Tag: monetary non-sovereignty

–The end of American states?

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.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•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.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

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

The United States of America is exactly what it’s name says it is: States that united. These states were sovereign nations that came together to defend against a common enemy.

Like the citizens of European nations, each American state’s citizens had national pride, and much preferred not to dilute its heritage and morès. So when forced to unite under a Constitution, the states’ politicians insisted on retaining various rights, as referred to in the 10th Amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Despite what commonly is believed, these are not enumerated powers. The Supreme Court has held that federal law “neither can be nullified openly and directly by state legislators or state executive or judicial officers nor nullified indirectly by them through evasive schemes.”

As recently as 1992, in New York v. United States, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote that the federal government (only) can encourage the states to adopt certain regulations through the spending power, or through the commerce power.

The question then is: Has time made the 10th Amendment functionally obsolete? Or more specifically, has time made the states obsolete?

While the states formerly were nations, today they merely are artificial, geographical boundaries. They do not define heritages, mores, lifestyles, beliefs, politics, religion or any other human traits.

Consider, for instance, Illinois. There is approximately zero relationship between Chicago and southern Illinois, the latter whose residents resemble people in Kentucky or Tennessee, far more than people in Chicago. The same could be said of New York City, tucked into the southeast corner of a largely rural, heavily forested state.

State boundaries are historical artifacts, signifying nothing. Yet, we retain the artificial, obsolete Electoral College. (Because the original colonies that came together to create the United States of America greatly feared mob rule, which some felt would happen with a direct presidential election, the Founding Fathers created the Electoral College.)

State boundaries lead to senseless legal differentiations: By what U.S. rationale does Texas enforce a death penalty while Illinois has none? We all are Americans. Is the need for a death penalty in Texas different from the need in Illinois?

Why does the federal government allow abortions nationally, while some states put up barriers to abortion (and ironically, those states have a death penalty)?

Why do voting laws, for federal elections, differ among the various states? It’s a U.S. federal election. Yet, some states demand more proof of eligibility to vote, than do other states do. What is the logic?

Chicago’s public school system is insolvent, because Illinois is insolvent. So Chicago children suffer from lack of teachers, overcrowded and unsafe schools and lack of school programs. Were Chicago’s schools to be supported by the federal government, hundreds of thousands of American children would receive a better education. This would benefit all of America, not just Chicago.

Is a division into financially struggling, legally byzantine states the most efficient, effective way to run a nation? If we had to start over, to build a government for 320 million people, would we divide it into 50 monetarily Non-sovereign entities, and allow each government to create its own unique laws — laws that may contradict the laws of neighboring states?

What governing advantage do states provide for the United States?

Admittedly, there are socio-economic and cultural differences, within counties or even within cities. But it is far easier for voters to understand and to influence, the politics of a county or city, than of a state. Within cities and counties, the weather generally is similar, as is access to water, access to food and geology. State boundaries are arbitrary lines, drawn for outdated, political reasons, having no functional purpose.

While tradition probably precludes the elimination of states, we should eliminate state sovereignty:

1. Eliminate state, county and city courts; have all courts be federal.
2. Eliminate state governments.
3. Eliminate the functions currently operated by monetarily Non-sovereign states and hand them to the Monetarily Sovereign federal government. Lack of money would cease to be the all-purpose excuse for insufficient government services.

(Despite what libertarians tell you, America’s biggest financial problem is not due to the federal government being too big. The problem is the state governments are too big and the federal government is too small.

Consider Puerto Rico, which is a territory, but has exactly the same monetarily Non-sovereign financial problems as a U.S. state:

Misery deepens for those in Puerto Rico who can’t leave

The entrenched economic crisis is leading people to either cut their personal spending to the basics or flee in search for jobs.

Nearly 10 years into a deep economic slump, it is no closer to pulling out, and, in fact, is poised to plummet further. The unemployment rate is above 12 percent.

The government has tried to boost revenue by hiking the sales tax to 11.5 percent, and closing government offices.

A $58 million bond payment due Saturday went unpaid. If defaults continue, analysts say it will face numerous lawsuits and increasingly limited access to markets, putting a recovery even more out of reach.

A list of cost-cutting measures proposed by a group of hedge funds that holds $5.2 billion of debt has riled citizens: laying off teachers; cutting medical benefits; and reducing subsidies to the main public university.

Meanwhile, a report commissioned by the government called for wage levels to be lowered, paid holidays cut, and energy costs reduced.

Some economists warn that measures like new taxes could further depress the economy, a concern shared by small business owners.

Puerto Rico’s fundamental problems are identical with Greece’s: Like all euro nations, Puerto Rico and all U.S. states, counties, and cities, are monetarily Non-sovereign.

To survive long term, all monetarily Non-sovereign entities (including you and me) require income to exceed outgo.

In contrast, the federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, requires no income; it creates dollars, ad hoc, by paying bills.

You and I receive income from salaries, investments and other businesses, pensions, borrowing and from the federal government (Social Security, Medicare, poverty aids, etc.)

Unlike the federal government, but like the states, we cannot create dollars at will. Without income, we cannot pay our bills.

State governments receive income from several sources: Taxes, borrowing, tourism, net exports of goods and services, outside earnings, and importantly, from the federal government.

There are important differences among these sources. Taxes remove dollars from the populace, and unless the state were to spend all tax dollars within the state (unlikely), taxes represent a net loss to a state’s economy.

State borrowing must be repaid — plus interest — so borrowing never is a long-term solution to state financial survival.

Tourism and net exports of goods and services can pay for and overcome the net economic losses caused by taxation. Tourists pay local taxes with dollars earned elsewhere, so tourism transfers dollars from one government to another.

Similar in effect to tourism is: Outside earnings. A person might work and earn a salary from a company based in one location while living and paying taxes in another.

Dollars are transferred from the “work” location to the “domicile” location. We see this often with suburbs, which survive on taxes earned in the neighboring big city. Dollars flow from the city to the suburb.

In all of the above — taxes, borrowing, tourism, net exports of goods and services and outside earnings — Puerto Rico, the U.S. states and all euro nations, including Greece, are financially identical.

They all are monetarily Non-sovereign, so cannot create money at will.

All the U.S. states, counties, cities, businesses, and people are engaged in a complex money-transfer game, with the federal government being the one entity that adds permanent dollars to the game. (Banks also add dollars by lending, but these are temporary dollars, as the loans must be repaid.)

The U.S. federal government creates dollars by spending, and it destroys dollars by taxing. To date, the federal government has created 13 trillion more dollars than it has destroyed: $13 trillion net dollars.

Many of these dollars have gone into the states, which then redistribute the money to counties and cities:

America’s fiscal union

From 1990 to 2009, the federal government spent $1.44 trillion in Virginia but collected less than $850 billion in taxes, a gap of over $590 billion. But relative to the size of its economy, Virginia derived a smaller benefit from America’s fiscal union than states like New Mexico, Mississippi and West Virginia, where the 20-year transfer exceeded 200% of their annual GDP.

Transfers to Puerto Rico, which is a US territory, not a fully incorporated state, exceeded 290%.

New York transferred over $950 billion to the (federal government) from 1990 to 2009. But relative to the size of its economy, Delaware made the biggest contribution, equivalent to more than twice its 2009 GDP.

Per the following chart by The Economist:

monetary sovereignty

The states in the upper half of the chart sent more dollars to the federal government than they received. They are being bled — unnecessarily — by a government that neither needs nor uses those dollars. It creates its own dollars.

Interestingly, Puerto Rico receives, proportionate to its GDP, the most dollars from the federal government, and still it suffers economically.

One is left to wonder where the money went, and how bad Puerto Rico’s economy would be without federal support.

One also is left to wonder why the Monetarily Sovereign U.S. federal government impoverishes its states (which in turn, impoverish their counties and cities) by draining tax dollars from them — dollars the federal government neither needs, uses, nor even has. (All dollars sent to the federal government disappear from the nation’s money supply. There is no statistic showing how much money the government “has,” because such a statistic would be meaningless for an entity that creates dollars at will.)

I don’t know the specifics of Puerto Rico’s financial condition. Do Puerto Rico’s failures, resemble the failures of my home state, Illinois, because of intense political criminality? (Illinois politicians routinely are sent to prison, and many more should be.) Or does Puerto Rico have a different problem? I don’t know.

But I do know there serves no public purpose for the citizens of Puerto Rico or any state, to suffer austerity because the state engages in a futile effort to pay its debts.

All of the above shows why U.S. state governments serve no purpose and should be eliminated.

The federal government should stand in for the states, supplying services and dollars directly to counties and cities, without state government intermediaries.

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
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
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

–Wa wa wa wa: And this is the guy who wants to be President of the United States???

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.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•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.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

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

“Wa wa wa wa” That is the sound of the “tough guy” who wants to lead America against Iran, China, Russia, ISIS et al

Trump Rails Against ‘Unfair’ Debate Questions From Fox News

B yCAITLIN MACNEAL, AUGUST 7, 2015, 6:51 AM EDT

Following the first Republican presidential debate on Thursday night, Donald Trump lamented that the Fox News hosts were tough on him, especially Megyn Kelly.

“The questions to me were far tougher, and that I — supposedly, according to what everyone’s telling me, I won the debate, according to the call-ins and everything,” he told reporters after the debate, according to Buzzfeed News.

“But the questions to me were not nice, I didn’t think they were appropriate, and I think Megyn behaved very badly personally.”

Here is the guy who wants to deport 11 million innocent men, women and children, but when he’s asked a couple of questions, he starts to whine. I suppose it’s easier to deport helpless families than to answer questions.

And “everyone” is telling him he won the debate, especially the toadies and sycophants who are paid to suck up to the boss. Truly sad that this guy is such a lying wimp. But, we all knew that, didn’t we?

He told reporters that his experience at the debate wasn’t worth calling Fox News boss Roger Ailes over, but he insisted that the moderators were particularly tough on him.

Yes, punch a bully in the nose, and he wants to run home to mommy (i.e. Roger Ailes).

“They weren’t even questions, they were statements that they asked,” he said, according to Buzzfeed News. He added that Kelly’s question about comments he has made to women was “unfair.” And he lashed out at Kelly on Twitter following the debate.

“Yes, they were ‘unfair,’ because they quoted what I actually said. Wa wa wa wa.”

Friday morning on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Trump continued to criticize Kelly’s line of questioning.

He said that if the Fox moderators were going to be tough on him, they should have hit all of the candidates with hard questions. “I walked out of that room and people were saying that was really unfair,” Trump told “Morning Joe” over the phone.

The next morning, and he still is crying. Hey boy, grow a pair. You were on FOX News, the right-wing bunch that bends over backwards to be nice to conservatives. And you whine about them being unfair?

Every day, President Obama receives brickbats, and he takes it all like a man — even when you gave him your birther BS.

And now, someone asks you questions, and its “Wa, wa, wa wa.”

Go back and hide in your Trump Tower closet with your paid bootlickers. You don’t have the backbone to be President.

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
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
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

–16 Reasons why you have way too much money and deserve to be in the Servant Class

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.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•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.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

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

You may know of Pete Peterson. He, along with the equally infamous Koch Brothers, is one of those several billionaires who have spent millions — perhaps billions — to prove that those in the upper .1% income/wealth/power group rightfully belong to the Master Class, while the rest of us 99.9% deserve to be in the Servant Class.

Peterson’s toadies and sycophants, otherwise known as the “Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget” and the “Campaign to Fix the Debt” published FISCAL FACTCHECKER: 16 BUDGET MYTHS TO WATCH OUT FOR IN THE 2016 CAMPAIGN

All 16 of the so-called “Budget Myths” are designed to make you believe one short nonsense idea: “Removing money from the economy enriches the economy, while adding money to the economy impoverishes the economy.”

If you can be brainwashed to believe that idea, you are perfect for the Servant Class.

Today’s post will not address all 16 “myths.” You can read them yourself. We’ll examine just the first one, because it summarizes the “thinking” in the others:

Myth #1: We Can Continue Borrowing Without Consequences

One of the most common myths about the national debt is that we can increase it without consequence. Some argue that because the United States borrows in its own currency, it can simply print money to cover its debt.

The “myth” is correct that the federal government (unlike state and local governements) has the unlimited ability to create its own sovereign currency, the dollar. That is known as Monetary Sovereignty.

But, this statement of the first “myth,” uses the misleading word “debt,” a word that can be pejorative or praising, depending on circumstance. For instance, If you were a billion dollars “in debt,” that may be a bad thing. But what if your bank is a billion dollars “in debt”? Is that also a bad thing?

What if your bank boasts that it has a billion dollars in deposits? Bank deposits are bank debts, so your bank’s boasts about deposits actually boasts about its indebtedness. And that is where the Petersonites attempt to confuse you, for federal debt is nothing more than bank deposits.

To “lend” to the federal government, you invest in a T-security — a T-bill, T-note or T-bond. The process is: You instruct your local bank to transfer dollars out of your checking account and send those dollars to be deposited in a T-security account at the Federal Reserve Bank.

A T-security account is like a bank savings account. Money sits in your account while it earns interest.

Then, when the Federal Reserve Bank pays off the “debt,” it does what any bank does to pay off deposits: It transfers existing dollars from your T-security account to your savings account. Aside from interest, the bank does not need to “print money to cover its debt,” as the Petersonites claim.

It transfers existing money. So there are no inflationary implications.

Others point to high-debt nations like Japan to show countries can bear large amounts of debt. Many others suggest that current low interest rates show that the market is not concerned about the debt.

However, none of these arguments stand up to scrutiny. Printing large sums of money might offer a quick x, but as internaonal experience shows, it can lead to hyper-inflation.

That, to put it gently, is a lie.

As we have seen, paying off federal “debt” does not require “printing large sums of money.” Aside from interest, which is relatively minuscule, no money creation is involved.

Further, despite massive deficit spending for the past 230 years, the U.S. never has experienced hyperinflation — not during the massive spending for wars, nor to cure recessions or depressions. The Petersonites issue dire warnings, based on false information about something that never has happened.

Japan is unique for a number of reasons that do not apply to the United States, and it has also faced two decades of economic stagnation along with its high debt.

All nations are unique, but nothing about Japan’s uniqueness answers why it has failed to experience hyperinflation, despite massive deficits (other than: Deficits don’t cause hyperinflation).

Nor does national debt cause economic stagnation. Remember how national debt is accumulated: The nation spends more than it taxes, that is, the nation pumps more money into the economy than it takes out.

The Petersonites would have you believe that adding money to an economy depresses the economy, while removing money from the economy stimulates it. Also, black is white and up is down. George Orwell would love such reasoning.

Low interest rates are a temporary consequence of the struggling global economy and near-term Federal Reserve actions – not a permanent fixture.

That is true, though irrelevant. The Federal Reserve lowers rates, because it believes (wrongly, in my opinion) that low rates are stimulative. This has nothing to do with the subject of the “myth,” the claimed dangers of federal debt. It’s a clever tactic: Toss in a true statement to add credibility to your false statements. (Every liar includes grains of truth.)

In reality, high levels of debt come with many risks and consequences. Over the long run, growing debt crowds out productive private investment, slows income growth, increases interest rates, reduces government flexibil-ity, and increases the risk of a fiscal crisis.

The federal debt increases when the government spends more than it taxes. To reduce the debt, the government taxes more than it spends.

No one can explain how federal spending “crowds out” productive spending. When the federal government buys goods and services, it buys them from the private sector, which then has more dollars for “productive private investment. Many thousands of businesses, employing millions of people, profit from federal purchases. By contrast, taxing, which removes dollars from the economy, “crowds out private investment” by reducing the money available for such investment.

Similarly, federal spending cannot “slow income growth,” though federal taxing does.

The Federal Reserve does increase interest rates when the economy is growing faster, as a defense against inflation. In essence, the Petersonites are preaching against economic growth!

Higher interest rates benefit lenders, and lower rates benefit borrowers. Which is better for you depends on your circumstances at any one time. If you buy a house or a car, you are a borrower who benefits from lower rates. If you own CDs, T-securities, any bank accounts, any bonds or bond funds, you are a lender, who benefits from higher rates — and you also benefit from a growing economy.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) finds that large and growing debt “would have serious negative consequences for both the economy and the federal budget.” Within 25 years, they estimate rapidly rising debt will increase interest rates by a full percentage point, reduce the size of the economy by 7 percent, and reduce average annual per person income by $6,000 ompared to current baseline projecons.

“Rapidly rising debt . . . “ What is “rapidly” rising? No one knows. Does this mean that rising debt is O.K., so long as it isn’t “rapidly” rising? Again, no one knows. “Rapidly” is one of those caveats, that mean whatever one wishes it to mean — or nothing.

” . . . Increase interest rates by a full percentage point . . . “ Is one percentage point supposed to frighten America? Or is this one percentage point merely the Federal Reserve’s normal response to the economic growth, from which we all benefit?

Finally, how could raising taxes (taking dollars out of the economy) not “have serious negave consequences” for the economy,” while increased federal spending on goods and services, cause those “serious negative consequences”? Talk about backward thinking!

And that is just “myth #1.” The Petersonites present 15 more, equally wrong myths — too much to discuss in one post. I invite you to go to the site, read the myths, and then ask me about any of them.

The entire excercise is to prove to you that federal spending for you must be decreased and federal taxes on you must be increased, so that the Gap between the rich and the rest can widen.

That is how the “Master Class” creates a permanent “Servant Class.”

And where is the majority of that federal spending that “must” be decreased? Social Security. Medicare. Medicaid. Poverty aids like food stamps, public housing — in short, everything that benefits the poor and the middle-income groups — the Servant Class — must be cut.

And where should taxes be increased? In addition to increasing FICA, the ongoing push is for “broadening the tax base,” i.e.taxing the poor and middle more. This usually involves some sort of sales or “use” tax, all of which punish the lower income groups most.

Of course, the Petersonites will tell you military spending must be maintained to protect us against foreign enemies that always, always, always are growing stronger. The Master Class loves the military to protect them, in case the Servant Class tries to rebel. (All over the world, most people are enslaved by their own military, rather than by foreign enemies.)

And taxing of the rich must be reduced, because those in the Master Class are the “makers,” while you in the Servant Class are the “takers.”

In summary, the upper .1% wish to create a Master Class, but can do so only with the acquiescence of a Servant Class. So they brainwash the public with the Big Lie — the lie that federal finances are like personal finances, and that federal debt is “unsustainable” (You’ll see the word “unsustainable” often in Peterson- and Kochsponsored articles). So, your taxes must be increased and your benefits must be cut.

And if you believe this, well maybe the .1% are right. Maybe they do desrve to be the Master Class, and maybe you do deserve to be the Servant Class.

What do you think?

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
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
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

–Open letter to John Kass re. Planned Parenthood

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.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•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.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

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

Some people oppose abortion, under any circumstance. I understand that. I disagree, but I understand.

What I don’t understand is why people believe the life of a fetus is more important than the lives of already-born people.

Republicans, who defend all fetuses, even for instance the newest, least-formed fetuses of poor black women, immediately lose interest once those fetuses become, for instance, poor black children.

Republicans do everything possible to close any service that even informs poor women about abortion, let alone conducts abortions. But, Republicans then do everything possible to prevent the resultant, poor children from receiving food, clothing and shelter.

My question is: What is there about being born that diminishes a child’s worth, in the minds of Republicans?

The reality is: Rich women have no difficulty getting abortions, and no difficulty paying for their children; so much of this abortion outrage is just an extension of the rich trying to widen the Gap between themselves and the poor.

John Kass is an important columnist (right up there on page 2) for the right-wing Chicago Tribune. Dutifully following his bosses, he hews to the Republican line. That’s how he keeps his page 2 position.

Here are a few excerpts from an article he published, today:

A new video came out the other day, a fifth video, of Planned Parenthood officials talking in chilling euphemisms and grisly business in the lab, secretly recorded by the Center for Medical Progress.

Like the other videos, the fifth centers on Planned Parenthood’s fetal organ harvests, but the new video also deals with the issue of “intact” fetuses, discussed in neutral, bureaucratic language.

“And we are able to obtain intact fetal cadavers, then we can make it part of the budget, that any dissections are this, and splitting the specimens into different shipments is this, I mean that’s — it’s all just a matter of line items,” says a Planned Parenthood official in the video.

And so the unborn are reduced to line items.

Planned Parenthood quickly responded, saying the videos are nothing more than an anti-choice campaign to smear an organization that provides health care to women.

The Center for Medical Progress alleges the videos are evidence that Planned Parenthood — which receives more than $500 million each year in federal tax money — is illegally selling body parts for profit.

What Kass neglects to mention is that the “Center for Medical Progress” isn’t really a center for “medical progress.” It is an anti-abortion group, that fights against the law of the land, which makes abortion legal.

That’s their definition of “medical progress.”

Not all of the politicians outraged by Planned Parenthood are Republicans. A few Democrats joined in. One is West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, who said he opposes funding Planned Parenthood.

“I am very troubled by the callous behavior of Planned Parenthood staff in recently released videos, which casually discuss the sale, possibly for profit, of fetal tissue after an abortion.”

Even this Democrat has a concern, but not about what Planned Parenthood does, which he undoubtedly recognizes is both legal and valuable. He’s concerned about their callousness.

But the issue isn’t whether abortion is legal. Abortion has been legal for decades. That’s not going to change.

That’s right, John. Nothing illegal is being done.

So the “scandal” is what? Doing legal medical research to save lives, many of which will be children’s lives?

Is that the problem?

This is something else again: Reducing human life to a commodity, subject to market whims, where the “procedure” (meaning abortion) is altered so that the fetal organs may be kept intact, to be bartered and sold.

You can say that it’s not human life. And many do. But in this case, using euphemisms is a shield. I suppose we can convince ourselves that the research “materiel” is not human, until of course, you see a lab tech with tweezers pick up a tiny limb.

What’s going on at Planned Parenthood is barbaric. (And) the use of our money makes us complicit.

And here is what I have to say to John Kass:

Today, you want to defund Planned Parenthood. Why? Because you don’t like the attitude of some Planned Parenthood people. The ATTITUDE.

Not one word about what PP actually DOES to save lives. No, that isn’t important. Research to save lives isn’t important. Poor women’s lives aren’t important.

The fact that the fetus already has legally been aborted, and already is dead, doesn’t matter to you. Perhaps, you would you prefer that the dead fetus be disposed of in the garbage?

Medical schools use cadavers. Doctors learn how to save lives by practicing on cadavers. Some of these cadavers are of adults. Some are children. Some are fetuses.

Would we be better served if doctors could not practice on cadavers? Should they practice on live humans?

Do you even care about what diseases are being prevented and cured? Have you even asked about how many lives are saved?

No, all that is important to you is the ATTITUDE of a couple of people, and therefore in your mind, this entire valuable program should be defunded.

How about defunding the Supreme Court, because you don’t like the attitude of some justices’ assistants?

How about defunding Social Security, because you don’t like the attitude of some Social Security employees?

How about defunding the military, because we don’t like the attitude of some colonels?

How about firing John Kass, because we don’t like the attitude of your employees?

Why care about what a program does, so long as a person’s attitude determines the future of that program? Is that your position?

You said, “What’s going on at Planned Parenthood is barbaric.”

No, John. Trying to find any excuse to defund a life-saving program, because you don’t happen to agree with abortion and don’t give a damn about poor women’s lives, and don’t understand the value of medical research – that’s barbaric.

Truly sad, John.

But knowing that you earn your money by sucking up to your rich bosses, I understand why you publish right-wing propaganda. Your rich boses can’t change the law, based on its merits, so they hire people like you to pick away at it, hoping it will die the death of a thousand cuts.

It seems to be the conservative way.

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
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
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