How false economic ideas are disseminated: Terry Savage edition Monday, Jun 18 2018 


It takes only two things to keep people in chains:

The ignorance of the oppressed
And the treachery of their leaders

.

 

All over the country — actually, all over the world — politicians, media commentators, and economists disseminate completely false economic ideas to an innocent public.

Then, having received these false ideas, the public facilitates the dissemination process by telling friends, relatives, students, and strangers.

It happens every day. Do you remember when you thought stomach ulcers primarily were caused by emotional stress? Do you remember when you thought margarine was more healthful than butter? Do you remember when you tried the latest fad diet?

Why did you believe? Because you heard it or read it, so you repeated it.

Each day I am reminded of this phenomenon and today, once again, I was reminded, this time by Terry Savage’s article in the Chicago Tribune.

Terry Savage’s own website says:

“Terry Savage is a nationally recognized expert on personal finance, the economy and the markets. She writes a weekly personal finance column syndicated in major newspapers by Tribune Content Agency.

“She is the author of four best-selling books on personal finance. The Savage Truth on Money was named one of the top ten money books of the year by Amazon.com in its first edition. Her other recent book is: The Savage Number: How Much Money do You Really Need to Retire?

“Terry appears frequently on national television and radio programs, commenting on the financial markets and current economic events. She is featured on WGN Radio and WGN-TV in Chicago, with a weekly personal finance segment. And in days past you saw her often as a money expert on Oprah!”

Yes, Terry is an “expert,” one of a multitude of “experts,” who repeatedly feed you false information, and who when challenged, defend their false positions with false claims and fake statistics.

Today, being in the mood to butt my head against a wall, I wrote to Terry, the following letter concerning her today’s column:

Hi Terry,

It’s been a long time since we last corresponded, and I see you still have not learned the differences between a Monetarily Sovereign government and a monetarily non-sovereign entity.

Here are some excerpts from your Social Security article, with a few comments:

“We can’t repay our debt. Everyone knows it, and no one is willing to say it. But the United States is awash in debt that can’t possibly be repaid.”

If you’re talking about the federal debt, this is 100% false. The so-called federal debt is the total of deposits in T-security accounts. The government could pay off the entire “debt” if it chose to, simply by returning the dollars that exist in those accounts, back to the account holders.

“Perhaps a spurt of economic growth could put a dent in our massive debt, but at this stage, we are piling on new debt at rates far higher than reasonable expectations of growth.”

Reducing the “debt” (i.e. running a federal surplus) would cause a depression, or at best, a recession.

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.

“And the burden has grown, despite record low interest rates. As rates start rising, or as tax revenues fall during the next recession, the problem will overwhelm us and we will be forced to face the truth. We have made promises we cannot keep.”

This would be true of state and local governments, which are monetarily non-sovereign, but it is not true of a Monetarily Sovereign government, which cannot run short of dollars. It can keep any promise denominated in dollars.

“And we can’t just print money to pay the bills, as that will only result in devaluing our currency. Who would want dollars as they flood the market?”

In 1940, the federal “debt” was $40 Billion. Today the “debt” is $15 Trillion – a 37,500% increase.  The government has “printed” all those trillions of dollars, yet everyone still wants them, and inflation has been low, averaging close to the Fed’s target rate of 2.5%.

Federal debt = blue line. Inflation = red line. Massive debt growth has yielded low inflation.

“The government would have to pay higher interest rates as a bribe to get the world to lend to us to finance our deficits.”

The federal government, unlike state and local governments, does not borrow. Having the unlimited ability to create dollars, why would it need to borrow? The purpose of T-securities is not to obtain spending funds but rather to:
1. Provide a safe, interest-paying “parking place” for dollars, to help stabilize the dollar, and to
2. Help control interest rates.

“And those higher rates would only add to our debt burden. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that a one percentage point increase in interest rates adds $1.6 trillion to our 10-year budget deficit. Higher rates just dig a deeper hole.”

The interest on T-securities is not a burden – not on the government and not on taxpayers. The federal government pays interest by creating dollars, ad hoc. It never can run short of dollars to pay its bills.

“According to the ticking debt clock at http://www.TruthinAccounting.org., the U.S. national debt now stands at slightly more than $21 trillion. And we are in the process of adding another half a trillion dollars to it through the budget deficit predicted for 2018.”

Every year, since 1940, the federal debt has been called a “ticking time bomb” (see: From ticking time bomb to looming collapse), and still no explosion. That’s 78 years of false claims, but the debt Henny Pennys still have learned nothing.

“But the real issue is all the promises we’ve made to pay future benefits like Social Security and military retirement benefits. According to TruthinAccounting,org, adding those promises over the coming 30 years bring the total U.S debt to more than $104 trillion. The mind boggles at the thought.”

Unboggle your mind, Terry. That fearsome $104 Trillion is 7 times the current level. But, thirty years ago, the “debt” was $2 Trillion. Now it is 7.5 times that level, and the economy looks pretty good. What does that tell you?

“That brings us to the Social Security trustees report that was recently released. It hardly made a splash in the headlines. The trustees report says the Social Security trust fund will be exhausted in 2034. It will happen at the height of the baby boomer longevity spurt.”

Total nonsense. There is no “trust fund.” (See: Fake federal trust funds). As even the Peter G. Peterson Foundation admits:

“Although many believe that the existence of trust funds guarantees the sustainability of programs in the future, trust funds are simply accounting mechanisms that are part of the way the federal government keeps its books.

“The actual cash inflows and outflows of the programs are combined with all other federal programs and therefore contribute to federal surpluses and deficits.

“If a program is in surplus, the federal government’s overall deficit balance improves because it uses the additional receipts from the program to fund costs of other programs.

“In effect, the government is conducting transactions with itself but keeping track of inflows and outflows of funds through trust funds.

“Ultimately, trust fund income and outlays are not separate from the rest of the federal budget, and the sustainability of trust fund programs, like Social Security, depends on the overall sustainability of the federal government.”

Terry, everything you wrote about the federal government finances is true of state and local government finances. And it is true of business finances. And it is true of your finances and my finances. We all are monetarily non-sovereign.

But it is not true of the Monetarily Sovereign federal government’s finances.

If you wish to learn the difference, I’ll be glad to teach you.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

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

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

The single 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 (Guaranteed Income)) 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

When ego meets ignorance: Who pays for tariffs? You do. Saturday, Jun 16 2018 

It takes only two things to keep people in chains:

The ignorance of the oppressed
And the treachery of their leaders

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

The term “trade war” is used to describe a situation in which one country applies tariffs to imports from another nation, and the other nation retaliates with tariffs of its own.

But, a “trade war” is vastly different from a military war. In a military war, the enemy shoots at you, and you shoot at the enemy.

In a trade war, the enemy shoots at you and at itself, while you shoot at the enemy and at yourself.

A trade war is a suicide pact.

With every nation shooting at other nations and at its own people, how do you  “win” a trade war? You don’t. All trade wars are lost.

The hypothetical purpose of a tariff is to protect local businesses from foreign competition. But a tariff hurts the entire economy.

One example: Taxing imported TV sets would raise the price of all TV sets, because domestic TV manufacturers would feel less pressure to hold prices down.

The two results — both adverse — would be:

  1. The entire American public pays more money so that the relatively fewer American TV makers s can receive more money. The philosophy of tariffs is for many to pay more so the few can receive more.
  2. Tax dollars are taken from the economy and sent to the federal government, which being Monetarily Sovereign, and not needing to receive dollars, destroys them. Reducing the money supply is economically recessive.

The arguments for any tariff generally fall into two kinds of goals:

  1. To protect vital industries from extinction. Consider, for instance, computer processors. They constitute a vital defense product, and if there ever were a military war, the nation having a monopoly on computer processor manufacturing would have a distinct advantage.
  2. To protect domestic jobs. Every industry that is depleted by foreign competition loses jobs.

Both types of protection — protecting vital industries and protection jobs –are reasonable goals, but neither needs to be costly to the economy. It is not necessary, or even wise, to “shoot” our own people, in order to protect them from enemy “bullets.”

Both goals of protectionism can be accomplished by our Monetarily Sovereign government via:

  • federal government purchases from domestic suppliers, even at higher than import prices.
  • federal tax breaks for selected industries
  • direct federal cash infusions to the selected companies.

A Monetarily Sovereign government has the unlimited ability to create its own sovereign currency.

It easily can fund any sort of protectionism without tariffs, which has the added value of stimulating the economy instead of depressing the economy, as tariffs do.

U.S. and China Expand Trade War as Beijing Matches Trump’s Tariffs
By Ana Swanson, June 15, 2018

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Friday escalated a trade war between the world’s two largest economies, moving ahead with tariffs on $50 billion of Chinese goods and provoking an immediate tit-for-tat response from Beijing.

The president is battling on a global front, taking aim at allies and adversaries alike.

The United States has levied global tariffs on metal imports that include those from Europe, Canada, and Mexico, while threatening to tear up the North American Free Trade Agreement.

These countries are fighting back, drawing up retaliatory measures that go after products in Mr. Trump’s political base.

China’s response was swift on Friday, focusing on $50 billion worth of American goods including beef, poultry, tobacco and cars.

The trade actions could ripple through the global economy, fracturing supply chains and costing jobs at American companies that will be forced to absorb higher prices.

The tariffs are expected to drive up prices for American consumers as well as for businesses that depend on China for parts.

China is likely to back away from an agreement to buy $70 billion worth of American agricultural and energy products — a deal that was conditional on the United States lifting its threat of tariffs.

To say this is foolish would be an understatement. It is the work of a megalomaniac, who cares nothing about trade realities, but who wishes only to project to his base an image of “toughness.”

His base, being equally ignorant about trade realities, and who is more attracted to faux toughness than to facts, goes along with their self-punishment.

The penalties make good on a campaign promise by Mr. Trump to crack down on Chinese trade practices that he says have cost American jobs. 

Weakening the American economy and costing Americans money surely is the worst way to protect American jobs.

Mr. Trump added, “These tariffs are essential to preventing further unfair transfers of American technology and intellectual property to China, which will protect American jobs.”

But the White House has lately vacillated between taking a tough stance on Chinese trade practices and declaring that the trade war was “on hold.”

In recent weeks, the administration had tried to defuse tensions with China ahead of a summit meeting with the North Korean leader. Mr. Trump extended a lifeline to the Chinese telecommunications company, ZTE, at the request of President Xi Jinping.

This constant vacillation signifies government by childlike impulse and ego.

If Trump sees something on Fox and Friends, immediately a policy emerges, until he sees something else, at which time a whole new policy rears its ugly head.

China said it would hit back with additional tariffs of 25 percent on about $50 billion of American-made products, the country’s Commerce Ministry said in a release. 

The ministry said in a separate statement Friday that all other recent trade terms negotiated by the United States and China would also be declared invalid.

Years of trade negotiations will be lost to the petulant, emotional decisions by a man having scant knowledge about the subject of his decisions.

The Tax Foundation, a conservative nonprofit organization, found that tariffs on China and steel and aluminum could lower American employment by more than 45,000 full-time jobs in the long run.

Imposing tariffs places the cost of China’s unfair trade practices squarely on the shoulders of American consumers, manufacturers, farmers and ranchers,” said Thomas J. Donohue, the president of the United States Chamber of Commerce. “This is not the right approach.”

The National Retail Federation, which represents grocers, chain restaurants and other stores, said the tariffs would not combat China’s abusive trade practices, but only “strain the budgets of working families by raising consumer prices.”

“Lower American employment,” “places the cost . . . on American consumers,” “strain the budgets of working families” — these are the results when ego meets ignorance.

Are you “tired of winning”?

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

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

The single 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 (Guaranteed Income)) 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

Fake federal trust funds and fake concerns Wednesday, Jun 13 2018 

It takes only two things to keep people in chains:

Pete Peterson


The ignorance of the oppressed
And the treachery of their leaders

The Peter G. Peterson Foundation is a self-described “nonpartisan” mouthpiece for the right wing.

Its “nonpartisan” leanings include advocating:

  1. cuts to federal support for Social Security
  2. cuts to federal support for Medicare
  3. increases to Social Security and Medicare taxes (FICA).
  4. increases to taxes on the middle-income groups.
  5. cuts to taxes for the rich
  6. cuts to the federal deficit spending that grows the economy

The Foundation continually publishes articles that falsely claim our Monetarily Sovereign nation somehow can run short of its own sovereign currency, and thus, Social Security, Medicare, and other federal “trust funds” are running short of dollars — all untrue.

It is 100% impossible for a Monetarily Sovereign entity to run short of its own sovereign currency. Similarly, it is 100% impossible for any agency of a Monetarily Sovereign entity to run short of the sovereign currency, unless that is what the entity wants.

Neither the U.S., nor Social Security, can run short of U.S. dollars, unless that is what Congress wants. Period.

So it was with amazement that I read these excerpts from an article published by the Peterson Foundation:

WHAT ARE FEDERAL TRUST FUNDS?
Sep 20, 2016, Peter G. Peterson Foundation

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 funds finance Social Security, Medicare, highways and mass transit, and pensions for government employees.

Federal trust funds bear little resemblance to their private-sector counterparts.

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 the receipts themselves are comingled with other receipts that Treasury collects and spends.

This is all correct. Federal so-called “trust funds” are nothing like state and local government trust funds and nothing like private trust funds.Image result for money printing machine

All private sector financing is constrained by one simple fact: The private sector is monetarily non-sovereign.

It does not have the unlimited ability to create its own sovereign currency, for the simple fact that it has no sovereign currency.

The U.S. private sector (which includes state and local governments) uses the sovereign currency of the federal government.

And then, having admitted that federal “trust fund” receipts are comingled with other Treasury receipts, the article promptly forgets what it said:

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.

No need to raise or lower collections. The correct statement would be:

The federal government owns the accounts and can, by changing the law, unilaterally alter the purposes of the accounts and/or provide additional funding.

In the late 1770s, the federal government created the original U.S. dollars from nothing, and today it continues to create dollars at will.

Neither the federal government nor the misnamed “Social Security Trust Fund” (or any other federal trust fund) can run short of dollars unless Congress wants it to.

The Peterson Foundation, and far too many others, including those in the federal government, have been pretending that to save Social Security taxes must be increased or spending must be cut. It simply is not true.

The article continues:

What happens when a federal trust fund runs a deficit?
Treasury must finance trust fund interest payments and the redemption of trust fund securities through additional borrowing from the public (unless policymakers raise taxes or cut spending).

The above is wrong. Not only is it wrong about the supposed need for raising taxes and cutting spending, but it also is wrong about borrowing.

Unlike you and me and all other monetarily non-sovereign entities, our Monetarily Sovereign federal government creates unlimited dollars ad hoc, by paying creditors.

Thus, the federal government has no need for any kind of income. It has no need for tax income. It has no need to cut spending. And it has no need for borrowing.

Alan Greenspan: “A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency.”

Ben Bernanke: “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.”

St. Louis Federal Reserve: “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.”

Thomas Edison: If the Nation can issue a dollar bond it can issue a dollar bill.  The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good also. . . . It is absurd to say our Country can issue bonds and cannot issue currency.”

The federal government has several trust funds. The three most important trust funds are for Social Security, Medicare, and transportation projects.

Social Security Trust Funds
In 2034, unless reforms are enacted, the Social Security trust funds are projected to be fully exhausted. At that point, Social Security’s receipts will only be sufficient to cover 79 percent of benefits.

Benefits will then have to be cut by 21 percent to continue making payments to all beneficiaries. 

Wrong.

As the article previously said, Social Security “receipts are comingled with other receipts that Treasury collects and spends.Image result for shhh

This means the receipts cannot be “sufficient” to cover anything.

The dollars, once received by the Treasury and comingled, disappear from any money supply measure.

They effectively are destroyed upon receipt.

Asking how many dollars the Treasury has is akin to asking how many sentences you have. The Treasury creates its dollars as needed, and you create your sentences as needed.

Just as the Treasury is Monetarily Sovereign, you are “sentence sovereign.” You never have to ask anyone — via taxing or borrowing — for sentences, and you never can run short.

The Social Security Disability program is in worse condition. Its trust fund will be depleted in 2023, and unless its finances are addressed, its benefits will be cut by 11 percent.

The Social Security Disability benefits will be cut only if Congress wants them to be cut.

Medicare Trust Fund
In the Medicare program, payroll taxes are credited to the Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) fund and premiums paid by Medicare beneficiaries are credited directly to Medicare’s Supplemental Medical Insurance (SMI) fund.

Unless reforms are enacted, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Trust Fund is expected to be exhausted in 2028, which will precipitate a 13 percent cut in its payments to hospitals and other providers.

The SMI fund cannot be depleted — each year, general revenue contributions are set to cover whatever costs remain after beneficiary premiums are taken into account.

Wait! What?!

“The SMI fund cannot be depleted — each year, general revenue contributions cover whatever costs remain after beneficiary premiums are taken into account.”

SMI, which pays for Part B and Part D benefits, is funded by Congress. It doesn’t rely on a fake “trust fund.” Congress directly authorizes what funds are needed.

So you have the ridiculous situation in which, Medicare Part A supposedly runs short of funds, but Medicare Parts B and D do not. And you are expected to believe this??

Ask your Senator or Representative why all of Medicare and Social Security cannot be handled like SMI, with the federal government simply paying expenses.

That approach would end all talk of trust funds supposedly running short of dollars.

Highway Trust Fund
The Highway Trust Fund will be depleted by 2021. In this fund, taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel are credited directly to the Highway Trust Fund, but the fund’s income falls short of its spending.

This situation has already precipitated a slowdown of highway and other surface transportation projects as states prepare for a shortfall in federal funding.

The same fraudulent situation as with other phony federal “trust funds.” The result: Either infrastructure projects are delayed, not done at all, or are passed to the monetarily non-sovereign state and local governments.

Does it get any more outrageous than this? A Monetarily Sovereign government, which has an unlimited supply of dollars, claims poverty and passes spending responsibility to monetarily non-sovereign state and local governments, which are limited in their spending ability.

The article ends with these truths:

How do trust funds affect the overall budget?
Although many believe that the existence of trust funds guarantees the sustainability of programs in the future, trust funds are simply accounting mechanisms that are part of the way the federal government keeps its books.

The actual cash inflows and outflows of the programs are combined with all other federal programs and therefore contribute to federal surpluses and deficits.

If a program is in surplus, the federal government’s overall deficit balance improves because it uses the additional receipts from the program to fund costs of other programs.

In effect, the government is conducting transactions with itself but keeping track of inflows and outflows of funds through trust funds.

Ultimately, trust fund income and outlays are not separate from the rest of the federal budget, and the sustainability of trust fund programs, like Social Security, depends on the overall sustainability of the federal government.

That last sentence completely destroys any notion that the fake Social Security “trust fund” is running short of dollars and so, taxes must be increased and/or benefits decreased.

The U.S. federal government can “sustain” (i.e. pay for) any amount of expenses because it has the unlimited ability to create dollars. It never can run short.

Unlike you and me, and the states, and businesses, and the euro nations, the U.S government is Monetarily Sovereign.

Remember this whenever you hear that Social Security, Medicare and any other federal program will run short of money or become “insolvent.”

It is a lie designed by the very rich, to make you believe you must settle for fewer federal benefits or higher taxes.

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

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

The single 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 (Guaranteed Income)) 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

That horrible, terrible, frightening trade deficit Saturday, Jun 9 2018 

It takes only two things to keep people in chains:Related image


The ignorance of the oppressed
And the treachery of their leaders

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

Ooooh, that horrible, terrible, frightening monster trade deficit; it scares everyone, especially our President.Image result for scary monster

Here are excerpts from a recent article in Forbes Magazine:

Total debt for the five largest U.S. banks have grown by 4.3% over the last twelve months – above the industry-wide growth figure of under 4%.

This is a large increase by these banking giants, given their massive debt base which averaged more than $5.3 trillion in Q3 2017.

This represents a share of more than 40% of the $13.2 trillion U.S. debt market, and this figure is likely to trend even higher.

Sounds frightening, doesn’t it? Our largest banks have gone into debt by an additional 4.3%. Time to pull your money out?

Well, I didn’t lie, but I misled. The actual article read:

Total deposits for the five largest U.S. banks have grown by 4.3% over the last twelve months – above the industry-wide growth figure of under 4%.

This is a commendable feat by these banking giants, given their massive deposit base which averaged more than $5.3 trillion in Q3 2017.

This represents a share of more than 40% of the $13.2 trillion U.S. deposit market, and this figure is likely to trend even higher as the largest banks continue to outperform the overall industry.

In the banking world, deposits are bank debt. And though you never hear any bank boasting about the size of its debt, banks often boast about the size of their deposits.

I told you this little story to demonstrate how deceptive the word “debt” can be, depending on circumstances.

Well, there is another word that can be equally deceptive and that is the word “deficit,” especially when used in the phrase “trade deficit.”

U.S. trade deficit falls in April, but still up for year
The U.S. trade deficit with China grew 8.1 percent in April, though it fell slightly overall. (Julie Jacobson/AP ) By Paul Wiseman Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Record exports shaved the U.S. trade deficit in April for the second straight month. But so far this year, the deficit is up 11.5 percent from a year ago despite President Donald Trump’s vow to close the gap through new tariffs on imports and renegotiated trade deals.

The president has proposed tariffs on up to $150 billion in Chinese imports. The Chinese have targeted $50 billion in U.S. products in retaliation.

Talks to head off a trade war between the world’s two largest economies have so far failed to produce a resolution even though China has offered to step up purchases of U.S. farm and energy products.

Trump is also trying to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico. The administration is also taxing imports of steel and aluminum.

The president views trade deficits as a sign of economic weakness that can be brought down by more aggressive trade policies.

What exactly is a trade “deficit” and why does President Trump worry about it?

You should know the answer. Every time you go to your local store, or buy something online, you run a “trade deficit,” which is nothing more than buying more than you sell.

Running a trade deficit is no problem for you, so long as you have sufficient income to pay for what you buy.

And running a trade deficit is no problem for the U.S. Because it is Monetarily Sovereign, it has the unlimited ability to pay for goods and services. The U.S. government never can run short of dollars.

Blue line is Gross Domestic Product. Red line is the amount of the trade deficit. Not only is the trade deficit a tiny fraction of GDP, but we have one almost every year, with no measurable negative effect on GDP growth.

Most economists say trade deficits are caused by bigger economic forces, mainly the fact that the United States consistently spends more than it produces.

The trade gap has continued to rise since Trump entered the White House partly because the U.S. economy is strong and American consumers have an appetite for imported products and the confidence and financial wherewithal to buy them.

The whole concept of a trade deficit is silly at best and deceptive in reality:

If you and another person exchanged items of equal value, which of you has run a trade “deficit”? Or said another way: If you give someone a dollar, and he gives you something worth a dollar, which of you has run a deficit?

Take it a step further: Imagine you own a machine that can print infinite dollars and you grab a big boxful of those dollars and exchange them with a foreigner for a car.

The foreigner gives you a car — something that cost him time, labor, and valuable materials to produce — and you give the foreigner some dollars, of which you have an infinite supply and which cost you nothing to produce.

Who received the better deal, you or the foreigner? Would you look up that exchange as a “deficit”?

I have just described the U.S. trade “deficit.” Dollars are free to the U.S. government, and in exchange for those free dollars, we receive valuable assets. Yet Trump and many others fret about the U.S. trade “deficits.”

If Illinois runs a trade deficit, that might worrisome. Illinois does not own that money-printing machine. It cannot create infinite income the way the federal government can. It must rely on other income sources, notably taxes. The same is true for Cook County and for Chicago.

And you, too. You must have sufficient income, either from earnings, gifts, or borrowing, to pay for goods and services. But the federal government needs none of these.

Being Monetarily Sovereign it merely creates dollars by pressing computer keys.

Ben Bernanke: “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.

St. Louis Federal Reserve: “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.”

So tell me, again, Mr. President, since “trade deficit” means the U.S. exchanges dollars it produces at no cost, for valuable goods and services, why are you concerned? Isn’t a trade deficit the greatest benefit imaginable?

Getting much more value than we give — that’s not a deficit. If anything, it’s a surplus.

What traditionally has been misnamed a “trade deficit,” more properly should be called a “trade surplus,” when referring to the Monetarily Sovereign U.S. government.

Then, everyone could stop wringing their hands in worry.

“Debt” and “deficit” are the most misused and misunderstood words in all of economics, when applied to our Monetarily Sovereign government.

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

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

The single 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 (Guaranteed Income)) 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: