Economics, the “science” that doesn’t believe in data.

As “everyone” knows, the federal debt is way too high.

In the previous post, “Veronique de Rugy has a PhD in economics. So why doesn’t she understand Monetary Sovereignty?“, we quoted Ms. de Rugy:

“As the U.S. faces the consequences of runaway pandemic spending and deficits that could add $25 trillion to our existing $36 trillion national debt over the next decade, “neither party is serious” about tackling the problem.”

“The so-called ‘debt’ is nothing more than the total of deposits in T-security accounts at the Federal Reserve—a form of savings for the private sector, not actual borrowing.”

So, calling it a “national debt” is actually misleading. It’s not something the U.S. must “repay” in any traditional sense. It’s more accurate to think of it as net financial assets that the federal government has injected into the private sector.

The so-called debt has risen, as the above graph demonstrates. It was very high during World War II, then fell to nearly nothing post-war.

But to cure the 2008 recession, it began its dramatic rise, which has Ms. de Rugy and virtually every other economist all aflutter. As she said:

“With Washinton in a state of bipartisn denial,’ the debt crisis will only get worse.’”

What exactly is the “debt crisis”? She never says. Actually, no one ever says what that “crisis” is. In fact, all the data seem to show that as the “debt” rises, the economy grows:

**Gross Domestic Product grew dramatically as federal “debt” rose.**

Along with fears about the federal “debt,” economists seem to shudder about the Debt/GDP ratio. We often have been told that when the ratio reaches 50%, 80%, 100%, or some other arbitrary number, then awful things will happen.

But they never happen.

**The debt/GDP ratio now has exceeded 100%, and the economy continues to grow.**

In our earlier posts, we demonstrated that the debt-to-GDP ratio is not a meaningful indicator. It does not predict the federal government’s ability to pay its debts (Its ability is infinite). The ratio does not show anything. See: “Enough already with the Debt/GDP ratio“)

The federal “debt” also has been called a ticking time bomb since 1940, and we’re waiting for it to go off. It’s proven to be a dud. (See: “Historical BULLSHIT Claims the Federal Debt Is a “Ticking Time Bomb”: From Sept. 26, 1940 to October 10, 2024“)

What has been missing from all those claims is specificity. What exactly is the problem with high federal debt?

Here are some general claims, none of which is supported by data:

Higher Interest Rates

Claim: As the government “borrows more,” it competes with private borrowers, driving up interest rates (the “crowding out” argument).

No data supports this. The Fed sets interest rates. The U.S. doesn’t borrow in a market-driven way; it issues currency. So interest rates are a policy choice, not a supply-and-demand issue. There is no evidence that the vastly increased debt has forced interest rates up.
Inflation

Claim: More government spending = more money = inflation.

No data supports this: All inflations are caused by shortages, not “too much money.” Deficit spending that eases shortages (labor, housing, energy) can reduce inflation. The solution to inflation is targeted spending, not austerity. There is no relationship between federal spending and inflation. See: “At long last, let’s put this inflation question to bed.“
Debt Service Becomes Unsustainable

Claim: As debt rises, so do interest payments, “crowding out” other spending.

No data supports this: The federal government can always pay interest in its own currency. And again, it chooses interest rates. There’s no risk of involuntary default. There is no evidence that the vastly increased debt has crowded out private borrowers.
Burden on Future Generations

Claim: Today’s borrowing saddles future taxpayers with repayment.

No data supports this: Taxes don’t fund federal spending. “Paying off the debt” is just swapping Treasury securities (savings) for cash. No burden is passed on—future generations inherit the assets, not a liability.
Loss of Investor Confidence / Currency Collapse

Claim: If debt gets too high, investors may stop buying Treasuries, or the dollar could collapse.

No data supports this. Treasuries aren’t “bought” to fund the government—they’re offered as a place to park dollars that already exist. The government doesn’t need to entice buyers—it creates the dollars it spends. Plus, confidence in the dollar is based on productive capacity and stability, not some debt-to-GDP ratio.

SUMMARY

The so-called “federal debt” isn’t federal (the dollars in Treasury Securities are owned by the depositors, not by the government) or debt (the government merely holds the dollars for safekeeping, as with a bank safe deposit box).

It poses no threat to, or burden on, the government or the public.

The entire debt story is designed to convince the public to forego some of the benefits the federal government provides.

As Ms. de Rugy claims, “Republicans, for their part, try to convince voters they care about the deficit but feed the delusion that they can balance the budget through discretionary spending cuts that leave Social Security and Medicare untouched.”

That is the story the wealthy tell. They want to cut social programs to widen the income/wealth/power Gap between them and the rest of America. The wider the Gap, the richer are the wealthy.

I can’t say whether Ms. de Rugy is in cahoots with the rich or merely ignorant of Monetary Sovereignty. Still, articles like hers greatly damage the nation’s economy and people.

Economics is a science loaded with data, but economists don’t believe the data.

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

The Republican cure for poverty. Punish the poor for being poor.

Bottom line: The Republican solution to all problems is the stick. The carrot is reserved for the rich.

The poor are to be punished because they are “lazy,” “socialist,” and takers who need to be whipped like oxen to get them to work.

That is the bigoted nonsense continually pedaled by the GOP.

Excerpts from the following article demonstrate the right-wing bent.

Mississippi will send back fed’s rental aid, even as housing needs remain high, Aug. 13, 2022, By By Phil McCausland

In mere days, Mississippi will end its participation in the federal pandemic rental assistance program that has kept people facing eviction in their homes during the past two years of economic turbulence.

The state still has $130 million in federal cash to run the program, but Gov. Tate Reeves, a Republican, said early this month that next Monday would be the last day to apply for assistance.

Once Mississippi finishes processing the remaining claims, they will be returning the leftover money to the U.S. Treasury, which maintains oversight of the spending.

The program’s end comes as rental prices in Mississippi have skyrocketed and a large percentage of those behind on their rent or mortgage said they are at risk of losing their home in the next two months, according to U.S. Census data.

If all these Mississippi men, women, and children become homeless, what will the GOP solution be? Just let them die out there?

The Rental Assistance for Mississippians Program, or RAMP, offered up to 15 months of rental and utility bill assistance for those in need.

It was funded by two Covid-19 economic bills passed by Congress in 2020 and 2021, which provided billions of dollars of rental relief to states to administer to people economically disadvantaged by the pandemic.

This is a net financial benefit to the states.

It adds money that passes through the hands of the populace into the hands of Mississippi’s businesses.

Those businesses can use the money to hire Mississippians.

But, for the GOP, any poor person receiving federal help is a “socialist.” (Rich people who receive federal benefits by taking advantage of tax breaks are fine.)

Though unemployment continues to decline in Mississippi and the majority of participants in the program are employed, Reeves said RAMP disincentivized work.

In Reeve’s right-wing opinion, poor blacks are not like you and me. They would rather live on the meager scraps life serves them than work to improve their lives.

“This program has essentially become: If for whatever reason you can’t pay your rent or utility bill, taxpayers will pay them for you,” Reeves said in a statement earlier this month. “Mississippi will continue to say no to these types of liberal handouts that encourage people to stay out of the workforce. Instead, we’re going to say yes to conservative principles and policies that result in more people working.”

Classic bigoted misinformation. Mississippi taxpayers don’t pay for the program. The federal government does. And federal taxpayers don’t pay, either. Federal taxes do not fund federal spending. Even if all federal tax collections ended, the federal government could continue spending forever.

Reeves’s decision is pure GOP meanness, a holdover from Mississippi’s days of whipping slaves to make them work harder.

Reeves’ decision hits Mississippi as the country experiences rising housing costs and fewer economic protections. Nationwide, median listing prices for houses were up 16.6% in July from the previous year, and rent grew by 14.1% in June 2020 over June 2021, according to Realtor.com reports.

Jacob Leibenluft, the U.S. Treasury’s chief recovery officer, said programs such as RAMP, which fall under the federal Emergency Rental Assistance Program, have helped to keep evictions below historical averages.

The program is a perfect example of how the carrot works better than the stick, not only from a moral standpoint but also from an economic standpoint.

He said the Treasury Department has continued to strongly urge states to use the funding to serve tenants and noted that more than 6.5 million payments have been made to renters facing eviction as of June. Even if the money is returned by states, he said it will continue to go toward housing.

“As we have done elsewhere in cases where funds are not used by the original recipient,” Leibenluft said, “we will continue to reallocate available funds where possible with a priority on keeping funds in state where there is outstanding need.”

Under Reeves’s brand of leadership, poor, impoverished Mississippi will send their unused money to other states.

Housing rights advocates and participants in the Mississippi program said the issue in their state isn’t finding work, like Reeves said, it’s finding wages that can pay for growing living costs. RAMP has been a huge aid to fill the gap, even though it often took months to arrive.

Teresa Walker, 45, a hairdresser in Jackson, said the pandemic caused her to lose numerous customers. While business has picked up, it’s still difficult to meet her rent of $935. She’s applied for the program, as well as for jobs at Target and Walmart to help her pay the approximately $4,000 she owes her landlord.

Because the process is so slow-moving, she hasn’t heard back since applying three months ago, and her bills are stacking up.

“They don’t care. They just don’t care,” Walker said. “The amount of applications they’re getting shows there is a need, and for them to suggest people like me aren’t working? It’s a slap in the face. It’s very insulting and degrading. You’re just not being sensitive to people’s needs and understanding it.”

Sensitivity is not a GOP strongpoint. Cruelty is.

The typical applicant in Mississippi was Black and female, Home Corps data shows. Less than a third of applicants were unemployed, but nearly 70% earned less than thearea median income where they lived.

Paheadra Robinson, who runs the Southern Rural Black Women’s Initiative in Jackson, said her group traveled across the state to operate clinics for those who needed help applying for the program.

She said they would have to bring computers and help people sign up for email accounts for the first time. More clinics were planned over the next month, but they will have to be canceled because of Reeve’s decision, she said.

“A lot of these people were able to afford where they were living prior to this explosion of rental increases, and now this spike is causing major financial issues for families,” Robinson said. “It’s just unaffordable for a lot of people, and I don’t think that was given proper consideration by the leadership of this state.”

Other states with Republican governors, such as Nebraska and Arkansas, have previously declined the federal funding that would help residents pay for housing and utilities.

This is not an aberration. Republican-run administrations have a history of not serving their states. They are the governors who have declined billions of ACA (Obamacare) dollars — dollars that would have benefitted the entire state, not just the poor.

Govs. Pete Ricketts of Nebraska and Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas rejected hundreds of millions of dollars that would have been directed to their states, claiming they were shielding residents from socialist programs they didn’t need.

We assume the residents are grateful for being “shielded” from receiving help in paying their rent, buying food, and paying for medical services.

“We must guard against big government socialism where people are incentivized not to work but are instead encouraged to rely on government handouts well after an emergency is over,” Ricketts said in March.

“We cannot justify asking for federal relief when Nebraska has the lowest unemployment rate in the nation and we are no longer in a state of emergency.”

But Gov. Ricketts, if Nebraska has “the lowest unemployment rate in the nation,” exactly what are you trying to get your working poor to do? Get two or three jobs? What is your solution to poverty? Just let them starve and freeze to death?

Or is your goal to force the poor to move to another state?

But nonprofits in those states have told a different story since the governors rejected the federal aid in the spring.

Together Omaha, which operated the rental assistance application process for the state, has had to scramble to provide rental assistance since then, said CEO Mike Hornacek.

“Across the board, we’re all experiencing the perfect storm that we were all worried about in the nonprofit sector, which is the need is continuing at the level that it did during the pandemic and the funding is going away,” he said.

“Unfortunately, in certain cases like ours in Nebraska, some of the leadership just doesn’t seem to understand that it’s not as simple as people need to get back to work.”

SUMMARY

The Republican solution to all problems (in those rare circumstances when they even offer a solution) is cruelty to the unfortunate.

Too much street crime? The solution is longer jail sentences (i.e., “tough on crime”) rather than treating the fundamental cause of street crime: Poverty.

Illegal drugs? The GOP solution is harsher drug laws (which are proven not to work) rather than aid for rehabilitation.

Sickness? Take away health care insurance.

Homelessness? Take away financial support.

Poverty? Take away what little the poor have to “incentivize” them to work harder.

Illegal border crossings? Build walls and take children from their parents rather than helping people immigrate legally and integrate with American society. Every day we lose the opportunity for thousands of people to become productive Americans, as our ancestors did.

The Republicans have become the party of the rich, the cruel party, the white supremacists, and the neo-nazis, the party of traitors.

Despite all the flag waving, the right-wing has become the antithesis of what America claims to be.

Latent, unAmerican, hate-based cruelty may have begun to flourish with the Tea Party, in 2009, as a reaction to President Barack Obama. Its harsh ideas gradually have grown to full flower under Trump, the exemplar of “me-first, me-only” politics.

[No rational person would take dollars from the economy and give them to a federal government that has the infinite ability to create dollars.]

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

……………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most critical problems in economics involve:

Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

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 Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps: Ten Steps To Prosperity:

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Does Bernie Sanders have a secret plan about Social Security?

Modern Monetary Theory Got a Pandemic Tryout. Inflation Is Now Testing It. - The New York Times — **Stephanie Kelton**

Bernie Sanders is a “friend” to the extent that he wishes to expand Social Security (and Medicare). He once had Modern Monetary Theory’s Stephanie Kelton as his chief economic adviser during his 2016 presidential campaign. Kelton tried and seemingly failed to educate Sanders about the facts of federal economics, the key one being that a Monetarily Sovereign government cannot run short of its own sovereign currency. It neither needs nor uses tax receipts, which are destroyed upon receipt.

(When you pay taxes to the federal government, money is removed from the private sector [aka “the economy”] and flows to the U.S. Treasury. Because the Treasury has infinite money, your tax dollars effectively are destroyed. (Infinity + any number = infinity. No change.)

Perhaps Sanders is playing politics because he continues to mouth the absurdity that the federal government and its agencies unintentionally can run short of U.S. dollars.

‘Time to Scrap the Cap’: Sanders, Warren Bill Targets Rich to Expand Social Security Posted on June 10, 2022 by Yves Smith, By Jake Johnson, a staff writer at Common Dreams. Originally published at Common Dreams

Yves here. It’s no secret that the assertions that Social Security is in dire financial straits are fabrications.

First, like so much of our Federal government funding, the device of having a trust fund is a convenient fiction.

So far, so good. Despite incessant allusions to the contrary, the so-called Medicare Trust Fund and Social Security Trust Fund are not trust funds. They merely are notations on a balance sheet. Those numbers are completely controlled by the federal government. The federal government can change the numbers at will — quite different from a trust fund.

In reality, Social Security is a pay-as-you-go program.

She is correct if Susan Webber (aka Yves Smith) means that the federal government pays for Social Security by creating dollars, ad hoc.

Second, for those who nevertheless like the appearance that Social Security is paid for by payroll contributions, the most obvious fix has long been to raise or eliminate the cap on salaries subject to payroll taxes.

The fact that this problem has not been solved strongly suggests some influential parties don’t want it solved.

Those “influential parties” are the very rich, who wish to widen the Gap between them and those below them on any income/wealth/power scale. It’s known as “Gap Psychology.” Unfortunately, most Americans believe the lie that Social Security is paid for by a trust fund. The solution to a lie is not to accept the lie, as Smith seems to advocate, but rather to tell the truth. But, she doesn’t seem to advocate for the truth.

Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren led a group of lawmakers Thursday in unveiling legislation that would expand Social Security’s modest annual benefits by $2,400 and ensure the program is fully funded for the next 75 years.

The benefit boost under the Social Security Expansion Act would be funded by lifting the cap on the maximum amount of income subject to the Social Security payroll tax.

This year the cap was $147,000—meaning millionaires stopped paying into the program in late February.

Lifting the cap would fund nothing because the Social Security payroll tax (FICA) funds nothing. The dollars are destroyed when they hit the Treasury. President Roosevelt, the creator of Social Security, knew this, but he wanted the tax to make Social Security impossible to end. He reportedly said, concerning FICA:

“I guess you’re right on the economics (that payroll taxes are unnecessary).

“They are politics all the way through. We put those payroll contributions there so as to give the contributors a legal, moral, and political right to collect their pensions and their unemployment benefits.

“With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my social security program. Those taxes aren’t a matter of economics. They’re straight politics.”

All federal programs can end, and many do when an opposing party comes into power. But if the voters believe they have contributed to a program, the opposing party will find it politically challenging to end the program.

If passed, the expansion bill would apply the payroll tax to all income, including capital gains, above $250,000 a year, a change that would only raise taxes on around 7% of U.S. households.

“At a time when half of older Americans have no retirement savings and millions of senior citizens are living in poverty, our job is not to cut Social Security,” Sanders (I-Vt.), head of the Senate Budget Committee and a co-chair of the Expand Social Security Caucus, said in a statement.

“Our job must be to expand Social Security so that every senior citizen in America can retire with the dignity they deserve and every person with a disability can live with the security they need,” the senator continued.

“And we will do that by demanding that the wealthiest people in America finally pay their fair share of taxes.

It is absurd that a billionaire in America today pays the same amount of Social Security taxes as someone making $147,000 a year.

It is time to scrap the cap, expand benefits, and fully fund Social Security.”

Does Sanders believe that? Does he think raising the $147,000 FICA salary cap will expand benefits and fully fund Social Security? Or is his plan simply to make the rich pay so that it appears a Social Security increase will be fully funded? Is that his way of answering the question, “Who will pay for it? Or does he have an even deeper plot?

The legislation comes a week after the annual Social Security trustees report showed that—contrary to Republicans’ claims that it is barreling toward insolvency—the program is positioned to fully fund benefits until 2035.

Thereafter, even if Congress takes no action, the program is projected to be 90% funded for the next 25 years and 81% funded for the next 75 years.

Social Security is fully funded, not by any fake trust fund but by the full faith and credit of the United States government. Neither the U.S. government nor any government agency can run short of dollars unless Congress and the President want it to. What is their real plan assuming Sanders and Warren are intelligent and well-informed?

“Social Security is an economic lifeline for millions of Americans, but many seniors are struggling with rising costs,” said Warren (D-Mass.).

“As Republicans try to phase out Social Security and raise taxes on more than 70 million hardworking Americans, I’m working with Senator Sanders to expand Social Security and extend its solvency by making the wealthy pay their fair share, so everyone can retire with dignity.”

That “fair share” hints at the real purpose of Sanders’ plan.

Sanders announced the new bill Thursday during a Senate Budget Committee hearing, at which Republicans—including Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who has previously voiced support for privatizing Social Security—made clear they would oppose the legislation, which has been endorsed by more than 50 advocacy organizations and labor unions.

The Republicans’ ostensible purpose for privatizing Social Security is the claim that stock market investments will grow enough to safeguard Social Security growth. The claim is false for at least two reasons.

Social Security is funded by the federal government’s money creation, not taxes or any other outside mechanism.
The stock market is not a secure growth mechanism, and if somehow it were made to fund Social Security, the current S&P drop demonstrates the folly of relying on private markets.

The true purpose of Romney’s and other Republicans repeated drumbeat for privatization is simple: To provide another lucrative money-making opportunity for wealthy investment firms.

In addition to increasing annual benefits and lifting the tax cap, the Social Security Expansion Act would also boost the program’s cost-of-living adjustments by switching to a more accurate measure of inflation.

According to the Social Security Administration, the average monthly Social Security benefit payment was around $1,540 as of April 2022.

“With the cost of living at an all-time high, Social Security has never been more important, yet congressional Republicans continue to play games with its funding,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), the lead sponsor of a companion bill in the House.

An example of Gap Psychology at work. A wealthy person will spend $12.8 million to distance himself from those who have less, and to come closer to those who have more.

“This legislation would ensure that the Social Security Trust Fund remains solvent for another 75 years, increase monthly benefits for most recipients by $200, and alter the cost-of-living-adjustment formula to meet the everyday needs of our nation’s seniors,” DeFazio added.

Lifting the tax cap won’t accomplish any of those stated purposes. So, what may be the fundamental purpose? Could it be Sanders’ and Warren’s secret plan to narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest? Is this their Gap Psychology plan?

(Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those below, on any socioeconomic scale, and to come closer to those above.)

The plan implies to those who believe FICA funds Social Security, a direct money transfer from the richer to the poorer, from those whose salary exceeds $147,000 to those whose salary is lower. Since there are more voters in the latter position than in the former, it’s a pretty good Gap Psychology election ploy. Because the plan would, though by a minimal amount, help narrow the Gap, I wish I could be in favor. But I simply can’t support the idea of ratifying the Big Lie that federal taxes fund federal spending. So long as the populace believes the Big Lie, the myth that the U.S. is as financially hamstrung as the states, counties, cities, and euro nations. We must free ourselves of that myth to have control over our economic future. The honest plan would be to tell the world that the federal government can’t run short of dollars, federal taxes don’t fund federal spending, and federal spending doesn’t cause inflation. (See: “First do no harm. How ‘Dr.’ Jerome Powell will worsen the inflation and cause a recession”) The rich will continue to rule until those truths are exposed and understood. (Every federal spending cut demanded by conservatives is designed to widen the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest, while the few federal spending increases backed by the conservatives are designed to reward and protect the rich.) Rodger Malcolm Mitchell Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

……………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The only way to teach children right from wrong

“Right” and “wrong” are social conventions that differ among societies. Canibals think eating people is just fine. Aztecs supposedly enjoyed ripping out hearts. Slavery was de rigueur in America. You were not born knowing right from wrong. You learned from your family and friends. You learned from your schools and other outside sources.

There is only one way to teach children right from wrong. Children must be taught what is right and taught what is wrong. They must be taught the truth.

So, for instance, if your family and friends were bigots — — i.e. intolerant of people because of their race, religion, or sexual orientation — and your schools said nothing about bigotry, you probably would have become a bigot. Why would your family and friends teach you bigotry? Because their families and friends taught them bigotry, a chain extending down through the generations, families and friends teaching bigotry as a standing tradition. Why would your schools say nothing? Perhaps because of laws that prevented them from teaching you right from wrong, for fear you would find such teaching “uncomfortable.” Although you, like most people, probably harbor some forms of bigotry in your heart, you probably also agree that bigotry, in general, is a sin. How do we solve that dichotomy and break the historical chain? I was reminded of that question when some years ago, on a visit to Germany, I toured the Dachau concentration camp.

Dachau’s commandant, Theodor Eicke, introduced a system of regulations which inflicted brutal punishments on prisoners for the slightest offenses, while scientists there conducted cruel experiments. Prisoners were subjected to injections of malaria and tuberculosis, and the untold thousands that died from hard labor or torture were routinely burned in the on-site crematorium. As Allied units approached, at least 25,000 prisoners from the Dachau camp system were force-marched south. During these death marches, the Germans shot anyone who could no longer continue; many also died of starvation, hypothermia, or exhaustion. When American forces liberated Dachau, they found more than 30 railroad cars filled with bodies.

I was able to tour the camp because the German government neither hid nor denied the existence of the horrors committed there. In fact, they use the camp as a reminder of the past, to help prevent a repeat. A movie describing in detail, the horrors of the camp, is shown to daily busloads of German school children as a right-vs.-wrong lesson. The German people, but for a small minority, do not celebrate the misdeeds of Naziism. There are no statues of Hitler in Germany. The Holocaust is revealed and decried. The Germans do not fear admitting this dark period of their history. In fact, they actively teach it. I think of that approach to the shameful parts of Germany’s heritage when I compare it to the American — or rather, the right-wing — approach to the horrors of our past and even of our present.

Nearly 100 Confederate Monuments Removed In 2020, Report Says; More Than 700 Remain : NPR

Slavery was an abomination that was celebrated by statues which, at long last, were pulled down despite claims of “Southern heritage.” And today, in America, “well-meaning, good citizens,” protest against teaching the parts of our past that shame us. Their stated concern is that such reminders and revelations would make their children “uncomfortable.” But ignorance is uncomfortable. Bigotry is uncomfortable. Denial does not change reality. Today, our black families continue to undergo hardship. No, it isn’t of Holocaust levels, but still is terribly destructive and wholly unnecessary in our wealthy nation. GOP advocated denial is the worst approach because it teaches no lessons. It condemns us to repeat the sins of the past.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905. From the series Great Ideas of Western Man.

We neither can, nor should try, to erase the blemishes of our past. Nor should anyone blame our children for our sins or for the sins of those who came before us. Leveling such blame would, in itself, be bigotry. The purpose of teaching history is not to lay blame or to create guilt, but to help us know our own successes and foibles, and the circumstances that can move a nation to bigotry and hatred. We are not pure. No nation is. Pretending purity is blindness and naivete. Let us be honest with ourselves. To some degree, we all receive mistreatment at times, but in America people of color have been, and still are, disproportionately mistreated. We allow the teaching of the Holocaust, and even have museums dedicated to that education. Few object, because it was the Germans, and to a degree, the Poles, Austrians, French and others who committed those crimes. But the teaching of racism in America is an anathema to some Americans, because it is we, or more correctly, some of us, who are the perpetrators. And to hide that historical fact, we countenance angry denial. This brings us to something called “Critical Race Theory,” perhaps the most reviled yet least understood and least taught academic subject in education.

Critical race theory (CRT) is an academic concept that is more than 40 years old. The core idea is that race is a social construct, and that racism is not merely the product of individual bias or prejudice, but also something embedded in legal systems and policies. One example: In the 1930s, government officials literally drew lines around areas deemed poor financial risks, often explicitly due to the racial composition of inhabitants. Banks subsequently refused to offer mortgages to Black people in those areas. Scholars who study critical race theory in education look at how policies and practices in K-12 education contribute to persistent racial inequalities in education, and advocate for ways to change them. Among the topics they’ve studied: racially segregated schools, the underfunding of majority-Black and Latino school districts, disproportionate disciplining of Black students, barriers to gifted programs and selective-admission high schools, and curricula that reinforce racist ideas.

Solving racial inequalities first requires admitting that they exist and then admitting that they should be solved. And that requires study. Sadly, there are those who deny any study is necessary, deny such inequalities exist to be solved, and claim any such equalities are the fault of the Black students — a “blame-the-victim” rationalization. The Catholic confessional begins, “Forgive me father for I have sinned.” The confession of sin is the first necessary step for absolution. Without realization and confession, the sin compounds. The Germans seem to have understood that the denial of sin is in itself a sin. “Forgive America, father, for we have sinned.” Those are the words of the truly moral, truly righteous. An evil man, like Donald Trump, would have you deny the obvious. He would have you deny the clear fact that people of color have received worse treatment in America than white Christians. That denial compounds the evil. For you who are religious, here is are reminders:

John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. James 5:16 Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. Proverbs 28:13 Whoever conceals his transgressions will not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy. Psalm 32:5 I acknowledged my sin to you, and I did not cover my iniquity; I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord,” and you forgave the iniquity of my sin. Romans 3:23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God James 4:17 So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

Perhaps you are one of those rare souls who has not sinned and has not felt bigotry in your heart. But to deny, or even to countenance the sins of others against strangers is in itself a sin. Discomfort is not an excuse for denial. Children must be taught about the existence of sin so they can recognize it and learn to avoid it. Without this teaching, the children can be sucked into sin by evil persons. We are not born bigots. We learn to be bigots, unless we first learn about the evils of bigotry. The people who object to the teaching of racism in America often blame their children’s sensitivity. But this is a false excuse. The real reason is, they are ashamed of our past, and want to bury it. But the past has become the present, and it cannot be buried so long as it still lives. The only way to end the shame is to recognize it and to speak against it, else it will not only continue but multiply. Perhaps, the real problem lies not in the reluctance to admit that bigotry exists but rather in the fear of the cures. “Affirmative action” often has involved establishing racial quotas or preferences to “even out” representation in school admissions or job hiring. The problem here is that it invariably requires the less qualified to take precedence over the more qualified, and always will be seen as unfair. Affirmative action” also stigmatizes the very people it is supposed to help — the “You got in only because you are black” appearance, which further adds to the bigotry rather than reducing it. Once we recognize the bigotry problem itself, and once we determine to solve it, the solution lies not at the top but at its foundation: Money and poverty, i.e. the income/wealth/power Gap at the bottom of the financial scale. Lacking money, such minorities as Blacks and Latins suffer poorer primary schools, more crime, less family stability, poorer housing, poorer nutrition, and a desperate culture, where immediate needs take precedence over future plans. These all lead to poorer primary-school academic results which, in turn, lead to less-educated older students and less qualified job- and college applicants. The solution lies not in taking from the top to give to the bottom (which always will be fought by America’s most powerful), or in giving solely to the bottom (which will be viewed as unfair by America’s middle). Rather, the solution is to lift the lower levels far enough above subsistence so that the problems of poorer primary schools, more crime, less family stability, poorer housing, poorer nutrition, and desperation culture cease to impact even the least fortunate among us. This would be a “rising tide” approach that lifts all boats. Examples can be found in the “Ten Steps to Prosperity” (below). For example:

Eliminate the FICA tax
Offer free Medicare to All who want it.
Offer Social Security to All who want it.
Offer free College to All who want it.

Offering the same money to everyone, regardless of current income or wealth, will not affect the lifestyles of the rich, but can lift the poor to levels where school and job achievements are seen as being in reach. It will not evoke cries of “unfairness” and “discomfort” that currently plague the accurate teaching of America’s history.

———-///———-

[Why would any sane person take dollars from the economy and give them to a federal government that has the infinite ability to create dollars?] Rodger Malcolm Mitchell Monetary Sovereignty Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

……………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

The typical applicant in Mississippi was Black and female, Home Corps data shows. Less than a third of applicants were unemployed, but nearly 70% earned less than thearea median income where they lived.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: