AARP continues to promulgate the Big Lie in economics: Social Security version

While it’s difficult to verify the exact words or the precise historical record of the exchange, the essence of the story is historically consistent with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s thinking about Social Security.

Here’s the most widely cited version of the exchange:

During the creation of the Social Security program in the 1930s, FDR was advised by his economic team — particularly economist John Kenneth Galbraith and others in the Treasury — that the federal government, as a monetary sovereign, did not need to collect payroll taxes to fund Social Security benefits.

They explained that the government could simply create the money and pay the benefits directly.

Roosevelt is reported to have responded with something along these lines:

“I guess you’re right on the economics — but the politics are what matter here. Those taxes aren’t really needed for revenue. They’re needed to give the workers a sense of personal stake in the system — to give them a legal, moral, and political claim to their benefits.”

“With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my Social Security program.”

Now compare that to what AARP wrote in its May/June 2025 issue of the AARP Bulletin, Social Security and Medicare, by T.R. Reid:

“These two programs (Social Security and Medicare) have protected the quality of life for older Americans,” (AARP’s Nancy) LeaMond observes. “So we need to save them.

“Job 1 is ensuring the solvency of the programs for current beneficiaries, but also for future generations. To do that, we have to ensure that the trust funds are stable.”

And there it is, the Big Lie, that Social Security and Medicare are paid for by taxes via federal trust funds. It is a lie believed by most Americans, and possibly most federal politicians, most media writers, and even most economists.

But despite common belief, it is a pernicious, harmful, cruel lie.

Even Franklin D. Roosevelt, the creator of Social Security, knew it was a lie, but he allowed it, not for financial reasons, but for political reasons — so that “no damn politician can ever scrap my Social Security program.”

How little did even he realize the depths of ignorance the damn politicians would plumb in order to limit benefits to the common people vs. the rich.

The rich have bribed the media (via ownership and advertising dollars), the economists (via university grants and promises of future think tank employment for professors), and the politicians (via many routes), to feed you false information. This guarantees ignorance through false information from trusted sources.

It is a multi-layered campaign of receipt:

1. Ignorance About Monetary Sovereignty: Unlike state and local governments, businesses, and individuals, the federal government is Monetarily Sovereign. It is the original creator of the U.S. dollar and continues to create dollars at will.

The federal government can never unintentionally run short of its sovereign currency, the U.S. dollar. Even if the federal government did not collect a single dollar in taxes, it could continue creating and spending dollars forever.

2. Ignorance about federal deficits, debt, and borrowing. Federal deficits are the net amount of money that an infinitely rich federal government sends to the private sector to grow Gross Domestic Product. Without federal deficits, the economy cannot grow and instead would fall into a depression.

The federal “debt” is not federal, and it is not “debt.” It is the total of outstanding Treasury security accounts (T-bills, T-notes, T-bonds) the dollars in which are owned by depositors and only held by the federal government for safety.

Those dollars are never used by the federal government for anything. The accounts are similar to bank safe deposit boxes in which the contents are held for safety and not part of the bank’s debt.

The federal government does not borrow dollars; it has the infinite ability to create them from thin air. As the St. Louis Federal Reserve wrote in their October 2011 publication titled “Why Health Care Matters and the Current Debt Does Not”:

“As the sole manufacturer of dollars, whose debt is denominated in dollars, the U.S. government can never become insolvent, i.e., unable to pay its bills. In this sense, the government is not dependent on credit markets to remain operational.”

3. Ignorance About Federal Taxes: Federal taxes fund nothing. The purposes of federal taxes are different from the purposes of state/local gov. taxes. The sole purposes of federal taxes are:

To assure demand for the U.S. dollars by requiring taxes to be paid in dollars
To control the economy by taxing what the government wishes to discourage and by giving tax breaks to what the government wishes to reward
To deceive the public into believing that benefits must be limited by taxes. This is a belief fostered by the rich to limit benefits to the rest of us.

Contrary to popular wisdom, the rich pay a much lower tax rate than you do. Pay no attention to the tax rate table that say otherwise. The rich have managed to engineer special tax deductions that make the tax tables invalid.

For example: Billionaire Donald Trump paid no federal income taxes at all in 10 of 15 years prior to 2016, In 2016 and 2017, he paid just $750 each year in federal income taxes.

In 2020, he paid $0 in federal income tax. He reported large losses across many years, some in the tens or hundreds of millions, which allowed him to offset future income.

These losses were often carried forward using legal provisions in the tax code. He claimed major business expenses — including for residences, aircraft, and other personal luxuries — as deductions.

(Have you been able to deduct the costs of your home, transportation, meals, clothing, cars, furniture, entertainment, etc.? Trump and other billionaires could.) But Social Security and Medicare are headed toward insolvency?? Really?

4. Ignorance about Inflation: No sooner does anyone realize that the federal government’s finances are nothing like state and local governments’ finances, than we hear the false claim of last resort about federal spending, “but that would cause inflation.”

Let me be very clear about this: Inflation is not a spending problem, and inflation is not a demand problem. Inflation is, always has been, and always will be a supply problem.

Federal spending does not cause inflation. In fact, federal spending cures inflation when directed at curing the shortages that cause inflation. We discuss this in more detail here.

The inflation myth has been promulgated solely to prevent the populace from demanding the kinds of federal spending and tax relief afforded to the rich — the kind of relief that has allowed billionaires like Donald Trump to pay less federal taxes than you have.

5. Ignorance about Federal Trust Funds: The USA.gov A–Z Index lists over 400 federal departments, agencies, and related entities. This includes executive departments, independent agencies, government corporations, commissions, and government-sponsored enterprises.

Very few federal agencies are (supposedly) funded through trust funds. The largest and most well-known trust funds include:

Social Security Trust Funds: Managed by the Social Security Administration, supposedly funded by payroll taxes.
Medicare Trust Funds: Managed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, supposedly funded by payroll taxes, premiums, and general revenues.
Highway Trust Fund: Managed by the Department of Transportation, supposedly funded by fuel and excise taxes.
Unemployment Trust Fund: Managed by the Department of Labor, supposedly funded by federal and state unemployment taxes.
Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund: Managed by the Office of Personnel Management, supposedly funded by employee and agency contributions.

In total, there are approximately a dozen major federal trust funds. So, only a small number of agencies are supposedly funded through these mechanisms.

The Supreme Court is not supposedly funded via a trust fund. Nor is the Executive Branch (The White House). Nor is Congress itself. Nor are the military services. Why, out of 400 federal departments, agencies, etc., are there only about a dozen trust funds?

Trust funds are not used because the government needs the money. They’re used because Congress wants to: Create political protection for specific programs (e.g., Social Security, Medicare), give the illusion of self-funding (“you paid in, so you earned it”), and limit or earmark spending, to avoid general budget fights — not for any financial reasons.

As the Peter G. Peterson Foundation wrote:

A federal trust fund is an accounting mechanism used by the federal government to track earmarked receipts (money designated for a specific purpose or program) and corresponding expenditures.

The largest and best-known trust funds finance Social Security, portions of Medicare, highways and mass transit, and pensions for government employees.

Federal trust funds bear little resemblance to their private-sector counterparts, and therefore the name can be misleading.

A “trust fund” implies a secure source of funding. However, a federal trust fund is simply an accounting mechanism used to track inflows and outflows for specific programs.

In private-sector trust funds, receipts are deposited and assets are held and invested by trustees on behalf of the stated beneficiaries.

In federal trust funds, the federal government does not set aside the receipts or invest them in private assets.

Rather, the receipts are recorded as accounting credits in the trust funds, and then combined with other receipts that the Treasury collects and spends.

Further, the federal government owns the accounts and can, by changing the law, unilaterally alter the purposes of the accounts and raise or lower collections and expenditures.

Note the last line, which is worth repeating: “The federal government unilaterally can alter the purposes of the accounts and raise or lower collections and expenditures.

While Congress, the media (including AARP), and the economists pretend to fret over the coming “insolvency” of the Social Security and Medicare “trust funds,” the simple and honest fact is this:

Congress and the President could prevent or cure any “insolvency” simply by voting to do so.

They could vote to add a few trillion dollars to the fake trust funds, or they could vote to do away with the trust funds altogether and pay for Social Security and Medicare the same way they pay for the POTUS, the SCOTUS, or Congress.

At one time, there even was the suggestion to create a multi-trillion dollar platinum coin (which the Treasury specifically is allowed to do) and to deposit that coin in the Social Security trust fund account, to prevent insolvency. This solution was rejected because. . . because it would have demonstrated the Big Lie about federal financing.

When did you ever hear that the President was running short of money? Or that SCOTUS couldn’t pay for the justices’ salaries? Or that Senators couldn’t be paid?

Answer: Never, and you never will.

There has never been a time when the Supreme Court, the Presidency, the military, or Congress was said to be “facing insolvency.”

Why? Because those agencies are funded directly by Congressional appropriations from the General Fund of the U.S. Treasury, which is not constrained by tax revenue or borrowing.

The Social Security and Medicare programs were deliberately designed to resemble savings accounts. This has enabled politicians and media to manufacture a crisis narrative: “We’re running out of money!” But that’s accounting fiction.

The difference is purely political, not financial:

Agency/Program	Funding Mechanism	Ever faced “insolvency”?	Why or Why Not
Department of Defense	General Fund (appropriated)	❌ Never	Congress always appropriates what it wants
Congress itself	General Fund (appropriated)	❌ Never	Congress won’t default on itself
Supreme Court	General Fund (appropriated)	❌ Never	Treated as an essential government function
Social Security	Trust Fund + FICA tax	✅ “Facing insolvency”	Artificial limit imposed by political design
Medicare (HI)	Trust Fund + payroll tax	✅ “Facing insolvency”	Same as above — not a real constraint

For years, you have been told about the Social Security and Medicare crisis, which is exacerbated by Congress’s and the President’s ridiculous decision to tax your benefits.

Why would a federal government, that neither uses nor needs tax dollars, tax the benefits it gives to the populace? For only one reason: To widen the Gap between the rich and the rest. “Rich” is a relative term. The wider the Gap, the wealthier the rich.

So to make themselves wealthier, the rich bribe Congress to pass laws that widen the Gap, bribe the media to promulgate those laws, and bribe economists to justify those laws. And that is why you see persistence in the Big Lie.

SUMMARY

The Big Lie in economics is that federal taxes and borrowing fund federal spending.

The Big Truth in economics is that even if the federal government didn’t collect a penny in taxes, and continues not to borrow dollars, it could keep spending forever, without causing inflation.

The so-called “crisis” in Social Security and Medicare solvency is a lie invented by the very rich, to widen the income/wealth/power Gap between them and you. There is no crisis other than a crisis of truth.

Your information sources and leaders are lying to you, and they will continue lying until you demonstrate that you will reject their lies. Vote the liars out of office. Stop using the lying media until they expose the truth. Stop funding universities that teach the lies.

Then one day, you will pay the same taxes as Donald Trump.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell

Search #monetarysovereignty

Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell; MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell;

https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

At long last, let’s put this inflation question to bed

You may have heard that inflation is too much money chasing too few goods and services. You’re about to learn that it simply is not true. Question: Does massive federal spending cause inflation? First, let us answer the intermediate question: Can our Monetarily Sovereign federal government massively spend without raising taxes?

Alan Greenspan, former Federal Reserve Chairman: “A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency. There is nothing to prevent the federal government from creating as much money as it wants and paying it to somebody. The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print the money to do that.”

Ben Bernanke, former Federal Reserve Chairman: “The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. It’s not tax money… We simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account.”

Jerome Powell, Federal Reserve Chairman: “As a central bank, we have the ability to create money digitally.

St. Louis Fed, in their publication titled “Why Health Care Matters and the Current Debt Does Not”: “As the sole manufacturer of dollars, whose debt is denominated in dollars, the U.S. government can never become insolvent, i.e., unable to pay its bills. In this sense, the government is not dependent on credit markets to remain operational.”

Paul O’Neill, former Secretary of the Treasury: “I come to you as a managing trustee of Social Security. Today, we have no assets in the trust fund. We have promises of the good faith and credit of the United States government that benefits will flow.”

Mario Draghi, former president of the (Monetarily Sovereign) European Central Bank, asked, “Can the ECB ever run out of money?” Mario Draghi: Technically, no. We cannot run out of money.

Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize–winning economist: “The U.S. government is not like a household. It literally prints money, and it can’t run out.”

Hyman Minsky, Economist: “The government can always finance its spending by creating money.”

Eric Tymoigne, Economist: “A sovereign government does not need to collect taxes or issue bonds to finance spending. It finances directly through money creation.”

Three Federal Reserve Chairmen, the Secretary of the Treasury, the President of the European Central Bank, and three economists agree that the Monetarily Sovereign U.S. can never run short of dollars. This means it can always pay all its debt without borrowing or taxing.

Warren Mosler (MMT Founder): “Federal taxes don’t pay for anything. They function to remove money from the economy. The government doesn’t need taxes to spend—it taxes after spending to manage demand.

Frank Newman (Former Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Treasury): “The government creates money when it spends. Taxes are just a way to remove money.”

Stephanie Kelton (Economist, former Senate Budget Committee Chief Economist): “The U.S. government is not like a household. It is the issuer of the currency. It doesn’t need to ‘get’ money from anyone else—not from taxpayers, not from China.”

James Galbraith (Economist, advisor to Congress): “The U.S. government spends money into existence. It does not need to collect taxes to spend.”

Federal deficits and debt (i.e., the total of deficits) are not burdens on the federal government.

Concerns about the size of a federal deficit or the federal debt are misplaced. The federal debt, no matter how large, never is a burden on the government or on taxpayers.

Even if federal tax collections fell to $0, the government could continue spending forever. Think about this the next time someone says Medicare and Social Security are running short of money. This cannot happen unless Congress and the President want it to.

Why then does the government collect taxes, if not to pay for spending:

To control the economy by taxing what it wishes to discourage and by giving tax breaks to what it wishes to reward.
To assure demand for the U.S. dollar by requiring taxes be paid in dollars.

All those articles you read and speeches you hear expressing horror at the size of a federal deficit or the U.S. debt result from ignorance or an attempt to mislead you.

Federal deficits and debt are necessary to grow the economy. When the federal government runs a deficit, it pumps growth dollars into the economy.

Recessions occur when deficits are too small for economic growth.

**Recessions (vertical gray lines) immediately follow declines in federal deficit spending growth. Recessions are cured by increases in federal deficit spending growth.**

Federal deficit spending adds growth dollars to the economy. Rather than calling it a “federal deficit,” it should be called an economy’s surplus.

This brings us to the central question: Does massive federal spending cause inflation?

Here are the inflations that have occurred since 1940, the start of World War II

U.S. Inflations Since 1940 — Causes Explained

1941–1947, Inflation Peak: ~20% in 1947 Cause: World War production and rationing replaced production for the economy, causing shortages of oil, food, rubber, steel, and other war goods. Consumer goods were scarce. The inflation was not caused by “too much money” but by total war mobilization stretching supply chains.

1950–1951 – Korean War Inflation Inflation Peak: ~9% in 1951 Cause: Sudden demand surge for military goods. Civilian supply shortages as factories shifted to war production. Another classic case of resource reallocation causing shortages.

1966–1969 – Vietnam War + Great Society Buildup Inflation Peak: ~6% by 1969 Cause: High military spending. Shortages of labor created wage/price pressures. Fed kept rates too low, allowing demand to overrun capacity.

1973–1975 – First Oil Shock Inflation Peak: ~12% in 1974 Cause: OPEC oil embargo caused energy shortages. Gasoline, transportation, and heating costs soared. Knock-on effects on food prices and shipping. Classic inflation from a shortage of a critical resource—oil.

1979–1981 – Second Oil Shock + Supply Constraints Inflation Peak: ~14.8% in 1980 Cause: Iranian Revolution disrupted oil supply. Ongoing energy bottlenecks from the 1970s. Rising wage expectations and commodity prices. Again, a supply-side crisis, not monetary excess.

1990 – Gulf War / Oil Price Spike Inflation Peak: ~6% in 1990 Cause: Oil price spike due to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. Temporary, short-lived inflation driven by energy costs. Again, a supply-side external shock—oil.

1992–2019 – Low and Stable Inflation Cause: Globalization, technology, slack labor markets, and stable commodity supply kept inflation low. Despite massive federal deficit spending, the Fed met its 2% inflation target (or missed below it) for most of this era. No notable inflation episodes for ~30 years because there were no serious shortages.

2021–2022 – Pandemic Inflation Inflation Peak: ~9.1% in June 2022 Cause: COVID-19 supply chain disruptions. Labor shortages and shipping bottlenecks. Oil/gas price surge from Russia–Ukraine war. Housing and car shortages (semiconductors, construction delays). Not simply “too much stimulus”—inflation started after supply chains snapped, not when money was spent.

2023–2025 – Disinflation (Monetary Sovereign view fits here: shortage-driven, not money-driven.Inflation Falling) Inflation has been falling steadily, despite continued government spending. Supply chains have recovered, and energy prices normalized. A strong example of how inflation eases when shortages ease—even with ongoing deficits.

**There is no relationship between federal deficit spending (green) and inflation (red). Deficit spending does not cause inflation.**

However, there is a strong relationship between an oil shortage and inflation.

**Oil prices respond quickly to oil shortages, and because oil prices affect all other pricing, oil shortages cause inflation.**

While oil shortages are important, shortages of other products can also affect inflation: Other energy sources, food, transportation, steel, lumber, labor, housing, and computer chips all contribute to inflationary pressure.

And it’s not only in America. Here are a few foreign hyperinflations and their causes:

Weimar Germany (1921–1923) Cause: War reparations from the Treaty of Versailles had to be paid in foreign currency. The shortage of foreign currency plus shortages caused by the loss of industrial capacity in the Ruhr region after French and Belgian occupation.

Zimbabwe (2007–2008) Cause: The land reform program disrupted agricultural production, especially of tobacco and maize, key exports. There was a massive drop in food and export production. Severe shortages of food and essential goods caused inflation to spiral.

Hungary (1945–1946) Cause: After World War II, Hungary’s infrastructure and economy were destroyed, leading to shortages of goods, services, and production capacity.

Yugoslavia (1992–1994) Cause: War and sanctions after the breakup of Yugoslavia led to the loss of industrial output and massive shortages.

Venezuela (2016–present) Cause: The collapse of oil production and exports, which were the main source of foreign exchange. The import-dependent economy faced extreme shortages of food, medicine, and goods.

In every case, shortages caused prices to rise. However, rather than address the scarcities, the governments printed currency, which gave the illusion that the currency caused inflation.

SUMMARY

While “excessive federal spending” is often blamed for inflation, the data do not support that common belief.

The data show that inflation is caused by shortages and is cured by addressing them. Printing currency merely pours gasoline on the fire that would be quenched by removing the fuel—the shortages.

So the next time you read or hear that the federal debt or deficit is too big, write or ask the authors to show you proof. If they say that Germans pushed wheelbarrows filled with money or merely claim that Zimbabwe is an example, show them this article and see if they can pick it apart.

Inflation is most definitely not “too much money” chasing anything. Inflation is too few goods and services. Cure the shortages, and you cure the inflation.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell

Search #monetarysovereignty

Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;

MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell;

https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Herr Fuhrer Donald Floats Idea Judges Who Go Against Him Are Guilty of ‘Sedition and Treason’

Once again, Trump borrows from Hitler.

Article Claims Judicial Overreach Could Be Criminal
©ZUMAPRESS.com / MEGA

The reposted article asserts that when judges act beyond their constitutional limits by blocking executive actions “without legitimate constitutional grounds, they not only overstep their role but may also commit acts tantamount to treason and sedition.”

Impossible in America? It was impossible in Germany, until it wasn’t.

It continues, arguing that “activist judges” undermine judicial neutrality by assuming roles outside of interpreting the law.

“The U.S. legal system provides mechanisms to address such overreach, particularly under statutes concerning sedition and treason,” the article states.

Federal law defines sedition as conspiring to overthrow or delay the execution of U.S. law through force, while treason involves “levying war against [the United States], or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere.”

The punishment for treason can include death or at least five years in prison.

It is not clear whether that includes Trump/MAGA’s violent attempts to overturn an election or “only” judges who rule against him.

At a recent hearing, James Boasberg questioned the timing of the deportations, stating, “What’s concerning to me is why was this proclamation essentially signed in the dark on Friday or Friday night or early Saturday morning and then people were rushed onto planes.

It seems to me the only reason to do that is if you know it’s a problem and you want to get them out of the country.”

Following President Donald Trump’s call for Boasberg’s impeachment, Chief Justice John Roberts issued an unusual public rebuke. “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said.

“The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

“Normal” is not a word that describes the Trumpian form of government,

This clash is one of several in which Donald Trump has faced judicial resistance. The president’s efforts to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development, restrict transgender military service, and terminate tens of thousands of probationary federal workers have been challenged or blocked in court.

Most recently, a federal appeals court on Friday, March 21, declined to pause a lower court order requiring the administration to reinstate 25,000 laid-off employees from 18 federal agencies, a significant blow to Trump’s ongoing attempts to reshape the federal workforce.

The above article was not our first warning about Trump as the alter ego of Hitler. See also:

1. Hitler in America. Why a bigot can win the presidency (July, 2015)

2. Hitler redux. (December 2015)

3. Astounding similarities: Hitler in America. It’s happening now. (September 2016)

4. “Lügenpresse”: Hitler’s “fake news.” We’re making the same mistake again. (December 2017)

5. Hitler’s lesson: Bigotry didn’t end with the Gypsies (July 2019)

Now again, Trump warns us not to forget history and ignore the threat to democracy that Trumpism (aka fascism) poses.

The people of Germany denied the curse of an extreme right wing that knows no limits to cruelty, hatred, bigotry, and lawlessness. They paid a stiff price for their denials.

So far, immigrants, judges, the media, Muslims, Mexicans, law firms, schools, politicians, current and former allies, and democratic elections have felt the wrath of Trumpist hatred. Who will be next? You?

Even previously ardent Trumpers are not safe. Any deviation from Trump’s line (which changes at his whim, frequently and unexpectedly) will be punished harshly.

Boxcars filled with innocents are not out of the question for a mad king.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell

Search #monetarysovereignty

Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;

MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell;

https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

About cutting investment in science

Donald Trump’s straw boss, Elon Musk, is proud of the number of people he has fired from the government. This noble feat was accomplished without the time-consuming burden of evaluating the qualifications of those he tossed out.

His actions required no brains or skill, two qualities not needed or wanted in the Trump administration. Seemingly, the salary savings alone are justification enough and damned be the repercussions.

For those who have managed companies without experiencing six bankruptcies or multiple fines and penalties, it is clear that losing valuable employees is detrimental to any organization.

Of course, Trump had a different experience: “Fail, fail, fail, then ask Daddy to bail me out.”

Sadly, there is no bailing out for the people damaged by Trump’s and Musk’s ignorance.

ANOTHER VIEWPOINT from the March 24 Sun Sentinel
Let’s scrap science. What’s the worst that could happen?

By Logan Suits

In 1800, about 50% of all children born didn’t see their fifth birthday. Over 200 years of science and advancement later, that number is less than 1%. Science saves lives — which is why the attempts to cut it are so appalling.

Today, researchers are working hard in thousands of laboratories across the country. They’re working for you — so that next time you go to the doctor, your doctor will be able to help you.

Whether it’s new treatments for emerging infectious diseases or innovative ways to treat things that have ailed humans since the dawn of time — like cancer and heart disease — these researchers are working on finding answers to diseases that claim thousands of lives. Diseases that you might have one day.

Their work is in danger. Recent funding cuts have made labs across the country worried. The National Institutes of Health, which funds the majority of laboratories in universities, has recently made drastic changes to funding that will make it impossible for some labs to function.

Worse, scientists have been reporting that meetings to review their funding applications have been canceled, leaving their funding in limbo.

What would happen if we stopped this progress?

First, we’d stop going forward. We’ve made huge strides in important issues that we should keep making. Since 1990, recent medical advancements saved an estimated 200,000 children in the U.S. alone. There’s still more work to be done, though — child mortality remains higher in the U.S. than in other highly developed countries.

We need to keep moving forward.

Second, and perhaps worse, we’d start going backward. New strains of bacteria that are resistant to every drug we use to treat them (so-called “superbugs”) are becoming more and more prevalent.

Some scientists are worried that you could get a paper cut, the wound could get infected with resistant bacteria, and there’d be nothing a hospital could do to cure it.

We could be moving toward a world where a healthy adult could die from a scratch — just as it was before penicillin. Scientists estimate that by 2050, 39 million people will die from antibiotic resistant infection.

In this world that requires new medical solutions to difficult challenges, the United States could choose to be a leader. Becoming a leader in this is not the costly investment some believe. For every dollar invested in medical research, there is $1.24 saved in health care cost, and over two dollars of economic activity created.

Financial issues are always a concern, but failing to fund research means the government will pay more in health care cost and collect less in taxes.

Funding cuts to medical research aren’t just amoral for the lost lives; they also don’t make financial sense.
With the broad funding cuts being considered, it’s important that we look back and see how things used to be, and how far medical science has taken us.

Research has been one of the best investments the United States has ever made, and we shouldn’t ever forget it.

Logan Suits is a Tampa native and a Ph.D. candidate studying antibiotic-resistant staphylococcus aureus.

Musk’s belief is that virtually all federal agencies are teeming with lazy, useless employees doing nothing but wasting taxpayer money. His “solution” is to randomly fire at least half the employees, regardless of their quality and accomplishments.

Thus, he was saved the effort of actually understanding what the agencies and their individual employees did. This approach, “if the horse is too slow, cut off two legs,” did nothing to improve efficiency. Quite the opposite, it guaranteed reduced efficiency.

What may have improved Twitter’s profits does not work with a federal agency that has no profit motive but rather a service motive. It has quite a different goal.

The idiocy of this juvenile approach is ignorantly:

Assuming random federal agencies must be inefficient, without any measure of “efficiency” for each agency. The measure will differ depending on the agency.
Assuming there is no difference between productive and non-productive people so, “Fire ’em all.”
Failing to install new systems that would improve efficiency, but rather, assuming that fewer employees will be more efficient.
Failing to set goals for the agency and the employees, so the efficiency can be measured.
Wrongly claiming that federal taxpayers will benefit from reduced federal spending. (In reality, federal taxpayers benefit when the government spends more- i.e., adds more growth dollars to the economy- than when the government spends less.

While they take billions from the federal government, Trump and Musk have caused irrecoverable damage to the economy, federal employees, and taxpayers.

Presumably, that was the plan all along, a plan to widen the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell

Search #monetarysovereignty

Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;

MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell;

https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY