The exact date the world will end Wednesday, Oct 11 2017 


It takes only two things to keep people in chains:
The ignorance of the oppressed
and the treachery of their leaders.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Here is when the world will end. I read it in the October 4th, 2017 issue of NewScientist Magazine, and if it’s printed, you know it’s right.

The end is nigh.

What a surprise – the end of the world has been delayed, again
The planet Nibiru was meant to wipe us out on Saturday. Undeterred by a no-show, doomsday theorists are already peddling more nonsense
By Geraint Lewis

CONGRATULATIONS, you have survived the latest prophesied doomsday. For weeks, the darker corners of the media have been abuzz with predictions that the end of the world was coming.

Some suggested it would coincide with the 21 August US total solar eclipse. Others plumped for 23 September, for no other reason than 33 days would have passed since the eclipse.

Always keen to move on from a no-show, conspiracy theorists have revised the big day to 21 October.

Prophecies of doom aren’t new. At the turning points of centuries or millennia, someone always comes out of the woodwork to claim that the end is nigh.

Others predict the end of days based on how immoral and violent society has become, although recent decades have been relatively peaceful compared with most other historical periods.

In 2012, we were told that the ancient Mayans had predicted the demise of the world on 21 December, 2012, when some cosmic event, such as a rogue planet called Nibiru.

But in 2017, the doomsayers said Nibiru was back and headed our way again. Predictably, some corners of the media lapped it up.

With a heavy sigh, science brushed off and recycled the same messages as in 2012, pointing out that if Nibiru was wandering the solar system, we would know.

Prophesies of doom do frighten people, so we must continue to call out nonsense and pseudoscience when we see it.

The media also has a part to play inaccurate and balanced portrayal of science. There is enough scary stuff without imagined threats.

O.K., so there have been a few world ending “no-shows” –a actually quite a lot of “no-shows — but that won’t stop the claims.

Image result for end of the world prophet

The end is till nigh.

Fortunately, you are too smart to fall for that “nonsense, pseudoscience, and imagined threats.” You have seen the multitude of “Henny, Penny, the sky is falling” predictions, and none of them have come true.

Repeated no-shows are a pretty good indication of no-sense. So, you’re not going to be taken in again.   You know, “Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice; shame on me.”

Ah, but would you like to know when the world really will end? I’ll give you a hint. It will be shortly after September 26th, 1940.

You read right: 1940. How do I know? Click the link to see the first of my sources:

Federal Debt, A “Ticking Time Bomb”.

Sept 26, 1940, New York Times: “Deficit Financing is Hit by Hanes: ” . . . unless an end is put to deficit financing, to profligate spending and to indifference as to the nature and extent of governmental borrowing, the nation will surely take the road to dictatorship, Robert M. Hanes, president of the American Bankers Association asserted today.

He said, “insolvency is the time-bomb which can eventually destroy the American system . . . the Federal debt . . . threatens the solvency of the entire economy.”

Oops. Apparently, “the insolvency of the entire economy” wasn’t a “time bomb,” and it didn’t destroy the American system.  We still are here.

The same claim has been made repeatedly — almost daily — since 1940, and it has been a repeated no-show, since 1940.

Perhaps the prediction was a tad premature for, at the time, the federal debt was only $40 BILLION. But now, the federal debt is $14 TRILLION, 35,000% larger, so here, in the next link, is an update:

From “ticking time bomb to “looming collapse.
(Excerpts from an April 27, 2017 article in the American Institute for Economic Research, by by Max Gulker, PhD – Senior Research FellowTheodore Cangero)

The Federal Reserve will create problems if it prints money to purchase Treasury securities. First, by stepping in and buying Treasury securities, it might disincentivize Congress from putting the budget on a sustainable path.

Second, monetizing the government debt will likely cause inflation. The government receives the new money first, spending it and pushing up prices.

International investors will see the Fed buying Treasury securities. This will likely cause them to demand higher interest rates. Since many consumer interest rates are linked to Treasury rates, interest rates would rise across the economy.

See, the budget is not on a “sustainable path,” and “monetizing the debt will cause inflation” and that will cause “interest rates to rise.”

Uh, but isn’t that what Robert M. Hanes, president of the American Bankers Association, said back in 1940, when the federal debt was 1/350th of what it is today? Isn’t that what the debt scarers have been saying for the past 77 years?

Surely, 77 years of exactly the same failure — the same no-show — would convince any intelligent person, that these debt scarers don’t know what they are talking about.

Nobody would be stupid enough to keep falling for the same “Henny Penny, sky is falling, nonsense, pseudoscience, and imagined threats.” You know, ” . . . fool me twice, shame on me.”

No-shows for 77 years. At least, you won’t fall for it. Right?

Marc Goldwein: National Debt: Yes, Rising Annual Deficits Threaten the U.S. Economy
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) September 5, 2017

The U.S. debt load will reduce private investment, slow wage growth, raise interest rates, shrink the economy and increase the likelihood of an eventual fiscal crisis.

(But the debt load is up 35,000% and interest rates are low, the economy has grown, and we are not in “fiscal crisis).

High debt levels also force the government to spend more on debt service leaving fewer dollars available to finance new investments, national defense, anti-poverty programs or tax relief.

“But the debt level is up 35,000% and the government has unlimited dollars available to “finance new investments, national defense, anti-poverty or tax relief.”)

Perhaps most significantly, debt cannot forever rise faster than the economy; and with debt growing unsustainably, the country is making promises we simply cannot keep.

(But for 77 years — actually for more than 200 years — the debt has risen faster than GDP, and we still are keeping whatever promises Marc Goldwein is referring to.)

A combination of thoughtful entitlement reform, tax reform, immigration reform, regulatory reform and deficit reduction will put the country on a more sustainable path and at the same time grow the economy and increase wages and income.

(Ah, and then there is that inevitable word, “sustainable.” What does it mean? No one knows.)

The United States can’t forever spend far more than it brings in, and we can’t indefinitely borrow our way to prosperity.

(How far in the future is “forever”? When is “indefinitely”? Next month? Next century? We never are told. Marc Goldwein and the CRFB have no idea. But they keep saying it, anyway.)

And there it is, folks. The CRFB, an organization that has been spewing exactly the same end-of-the-world nuttiness since it was founded in June 10, 1981.

That’s for THIRTY-SIX YEARS — the CRFB has given you exactly the same “debt cannot forever rise faster than the economy,” exactly the same, “debt growing unsustainably,” exactly the same threats about higher, “ interest rates, shrinking economy, and “fiscal crisis.”

And it all never happens, not in the past 77 years and not in the past 367 years.

Image result for aliens on an alien world

The end of the world is really, really nigh. We mean it this time.

Just more no-shows, day after day, year after year after year.

Amazingly, there still are those who believe planet Nibiru is about to wipe out the earth.

They are the types who also believe the nonsense and imagined threats” coming to them from the CRFB, and from the bribed-by-the-rich politicians, and from the owned-by-the-rich media, and from the the employed-by-the-rich economists for THIRTY-SIX years (or for the SEVENTY-SEVEN years since 1940).

And, they do not allow historical fact to influence them. They are not dissuaded by no-shows.

Hey, maybe these guys also come from planet Nibiru, and they know something we lowly humans don’t.

Or not.

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

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

THOUGHTS

•All we have are partial solutions; the best we can do is try.

•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 no matter how much it taxes its citizens.

•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes..

•No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.

•Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.

•A growing economy requires a growing supply of money (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)

•Deficit spending grows the supply of money

•The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.

•Progressives 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 the rich and the rest.

•Austerity is the government’s method for widening the Gap between the rich and the rest.

•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

GOP says, “Deficit spending grows the economy, so cut deficit spending.” Huh? Monday, Oct 9 2017 

Image result for escaping the prison
It takes only two things to keep people in chains:
The ignorance of the oppressed
and the treachery of their leaders.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

The GOP is telling you, “Deficit spending grows the economy, so cut deficit spending.” Huh?

No, really. That is exactly what they are saying.

And not only that, but they also are telling you, “While we’re cutting deficit spending and destroying economic growth, let’s also cut Medicare, cut Medicaid, and gut other social spending.

“And as the cherry on top of that, the Republicans want you to accept the idea, “We’re going to make more poor people pay more tax, and more rich people pay less tax.

I kid you not. This is what President Trump and the GOP are trying to sell to you, the American public. Sadly, some of the public might buy it.

‘Deficit’ no longer a dirty word for the GOP: Trump’s tax plan adds more than $2 trillion in red ink
By: Lisa Mascaro, Los Angeles Times, October 8, 2017

Not long ago, Paul D. Ryan stood before charts and graphs as the House Budget Committee chairman like a new Ross Perot, promoting an austerity plan that slashed taxes and spending, and warning of the dangers of deficits.

“The facts are very, very clear: The United States is heading toward a debt crisis,” he said then.

“We face a crushing burden of debt which will take down our economy — which will lower our living standards.”

As you who understand the realities of Monetary Sovereignty know, there is not, nor ever has been, a “debt crisis.” Nor is there a “crushing burden of debt,” and federal debt will not “take down our economy,” and it surely will not “lower our living standards.”

It is all part of the Big Lie, that federal finances are like personal finances, where debt actually can be a problem.

For the federal government and for federal taxpayers, federal debt is no problem at all.

The reasons you seldom are told:

1. Federal “debt” actually is nothing more than the total of deposits in T-security accounts, very much like bank savings accounts. The government could pay off the entire “debt” (deposits) tomorrow, simply by transferring the dollars that exist in those accounts, back to the checking accounts of the T-security holders. No new dollars or taxes needed.

Paying off the federal debt would be a simple money transfer, exactly like your bank transferring dollars from your savings account to your checking account.

2. The federal “debt” results from federal deficit spending, which in itself grows the economy, because: GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports. 

Thus, it is mathematically impossible for the economy to grow without federal deficits.

And not just deficits, but increased deficit growth leads to economic growth. The graph shows deficit growth. Even declining deficit growth leads to recessions (vertical gray bars),  and increased deficit growth cures recessions.

In fact, increased deficit growth is the method by which the federal government brings us out of recessions.

It cured the “Great Recession” of 2008, just as deficit spending for WWII cured the Great Depression.

U.S. depressions tend to come on the heels of federal surpluses.
1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807.
1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.
1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.
1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.
1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.
1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.
1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.
1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. Recession began 2001.

Now as House speaker, the Wisconsin Republican is undergoing a role reversal, championing President Trump’s tax plan, which promises massive tax cuts for corporations and to some extent individuals — and which experts say will add some $2 trillion to the nation’s red ink over the next decade.

It’s a sizable shift for Ryan, and he’s hardly the only one. The Republican majority, which swept to power just a few years ago in part by warning of then-President Obama’s run-up of debt, now plays down concern over deficits.

Economic growth must take priority, many Republicans say, and will ultimately take care of worries about red ink.

Get it? Even the GOP admits that deficit spending causes economic growth.

Let this be a lesson to the pusillanimous Democrats, who didn’t have the courage to support Bernie Sanders’s  “Medicare for All” because it would have added to the deficit.

You have to hand it to the GOP. They have the guts to push something they have campaigned against, solely to reward the rich with tax breaks.

Asked recently whether he had gone to the “dark side,” Ryan offered a reply that sounded like something a Democrat might have said to justify spending more on repairing roads and bridges or putting additional resources into schools.

“If this results in giving us a faster economic growth, that will help us reduce our debt,” he said in a CBS interview.

“You have got to have tax reform to get faster economic growth,” he added. “Faster economic growth is necessary for us to get our debt under control.”

No, a Democrat would not have said it. At least no Democrat I know. The little snowflakes would have been hiding under their desks, mumbling something about increasing taxes on the rich.

And yes, deficit spending not only will provide “faster” economic growth; deficit spending is what provides virtually all economic growth.

And again, no. You do not want to debt “under control,” if that means reducing the debt. To grow the economy, you must have deficit spending. Period.

The nation’s debt load has topped the eye-popping level of $20 trillion.

More misdirection by the debt liars. They say $20 trillion, to make it sound more terrifying. But $6 trillion of that is money the government owes itself. The right pocket owes the left pocket.

So on top of lying about the effects of federal debt, the debt liars lie about the amount of the debt.

For Trump, who routinely leveraged borrowing to expand his real estate empire and declared on the campaign trail that he loved debt, a tax plan that expands the government’s deficit may be no problem.

It actually was worse for Trump personally, because personal finances are not like federal finances. Trump could (and did) run short of dollars to service his debt (at least four times).

But the federal government never has, and indeed cannot, run short of dollars.  Never.

During a recent White House meeting, Trump boasted to lawmakers from the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee that the country’s economic growth could hit 4%, 5%, even 6% under his tax plan, which administration officials say would more than cover lost revenue and even reduce the deficit.

Think about it. Increasing the debt will increase economic growth, so decreasing the debt will decrease economic growth.  Why would anyone want that?

But, the lawmakers asked, what if growth isn’t so strong — most mainstream economists doubt it will be — what’s Plan B for making up the deficit shortfall?

What exactly is a “deficit shortfall”? Anyone?

Central to the GOP plan are tax cuts that slash the corporate rate. Some deductions would be eliminated and the standard deduction would be doubled, in hopes of simplifying the code and broadening the base of taxpayers.

The term “broadening the base of taxpayers” is GOP code for, “make more poor people pay more taxes.” That is, and always has been, the Republican goal — to widen the Gap between the rich and the rest.

“Republicans spent years pretending to care about the deficit when it came to making cuts to middle-class priorities, but the minute it came to handing tax breaks to the rich, that all went out the window,” said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.).

Well, the GOP is the party of the rich, after all.  What did you expect?

GOP Director of the Office of Management and Budget Mick Mulvaney said. “We need to have new deficits…. If we simply look at this as being deficit-neutral, you’re never going to get the type of tax reform and tax reductions that you need to get to sustain 3% economic growth.”

Read his comment carefully. Even Republican Mulvany admits that deficits (via tax reductions) are necessary for economic growth.

Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin has said growth from the tax cut would be as much as $2 trillion, enough to pay for the cuts and start paying down deficits.

It gets crazier and crazier. Mnuchin, like Mulvaney, admits that tax cuts (which create deficits) will cause economic growth, but as soon as we achieve that growth, we should eliminate the deficits that caused the growth.

Congress repeatedly has shown, even under Republican control, that it has been unable to impose the kind of draconian reductions to Medicare, Medicaid and other safety-net programs called for in Ryan’s budgets.

In other words, to eliminate the deficits that caused economic growth, we need “draconian reductions to Medicare, Medicaid, and other safety net programs.”

So, if the GOP budget succeeds, we’ll have a double disaster: Reduction in economic growth along with reductions in Medicare, Medicaid, etc.

At the same time, Republicans are under great pressure to deliver on taxes, to have something to show for their hold on Congress and the presidency.

Translation: “Pass something, no matter how stupid and damaging, to show we know how to govern.”

Does it get any more ridiculous than that?

Every year since 1940, the debt liars have referred to the debt as a “ticking time bomb.” Back in 1940, the federal debt was $40 Billion. Today, 77 years later, it is $14 Trillion — a 35,000% increase, and that so-called “time bomb” still is ticking — and the debt liars still are lying.

For how many years must a liar be wrong before the public understands that the liar is lying? Isn’t 77 years enough?

Bottom line: The GOP says, “Deficit spending grows the economy, so cut deficit spending, and while we’re at it, cut Medicare, cut Medicaid, cut other social spending, and make the poor pay more tax and the rich pay less.”

That’s the GOP plan, folks. Do you like it?

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

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics.

Implementation of The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE A MONTHLY ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA (similar to Social Security for All) (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Economic Bonus)) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONE Five reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefitting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE FEDERAL TAXES ON BUSINESS
Businesses are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the federal government (the later having no use for those dollars). Any tax on businesses reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all business taxes reduce your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and business taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

The Ten Steps will grow the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and you.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

I’m so sick of the Democrats I could puke Sunday, Oct 8 2017 

Image result for escaping the prison
It takes only two things to keep people in chains:
The ignorance of the oppressed
and the treachery of their leaders.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

The Republicans are on the wrong side of every issue.  Donald Trump is the worst President in your lifetime — perhaps the worst ever. And still, the Democrats have not found a way to win.

I’m so sick of them I could puke.

Read these excerpts from THE WEEK:

Trump’s 35% doctrine
By David Faris

On issue after issue, Republicans are pursuing policy goals that are unambiguously opposed by towering majorities of American citizens.

President Trump himself is on the wrong side of nearly every single major culture war initiative he has pursued.

Broad majorities of Americans believe the president tweets too often (69 percent), that his use of the platform at all is a net negative (59 percent), that health insurance should pay for birth control (69 percent), that NFL players should have the right to kneel during the national anthem without being fired (57 percent), and that they can trust the media to tell them the truth (68 percent).

While President Trump careens and rage-tweets his way to a needless crisis over the Iran deal, Americans want the accord to remain in place (56 percent to 29 percent), a decisive majority opposes military action against North Korea (60 percent to 29 percent) and 70 percent believe the president’s lunatic posturing and schoolyard name-calling are unhelpful in de-escalating the crisis.

Americans disapproved of President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement by a mile, too (59 percent to 28 percent).

Image result for whack-a-moleSo what are the Democrats doing about it?

Are they getting together and agreeing to laser-focus on the one or two most important (to the voters) issues?

No, they individually bop around like Whac-A-Mole players, reacting to each stupid tweet from Trump.

No focus, no plan, no philosophy, no direction, no change, no leader.

The public is angry. You voters want change. You voters of the 99% hate being down while the rich 1% are up.

But the Dems offer you nothing but horror about Trump’s lies.

Yes, we know. We get it. Trump is a lying, incompetent, mean-spirited, “me-only, ” “promise-them-anything” fraud. And yes, it’s no secret, the GOP is the party of the rich, and the rest of you be damned.

But Dems, what are you going to do about it, other than act outraged?

The numbers are much, much worse for the GOP economic agenda. The GOP’s plan to raise taxes on working people while slashing rates for the Hamptons set debuted at 28 percent support this week, with an overwhelming majority (65 percent) believing that large corporations should pay more in taxes rather than less.

Why else would his administration rescind the Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program when 70 percent of respondents want a path to citizenship for the DREAMers?

Even Trump’s magical, see-through border wall is down to 35 percent. Republicans also plan to cripple the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and roll back the Dodd-Frank financial reform passed into law under former President Obama, both of which continue to enjoy 74 percent approval from the public.

Before it was euthanized behind closed doors last week, the Graham-Cassidy health-care atrocity was polling at 20 percent.

As a marketing professional for the past 60 years, I’ve learned several things, but perhaps the most important of all is: Focus on the key benefits.

Don’t focus on the product. Don’t focus on the competition. Focus on the key benefits.

No company changes its slogan every day, but that is exactly what the Dems do. Every day its a new response to Trump, and by the time it hits, he’s long gone on yet another bit of nuttiness.

If you can tell me specifically what the Dems stand for, specifically what they want to accomplish, and specifically how they plan to help you, the voter, my hat’s off to you.  I sure can’t.

Trump has the Dems so flummoxed, none of them can tell you what they hope to achieve for you. When they try to say everything, they communicate nothing.

Trump won not only because Hillary Clinton was an arrogant campaigner, who was so sure she had it won, she forgot to listen to the voters. Trump won because he promised to “drain the swamp,” and to make you great, again.

All his other promises were merely pieces of the one big concept: “Your government is broken and I will fix it for you. You should be great, but the government has taken your greatness away. I will make you great, again.”

That resonated with his two bases:

  1. The beat down people who feel the world is against them and need a strong, white knight to save them, and
  2. The rich who know greedy Trump will do everything for himself and in the process also benefit his fellow rich.

Neither of those bases cares that he is a lying, cheating,  bigoted scumbag. He promised to fix the government and to cut taxes. All the voters cared about is that this charismatic speaker who feigns being just as angry at the government as they are, will shake things up on their behalf and make their lives beautiful.

What is the Democrats’ promise? What change will they make? Who is their charismatic speaker? What will they do for you?

The Republican Party of 2017 is a gang of thieves, miscreants, and shameless liars, acting not on any conceivable interpretation of the public good but instead governing in the interest of their donors and their increasingly unhinged base, the sort of people who would elect a lawless theocrat called Roy Moore to one of the 100 or so most important offices in the entire country.

They are gambling that their only meaningful challenge is to survive the wrath of their primary voters, who they expect to ignore outcomes, and instead hold incumbents to an ideological litmus test — rewarding them with re-election only if their policy positions signal congruence.

The Democrats lack two things: Courage and a charismatic leader.

They lack the courage to tell the people why federal deficit is spending good for them, and here is what benefits we will give you.  [See the Ten Steps, below]

The Democrats put Professor Stephanie Kelton on the payroll. She understands Monetary Sovereignty.  She is an expert.

They hired her, then didn’t say a word about Monetary Sovereignty, ample evidence of extreme cowardice or extreme stupidity. Take your choice.

Instead, they chose as their candidate, someone who would change nothing except the monograms on the White House linens.

She was “more of the same,” while Trump was “drain the swamp.”

So an obviously dishonest ignoramus won when the election shouldn’t even have been close, and it was all due to Democratic incompetence, no, Democratic conservatism.

Note to Dems: Below are Ten Steps. Pick one. Focus on it. Make it your signature. Explain why it will work. Explain why it will benefit the 99%. Fight for it. Defend it against lies. Be united for it. Repeat, repeat, repeat.

For instance, #1 is “Eliminate FICA.” Easily done at the stroke of a pen. Nothing complicated. Just eliminate the most regressive, unfair tax in America. It serves no purpose, whatsoever. None.

Image result for money down the toilet

FICA

(No, despite all the lies from the government and the politicians, FICA does not fund Social Security, does not fund Medicare, and does not fund anything else.

It is a 100% loss for the economy and 0% useful.)

Getting rid of it would be a trillion dollar boost to the economy — a trillion dollar benefit to business and to the working class.

It would help lift the U.S. back to #1 in GDP (PPP). (Yes, we are 2nd to China and actually 3rd if you include the European Union.)

Please, explain why the federal government doesn’t need my FICA dollars, and why the elimination of FICA won’t cause inflation and why it will make my life better.  Tell me the good news.

Fight, fight, fight for it.  Don’t surrender to the “debt is bad, our children will pay” bullshit memes. All you need is the courage to change the “same old, same old” to “Here is what your future can be.” 

Have the Dems learned from the thrashings of the past few years? I see no signs of it. All I see is more “Trump is bad” Whac-a-Mole.

Who cares, anymore?  So yes, Trump is bad. And yes, the GOP is bad. And the Nazis are bad. White supremacists are bad. Joe Arpaio is bad. Steve Bannon is bad. I get it.

But, all I really want to know is, what will you do for me? That. Is. All. I. Want. To. Know.

WHAT WILL YOU DO FOR ME? 

Tell me loud. Tell me beautifully. Tell me with conviction and with optimism. Show me a bright future.

Tell me the same thing again, and again, and again. I may not believe you the first time or even the 100th time. But eventually, if you tell me the same thing, often enough and passionately enough, I will believe.

And then, because you will have the advantage of truth, I will follow you, and you will win.

So, come on guys, do it.

Don’t make me puke, again.

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

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics.

Implementation of The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE A MONTHLY ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA (similar to Social Security for All) (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Economic Bonus)) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONE Five reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefitting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE FEDERAL TAXES ON BUSINESS
Businesses are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the federal government (the later having no use for those dollars). Any tax on businesses reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all business taxes reduce your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and business taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

The Ten Steps will grow the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and you.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

 

Bad news for MMT’s Job Guarantee Saturday, Oct 7 2017 

 

Image result for escaping the prison

 

It takes only two things to keep people in chains:
The ignorance of the oppressed
and the treachery of their leaders.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is a close cousin to Monetary Sovereignty (MS), the theory espoused on this site.

Both recognize the fact that federal finances are unlike state and local government finances. The federal government uniquely has a sovereign currency, the dollar, which it can create endlessly. Thus, federal spending is not funded by taxes or borrowing.

Fundamentally, MMT and MS are identical, but one important detail concealed by the devil has to do with MMT’s “Job Guarantee” (JG).

We have discussed JG many times, and continue to do so, because MMTers claim it is one of the most important parts of MMT.

They even have established a Center for Full Employment and Price Stability at the University of Missouri, Kansas City.

Here are excerpts from an article in The Nation:

The Job Guarantee: A Government Plan for Full Employment
There is no economic demand more urgent than putting Americans back to work. The government can do this by creating an “employer of last resort” program.
The Nation, By L. Randall Wray, June 8, 2011

There is no economic policy more important than job creation.

JG is a scheme only a university economist could love.

The idea is this: A federal government bureaucrat will create (or find in the public sector; that never has been clear) a job for anyone who wants a minimum wage job.

MMT refers to such job seekers as “buffer stock” or a “pool of employable labor.”

To be part of “buffer stock” or the “pool”:

  1. You will accept any minimum wage job you are offered, wherever in America it may be.
  2. You are qualified for any minimum wage job you are offered.
  3. Or, a federal government bureaucrat has the ability to find you the minimum wage job you want, and for which you are qualified, in a location convenient to where you live (even if you live in a small town in rural America).
  4. You prefer to work a minimum wage job, rather than not work, because you find such labor to be more emotionally rewarding than not working. (This doesn’t apply to wealthy people, of course.)

The whole thing is based on the MMT economist’s belief that the primary goal of you “buffer stock,” “pool employables”  (sometimes known as “people”) is to labor, or if that isn’t your primary goal, it morally should be. Apparently, you cannot be happy unless you have some minimum wage job, somewhere.

If the MMT professors merely would open a window in their ivory tower, they might see this:

Why Can’t the Middle Class Find Good Jobs if There Are So Many Job Openings?
Money & Career Cheat Sheet, Sam Becker, October 07, 2017

Job vacancies and job openings are exactly what they sound like — open jobs waiting to be filled. These positions represent needs from employers, and as such, employers advertise them as jobs to be filled.

As mentioned, these openings are at the highest levels on record, which goes back to the year 2000 when the government started keeping track.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, show there are more than 6 million job vacancies in the U.S. economy.  Why are employers unwilling to dip into the pool of 6.9 million unemployed people?

The answer, it seems, is a “skills mismatch.”

What does that mean? Those unemployed Americans out there don’t have the required skills or experience to be successful in the open positions.

A more obvious issue is the fact that many employers are reluctant to pay workers more.

Labor, like any other commodity, is subject to the rules of the free market. When there’s a shortage (as there appears to be right now), prices go up. But businesses don’t want to increase spending, and as a result they are allowing positions to go unfilled.

It’s not merely a matter of not being able to find quality employees. It’s that businesses are reluctant to pay more for them.

Pause for a moment to consider what you have read: There are millions of jobs available, but unemployed Americans don’t have the the skills to do them and employers are reluctant to pay what applicants want.

This doesn’t mean no one in America can do the job. It means:

Convenient to this location, there are no people who know about the job, can do the job, or who want the job, or who want the pay the job offers.

There are five crucial faults — job location, job awareness, job ability, job desire, pay acceptance — that separate JG from reality.

If the unemployed are looked at as mere “buffer stock,” these may be non-issues, but if they are considered to be human beings, these are killer issues. MMT economists, with their charts and graphs, fail to understand that.

If you have millions of workers who don’t have the skills needed to fill your positions, one option is to train them. But that’s something fewer and fewer businesses are offering these days.

More jobs than ever require college degrees, and many entry-level positions expect you to come in with some sort of certification or experience. This, of course, is at odds with the “entry-level” designation.

The fulcrum point of all of this is many employers simply aren’t offering attractive enough compensation packages to get the people they want. Yes, there’s a skills gap out there. But even that can be solved with high enough incentives.

How does the above square with MMT’s desire to pay minimum wage? Of course, it doesn’t.

That brings us to another (issue): The South and Midwest are where the most open jobs are.

And it’s not just areas of  the nation. It’s not even which states have jobs. It’s not even which cities. It’s a question of transportation cost and time. Most people will not accept a job that is much more than an hour a way and/or costly to reach.

Someone living in a northern suburb of, for instance, Chicago, would not consider a job in most of the Chicago business area — especially for a minimum wage job. Too far away and too costly to reach.

When employers can’t get people to work for the wages they’re offering, what are they supposed to do? The answer is to offer higher wages — and keep raising them until people start to bite.

Or mechanize, so live employment is less necessary.  Machines are a tempting option: No absences, no complaints, no labor problems, no errors, no salaries, no benefits, no lunch breaks.

A lot of employers are willing to let the 6 million unfilled jobs sit there rather than offer higher wages to fill them. That is why we have a record number of job vacancies and why we have millions of unemployed people who aren’t interested, or, as employers say, aren’t qualified.

MMT’s view of people as eager pegs to be dropped into holes, is at odds with reality.

Image result for ditch digger

Do you want this minimum wage job?

And here is another reality: The future is not more working hours, but fewer.

The goal for most people is to be able to do what they want, when they want — to live a happy life.

For some, this means being productive. For others it means reading, vacationing, being healthy, having friends, raising children, etc.

To each his own.

MMT’s professors repeatedly have stated, “There is no economic policy more important than job creation.”  They are wrong. Slaves in the South were fully employed. They were not happy.

People want happy lives. Minimum wage jobs are not the road to happy lives. There’s an old line, “No one ever says, ‘I wish I had spent more time in the office.'” Working for money seldom is a goal. The real goal is money and what money can buy.

Ask any retired person.

Monetary Sovereignty says “The most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.”

While narrowing the Gap between the rich and the rest cannot be accomplished by JG’s minimum wage jobs, it can be accomplished, beginning with Monetary Sovereignty’s Ten Steps to Prosperity (below).

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

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The most important problems in economics involve the excessive income/wealth/power Gaps between the have-mores and the have-less.

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics.

Implementation of The Ten Steps To Prosperity can narrow the Gaps:

Ten Steps To Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich can afford better health care than can the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE A MONTHLY ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA (similar to Social Security for All) (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB (Economic Bonus)) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012

Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONE Five reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefitting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE FEDERAL TAXES ON BUSINESS
Businesses are dollar-transferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the federal government (the later having no use for those dollars). Any tax on businesses reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all business taxes reduce your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.) Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and business taxes would be a good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.

The Ten Steps will grow the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and you.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Next Page »

%d bloggers like this: