and the poor — all lazy, criminals according to the right wing.

Disability recipients are easily caricatured as malingering layabouts by politicians, academics and journalists. They’ll say disability benefits are so lavish they discourage work, and convenient substitutes for welfare payments. None of that is true.

As I reported in 2013, Social Security’s disability standards are stringent. To be eligible you must have worked at least one-fourth of your adult life, and been employed in at least five of the previous 10 years.

Workers younger than 31 have to show employment in half the years since they turned 22.

You have to be too impaired to earn even $1,040 a month on your own. Just over a quarter of all applicants are approved initially, though an additional 13% or so win benefits on appeal. All in all, only 41% of all applicants end up with checks. Sound easy to you?

And here’s where the politicians, on the payroll of the rich and powerful, rely on the ignorance of the voting public:

The new rules drafters say it’s necessary to “protect the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund from diversion of its funds to finance a broken Disability Insurance system.”

But, disability isn’t “broken.” Its rolls have grown because of a number of well-understood factors, including the aging of the American population, the entry of more women into the workforce (and thus their eligibility for benefits), and the increase in Social Security’s full retirement age above 65.

In a cynical ploy, direct from the book, “1984,” our “Big Brother” teaches that cutting your benefits “protects” your money — and black is white and war is peace.

Sadly, the author thinks its all a big misunderstanding:

Do House Republicans understand any of that? It’s doubtful. If they did, they’d understand that their actions Tuesday are nothing short of shameful.

It’s no misunderstanding at all. It’s an intentional effort to keep taking money from the 99%, so as to widen the Gap., between the rich and the rest — an effort funded by the rich via campaign contributions (thank you right-wing Supreme Court) and promises of lucrative employment later.

You can read more about this at: ’60 Minutes” shameful attack on the disabled, October 07, 2013|By Michael Hiltzik.

Meanwhile, the Gap-widening efforts continue:

Republicans for Raising the Gas Tax?
Peter Suderman|Jan. 6, 2015

With gas prices around the country at lows not seen for years, America’s political class smells an opportunity: It must be time to raise the gas tax.

Over the weekend, Sen. John Thune (R-SD) was asked about the possibility of raising the federal tax on gasoline. In response, he said, “but I think we have to look at all the options.”

There are two reasons why this issue is coming up now. The first is that there’s a perennial shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund, which funds federal roads projects. The trust is paid for by a fuel tax of 18.4 cents per gallon, which has been level since 1993. Estimates from last summer put the shortfall around $170 billion.

It’s currently being funded via an $11 billion stopgap measure that expires in May. The politicos who manage the fund are looking for ways to fill that pot.

According to the article, “Peter Suderman is a senior editor at Reason magazine and Reason.com, where he writes regularly on health care, the federal budget, tech policy, and pop culture.” He also is a film critic.

So he knows a lot, but the one thing he doesn’t know is economics, because like the “man-in-the-street” he doesn’t understand the difference between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty.

He thinks federal spending is paid for by federal taxes. And the public, which hears this nonsense day after day after day, has been thoroughly brainwashed.

That’s the policy reason. But as much as anything, this is about low gas prices, which, at least in theory, make it easier to raise federal gas taxes.

It’s a kind of tax hike opportunism: Consumers are saving money at the pump, so some of the savings ought to go to the federal government. Even Republicans, typically the anti-taxers in government, aren’t immune from the lure of easy tax hikes.

The real reason is that tax hikes on purchases affect the 99% far more than they affect the 1%, simply because the 99% uses a greater percentage of their income to buy things, while the 1% uses more of their money to invest.

The rich pay to spread the disinformation about federal taxing and spending, because they want the Gap to increase. It is the Gap that makes them rich, and the wider the Gap, the richer they are.

So by telling you The Big Lie (i.e. the federal government needs your tax dollars) they gain your approval to reduce spending that benefits you and raise taxes on yourself. That’s why FICA was increased, Social Security benefits decreased and Republican governors have refused to accept billions in Medicaid benefits to the poor.

Day after day, you experience yet another sneak attack by the rich on the rest. And the Gap grows wider.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

===================================================================================
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. 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)

THE RECESSION CLOCK

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

–Then, now, and soon. Why the Greek tragedy plays out — to become a blessing

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

Then: :

“The Meteorology of Economics” A talk at UMKC, June 5, 2005: “Because of the Euro, no euro nation can control its own money supply. The Euro is the worst economic idea since the recession-era, Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The economies of European nations are doomed by the euro.”

Now:

Germany prepared to let Greece leave euro zone
Jan 4 2015, 05:15 ET | By: Yoel Minkoff, SA News Editor

Both Chancellor Angela Merkel and Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble believe the euro zone has implemented enough reforms since the height of the regional crisis in 2012 to make a potential Greece exit manageable, said Der Spiegel magazine on Saturday.

According to the report, the German government considers a Greece exit almost unavoidable if the left-wing, anti-austerity party Syriza led by Alexis Tsipras wins an election set for Jan. 25.

And soon:

Why Greece will look back at the other euro nations and laugh. Sunday, May 13 2012

Within two years after Greece leaves the euro, and re-adopts the drachma, its economy will grow, while the other euro nations sink deeper and deeper into austerity.

Why the tragedy plays out:

Euro Countries Take Tough Line Toward Greece

European officials are taking an increasingly hard line toward Athens, saying they want to keep Greece in the single currency, though not at any cost.

To the evident dismay of European officials, and international markets, the narrow front-runner for the Jan. 25 election appears to be Alexis Tsipras, the head of the leftist Syriza party.

Though Mr. Tsipras has made it clear that he would like to keep Greece in the eurozone, he has also vowed to repudiate parts of the nation’s debt, roll back the austerity measures required by Greece’s international creditors, and renegotiate deals with them that have given Greece access to billions in aid.

Following through on such pledges could cost Greece’s creditors, and European taxpayers, tens of billions of dollars.

What cost are (European leaders) willing to bear to keep Greece in the eurozone? Their answer, for now, has amounted to a tough line, particularly from the austerity-minded Germans.

It is mathematically impossible for austerity ever to grow an economy or benefit the poor and middle-income populace. Removing dollars from an economy, by definition, cannot increase GDP, and taxes + reduced spending punish the lower economic groups most.

It’s not so much the German people who like the austerity that has brought them low wages. It’s the German (and other nations’) rich and powerful, who like the austerity that widens the Gap, and gives them a ready supply of cheap, desperate labor.

The euro is the perfect “austerity forever” device for the rich and powerful. That’s why you repeatedly will read:

Wolfgang Schäuble, the German finance minister, (said): “If Greece takes another path, it will be difficult. Any new government will have to stick to the agreements made by its predecessor.”

Officials in Brussels emphasized that membership in the euro bloc was “irrevocable.”

“The euro is here to stay,” said a European Commission spokeswoman, Annika Breidthardt.

Guy Verhofstadt, who leads the Liberal group in the European Parliament, called the idea of a Greek exit from the eurozone “nonsense,” not only because most Greeks do not want to leave the euro, but also because European taxpayers would wind up losing billions of euros that Greece owes them.

President François Hollande said that though the Greeks were “free to choose their own destiny,” there were “certain engagements that have been made and all those must be of course respected.”

Preventing a Greek exit is also still desirable for Germany and other countries, since billions of euros in European taxpayer money could be wiped out if Greece were to leave the euro.

Of course, Greek taxpayers would have to pay those billions, but that’s the point. So long as the rich and powerful of Europe can continue to bleed the taxpayers of Greece, all is happiness in euroland.

And soon (we hope) the Greek people will wake up to the fact that they are enslaved by the euro — enslaved to a never-ending future of paying the rich and powerful, while they themselves sink deeper into poverty.

And soon (we hope) the Greek people will find a leader who takes them into Monetary Sovereignty by re-adopting their own sovereign currency.

Then the Greek will have the unlimited ability to grow their own economy, unencumbered by tribute being paid daily to foreign and domestic, rich and powerful, lenders.

And they will look back at those poor souls remaining in the euro and laugh and laugh and laugh, all the way to the bank.

Ah, what a blessing it will be.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

–The entire gold story in just five words

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

This is the entire gold story in just five words: “Gold is safer than dollars.”

But don’t ask “why,” because that gets a bit confused. Here are some article excerpts from someone who regularly promotes gold [My comments inserted in brackets]:

The Daily Bell
Don’t Lose Your Gold

If you’ve included gold in your portfolio, you’ve made a wise move. Foreign currencies and foreign stocks also add to your safety – until someone takes them away.

An investor in the U.S. might wonder… what happens when a new law or a new executive order or a bureaucratic edict tells me to undo all I’ve done to internationalize my finances?

My name is Anthony Wile, and in addition to serving as Chief Editor of TheDailyBell.com, I also serve as Chief Investment Strategist for its publishing parent, High Alert Investment Management.

One way they make money is by advising people to buy gold. When gold is going up in price, they advise buying it (because it’s going up). And when gold is going down in price, they advise buying it (because it’s cheap). And mostly of course, because it’s so very safe.

What (some Americans) are all detecting is hints that leaving their financial lives tied 100% to conditions at home makes them vulnerable to the arbitrary actions of their home government.

This is under the nonsensical theory that there is some way you can insulate yourself from the arbitrary actions of your home government.

But then, Wile himself tells you why you can’t insulate yourself:

Here are eight of the worries that may make you tense up just a little:

Reckless (federal) borrowing. The U.S. government’s monster deficits are going to get paid for one way or another. [He goes on to demonstrate ignorance of Monetary Sovereignty by suggesting you are liable for the federal debt.]

So much paper money (always ending in runaway inflation.) It’s just a matter of time. [Except we never have had “runaway inflation,” and whatever inflation we’ve had, was not caused by “paper money.”]

The death of privacy. (making) any attempt to hold nearly any type of asset privately would turn you into a criminal. [Meaning you can’t hide your gold.]

Lightning asset freezes. Thousands of government employees, in the IRS and other agencies, hold a summary power to freeze all your bank accounts and any account you have with other financial institutions. [Meaning you can’t hide your gold with any financial institution.]

Guilty until proven innocent. [Which has nothing to do with any advantages of owning gold.]

Lawsuits. Anyone with substantial assets can be wiped out by a predatory lawsuit. [Including gold assets]

Government power now reaches everywhere. The people who used to work for you – people you confided in – now work for the government. [They are the people who will tell the government where you have hidden your gold.

Dishonesty has become the norm. Many public officials routinely lie. [Has nothing to do with owning gold, and it’s nothing new.]

Then the article gets to some partial “solutions.”

Perhaps you’ve taken some of the following steps.

Buying gold. It’s the one truly international asset, not tied to any particular country’s economy.

Storing gold outside the U.S. That should put some distance between the gold and problems in the U.S.

Opening a foreign bank account.

Buying life insurance or an annuity tied to a currency other than the U.S. dollar.

Setting up a foreign limited liability company for holding investments, especially foreign investments.

But no, these solutions don’t really work, because as Wile admits:

. . . the same government you are hoping to distance yourself from can compel you to undo every one of them.

Remember Wile’s admission: The U.S. government has the power to undo any step you may take to protect yourself from the U.S. government.

As Wile himself says:

If the U.S. government decides to restore the prohibition on private gold ownership that was in force from 1933 to 1974, you’d be stuck.

Holding gold outside the country does little to change things. Congress can easily make it a crime not to bring the gold back to the U.S.

If you lose a big lawsuit, . . . the judge (will) order you to bring the money home and hand it over.

When the U.S. government goes looking for foreign currency to use to protect the value of the dollar, your foreign life or annuity policy will be easy pickings.

So what’s a guy to do? Buy gold? Not buy gold? Wile has the answer:

The Only Robust Solution
You’d be kidding yourself if you thought you could rely on any of those solutions.

If leaving your financial life tied 100% to the US economy, the US tax system and the US justice system leaves you feeling uncomfortable, there is one and only one robust solution: Use an international trust to protect your assets.

The trustee you select (probably a licensed trust company) is subject to the laws of its own county – not to U.S. laws. It can’t be forced to do anything by any court or other government agency in the U.S.

Huh? What about the judge ordering you to bring the money home?

What about Congress making it a crime not to bring gold home?

What about “the same government you are hoping to distance yourself from can compel you to undo every one of them.“

And of course, there is another problem: What makes some other country safer than the U.S.? (Please name the nation you consider to be a safer custodian for your money than the United States.)

Of course, we’re talking about your money, so you won’t want to give up too much control. Getting the protection you want without handing too much authority to your trustee is a delicate matter.

The needed balance can be achieved, but it requires trust terms that leave you with just the right amount of say-so (not too much, and not too little), and it requires going to a country where the laws have been tailored for just that purpose.

“Delicate balance.” “Just the right amount of say-so.” “Not too much and not too little.” “Going to a country where the laws have been tailored.”

Well, that makes me feel safe — about as safe as walking on a wobbly high wire above hungry sharks.

So why is Anthony Wile suggesting such a high risk, low reward solution? I’ll give you one guess:

The best way I know of to get started is with Passport Financial’s International Trust Kit.

There just is nothing with which I can compare Passport Financial’s Trust Kit as a resource for understanding international trusts and then acting on that knowledge to get your assets out of harm’s way.

Appparently, Anthony Wile is branching out from marketing gold to marketing Passport Financial.

But, who is Passport Financial? Could it be this company?

Terry Coxon is the president of Passport Financial, Inc., a publishing company specializing in international financial planning, and is a senior editor for Casey Research.

Hmmm . . . And who is Terry Coxon?

On the basis of the (Security and Exchange) Commission’s opinion issued this day, it is

ORDERED that World Money Managers and Terence Michael Coxon be, and they hereby are, ordered to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations or any future violations of Section 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act . . .

it is further

ORDERED that Terence Michael Coxon be, and he hereby is, ordered to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations or any future violations of Section 34(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, and it is further

ORDERED that World Money Mangers and Terence Michael Coxon, jointly and severally, shall disgorge a total of $971,777.54, and pay half the amount of prejudgment interest as described at 17 C.F.R. § 201.600(b), due from September 21, 1993, which we deemto be the date of their violative conduct . . .

And then there was:

In her May 31, 2005 order, Judge Patel found that the Commission had established Coxon’s failure to pay the disgorgement and interest amounts.

Judge Patel also determined that Coxon had the ability to pay some of that amount and was therefore in civil contempt.

Unless (certain) payments are made, the Court ordered Coxon incarcerated pending payment or a showing of good cause for failure to make payment.

Now, in all fairness, I don’t know how, or even if, Wile is associated with Terence Coxon, or if that is the same Terence Coxon who was mentioned in the above proceedings, or if Coxon was found innocent on appeal, or really anything more about what Wile is recommending than what’s printed here.

But somehow, if I were looking for financial security, I’d not first turn to gold, to Anthony Wile or to Terry Coxon.

That’s just my opinion.

What’s yours?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: