Tag: Trumpcare

I just received an advertisement for Trumpcare. Should I join?

I just received an advertisement for Trumpcare. Should I join?

The advertisement was in the form of an Email. It came with a nice logo, featuring a symbolic American flag, and looked quite official.

It resembles what I might receive from a federal agency:

Trumpcare logo.png

Alas, like all things associated with Donald Trump, Trumpcare is mostly BS, a non-existent “program” designed and named solely to stroke the endlessly needy ego of Donald J. Trump and his fact-blind followers.

There is no Trumpcare. There only is a group of proposed modifications to Obamacare (ACA) that provide less care, and cost more than the original.

One of the most important features of Obamacare is the ban on discrimination against pre-existing conditions.

Here is what the site “TrumpCare and Pre-Existing Conditions” says:

TrumpCare weakens (not eliminates) key protections for women, seniors, low-income Americans, and those with pre-existing conditions, which could result in tens of millions (including those with pre-existing conditions) being excluded to from the market or placed in a high-risk pool due to cost.

If one wants to speak truthfully without diving into the whole explainer above, they can simply say, “TrumpCare/ The American Healthcare Act weakens pre-existing conditions protections.”

Or more generally, “TrumpCare/ The American Healthcare Act weakens protections for women, seniors, low-income Americans, and those with pre-existing conditions.”

If one wants to add more detail they can say, “The state waivers, paired with reduced cost assistance, a fee for re-entering the market, less employers offering health plans, and the freezing of Medicaid expansion could lead to many being effectively excluded from insurance due to having a pre-existing condition (the effect is indirect, not direct).”

FACT: As many as 1 in 2 Americans have a condition that could count as a pre-existing condition and, although not every possible pre-existing condition would be excluded, a portion of those 50% with pre-existing conditions could see new hurdles under TrumpCare.

FACT: The plan (before the Amendments) had a price tag that came in under the ACA according to the Congressional Budget Office, saving $337 billion (for the federal government) over the decade (according to their first report).

However, it did this by leaving 52 million without coverage by 2026 (it increases the uninsured by 24 million by 2026 for a total of 52 million).

The cost and uninsured rate are subject to change based on changes to the bill.

Much like Trump University and Trump Foundation, Trumpcare is a bit of sleight-of-hand that seems to promise much, but in reality, it is a figment of Trump’s imagination.

The changes from Obamacare mostly involve turning over to the states, decisions about benefits.

Those of you who live in “red” states know what that means: If you’re middle- or lower-income, you’re about to be cheated by right-wing, “states rights” bologna.

Continuing with the article:

Very simply, TrumpCare/ The American Healthcare Act weakens pre-existing conditions protections.”

Or more generally, “TrumpCare/ The American Healthcare Act weakens protections for women, seniors, low-income Americans, and those with pre-existing conditions.”

If one wants to add more detail they can say, “The state waivers, paired with reduced cost assistance, a fee for re-entering the market, fewer employers offering health plans, and the freezing of Medicaid expansion could lead to many being effectively excluded from insurance due to having a pre-existing condition (the effect is indirect, not direct).”

FACT: As many as 1 in 2 Americans have a condition that could count as a pre-existing condition and, although not every possible pre-existing condition would be excluded, a portion of those 50% with pre-existing conditions could see new hurdles under TrumpCare.

FACT: The plan (before the Amendments) had a price tag that came in under the ACA according to the Congressional Budget Office, saving (the federal government) $337 billion over the decade (according to their first report).

However, it did this by leaving 52 million without coverage by 2026 (it increases the uninsured by 24 million by 2026 for a total of 52 million).

The cost and uninsured rate are subject to change based on changes to the bill.

In summary, so-called “Trumpcare,” if it ever existed, would save money for the Monetarily Sovereign U.S. government (which can afford anything and never run short of dollars), while shifting a massive health burden to the middle- and lower-income people.

By the way, as a lark, I went through that website advertising the non-existent “Trumpcare,” and came to this page  ———————->

Trumpcare Obamacare.png
“Here’s Trumpcare.”

Apparently, “Trumpcare is Obamacare. Surprised?

If you liked Trump University, Trump Foundation, Trump Steaks, Trump Airlines, Trump Vodka, the Trump Casinos, Trump Mortgage, Trump Magazine, Trump Tower Panama, GoTrump.com, Trump: the game, and my very favorite,  Donald Trump, the fragrance (for those of you who wish to smell like Trump), all of which were failures (and some illegal), perhaps you also will enjoy Trumpcare — if it ever passes.

But as with all things Trump, hang on to your wallet.

And by the way, none of the business failures was Trump’s fault. Ask him.

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

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

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. 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:

1. Eliminate FICA

2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone

3. Provide a monthly economic bonus to every man, woman and child in America (similar to social security for all)

4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone

5. Salary for attending school

6. Eliminate federal taxes on business

7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 

8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.

9. Federal ownership of all banks

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Are the Dems willing to learn? What will it take?

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

In the publication, This Week, Ryan Cooper wrote:

The big lesson of Ossoff’s defeat is that Democrats must run on policy 

I suggest that what Democrats need to do is sharply discount predictions about what sort of politics will play best, and proudly run on something substantive.

Oooh, “run on something substantive”? What a concept! Actually give voters real facts!

You wouldn’t know it, but when it comes to something substantive, the Dems hold all the cards:

  1. There are far more middle-income and poor voters than rich voters.
  2. Most progressive initiatives favor those middle-income and poor voters
  3. By contrast, the conservatives have a record of favoring the few rich voters.

So what’s the problem?

  1. The rich are better able to bribe the politicians than are the middle-income and poor.
  2. The rich also are better able to bribe the economists and the media.
  3. Those bribes, over the years, have moved the Democrats from progressivism toward conservatism.

Thus, we endured a faux progressive President in Barack Obama, who repeatedly opted for social spending cuts and deficit cuts. Today, there are few-to-no progressive politicians, and any such will be labeled “socialists.” Our last progressive President was Lyndon Johnson.

And now we have arrived at today, from which we can look back and ask, “How did we get here?”

First, the Dems lost Congress, despite there being more of them registered as voters than the Republicans have.

Then, they lost the Presidency to a semi-literate, rich bigot, who was elected, in part, by the very people against whom he expressed his bigotry.

Image result for georgia people
Trump voters will lose most under Trump

Most recently, the Dems spent mega-millions to lose in Georgia,  whose voters will lose most under Trumpcare.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton, the perennial presidential loser, and a representative of the old Democratic style, continues to mouth off about Russia, the FBI, and hacking, which may be important to her, but don’t mean a damn thing to the voters.

So the question (or rather the questions) are:

  1. Do the Democrats care?
  2. Are the Democrats brave enough to tell the voters the truth?

Question #1 has to do with motivation.  If you are a leading Democrat in the Senate, you very likely are safe. Aside from being caught in bed with a sheep, you probably cannot lose your seat.

If you are a Democrat in the House, you probably have been elected via Gerrymandering, and are as locked in as a gold bar at Fort Knox.

In either case, you have yours, and they have theirs, and all’s well with the world. The boat will not be rocked by your hand.

For example, here in Illinois, we have a Democratic Senator named Durbin.  He was a House member from 1993-1997 and a Senator since 1997.  That’s 24 years in Congress and currently the senior Democratic Senator from a blue state.  You couldn’t pull him out of Congress with an 18-wheel truck.

Despite his 24 years, you might not have heard of him.  He keeps a very low profile, so low he scarcely comes up for air, at which time he whispers that he’s for all things good, and against all things evil. Then down he goes for another six years.

Do you think Durbin and all the other “Durbin’s” want to learn or do anything different? Not a chance. They have won for themselves by doing what they have been doing.  So they just sit back in that rocking chair and watch the votes come in.

But let’s say you’re one of those rare Democrats who not only cares about the Party, but also cares about the party’s traditional constituents, the men and women of the middle and lower income groups, the minorities and the underdogs.

You know the party needs to change its ways. You know you can’t be the party of the middle and the poor, and at the same time coddle the crooked bankers who caused the recession.

You know you can’t opt for “Medicare for All” while pretending the federal government needs to ration spending. You know you can’t provide the benefit without deficit spending or tax increases. (That was Bernie Sanders’s problem. He denied reality. He claimed he could pull ten pounds of potatoes from a five-pound bag. )

You know you must acknowledge the federal government’s unique and unlimited ability to create dollars while preventing inflation.

But, do you care enough to risk your Congressional seat? Do you care enough, knowing you’ll receive no help from the establishment Dems?  After all, look what they did to Bernie, and he wasn’t even revealing the truth that federal taxes don’t fund federal spending.

Now, my friend, Professor Stephanie Kelton, who understands Monetary Sovereignty, just wrote to me today. She continues her Quixotic effort to find, then teach, the one or two Democrats who might have the courage and the influence to change the trajectory of the formerly left-wing.

God bless her and keep her.

She tried with Bernie, indeed she tried with the whole Democratic Party just last year when she was the Senate’s official Democratic economist. As a result of her efforts, did you hear Bernie, or any other Democrat, say anything resembling, “The federal government cannot run short of dollars, so there is no reason to cut spending“?

No? Nor did I.

Did you hear a single Democrat say, “Federal deficit spending is necessary for economic growth“? Me, neither.

Still, Kelton tries; I’ll give her credit for persistence.

If the Democratic Party is composed solely of people who don’t care about progressivism, and/or are fat and comfortable in their seat, and/or are too stupid to learn or too cowardly to teach, and/or have no influence, what is the Party’s future?

Dire, I fear.

The Dem’s slide to the right makes them increasingly irrelevant,  a virtual GOP-Lite. The poor and the middle will see more Trumpcares, more tax base widenings, more bank regulation cuts, more taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

The title question is, “Are the Democrats willing to learn? What will it take?”

Facts won’t do it. Logic won’t do it. Charts and tables won’t do it.

I believe it will take a charismatic, widely respected, and influential leader, someone rich enough and brave enough to ignore the bankers, and smart enough to understand and defend Monetary Sovereignty,  a person who has true compassion for the poor and the middle.

Know anyone?

I don’t.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

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 (Economic Bonus)) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:

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

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

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

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The season of Schadenfreude approaches. Trump version

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

There is a German word that has no synonym in the English language.

You know that good feeling when a guy speeds past you and gives you the finger as he drives by, and later, up the road, you see that same guy stopped by a cop?  That feeling is called “Schadenfreude.”

Or it’s when you learn that the former football hero in your high school, who kicked your butt, and had all the adulation from the girls, now years later, comes begging you for a menial job in your company. That’s “Schadenfreude.”

Or when you’ve told people, over and over and over again, that the guy they planned to vote for was lying, bigoted sack of sh*t, who would hurt them if he ever is elected — but they vote for him anyway, and he gets elected, and he hurts them just as you said he would — you know that feeling? That’s “Schadenfreude.”

It’s something like that lovely “Nah, nah, I told you so” feeling.

I thought about Schadenfreude when I read about President Trump’s Environmental Protection head, Scott Pruitt, who has absolutely no intention of protecting the environment, thus damaging the future world of all those children and grandchildren of Trump voters  (though my Schadenfreude is completely ruined by the knowledge my own children’s world will be damaged, too. Darn!)

Then there are the black voters and brown voters and gay voters and elderly voters and female voters, who voted for Trump or didn’t even bother to vote at all, and now their worlds will be ruined by Trump’s bigotry against them. Plenty of good Schadenfreude for me there.

Schadenfreude is one of those feelings we all deny having but secretly find absolutely delicious. So I deny having had any wonderful, marvelous feelings of Schadenfreude when I read the following excerpts from an article in the 3/12/17 Chicago Tribune:

Health bill may hurt Trump’s supporters
Analysis finds older, rural, poorer votersat risk of losing out
By Noam N. Levey, Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — Americans who swept President Donald Trump to victory — lower-income, older voters in conservative, rural parts of the country — stand to lose the most in federal health care aid under a Republican plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, according to a Washington Bureau analysis of county voting and tax credit data.

Among the hardest hit under the House bill are 60-year-olds with annual incomes of $30,000. In nearly 1,500 counties nationwide, such a person stands to lose more than $6,000 a year in federal insurance subsidies. Ninety percent of those counties backed Trump, the analysis shows.

And 68 of the 70 counties where these consumers would suffer the largest losses supported Trump in November.

Oh, this is just too great!

Er, ah, what I really mean to say is I truly am sorry (snicker) for those folks who were taken in by those right-wing charlatans.  How could these poor people (giggle) have known Trump would hurt them?

Most affected by the GOP plan would be parts of Alaska, Arizona, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Tennessee, where Obamacare subsidies have been critical to making insurance affordable. All five states went for Trump.

Also hit hard would be parts of key swing states that backed Trump, including Michigan, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

Meanwhile, higher-income, younger Americans — many of whom live in urban areas won by Democrat Hillary Clinton — stand to get more assistance in the GOP bill.

Faring best would be the nation’s wealthiest residents, who would see a substantial tax cut with the elimination under the House GOP bill of two levies on high-income taxpayers. These taxes — on individuals making more than $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000 — were included in Obamacare to help offset the cost of assisting lower-income Americans.

What? The Trump-led Republicans, aka the “party of the rich,” plan to hurt the poor and help the (titter) wealthy? Who could (guffaw) have predicted it?

Excuse me. I don’t mean to laugh at your pain. (Chuckle) Not at all.

The disproportionate impact of the GOP plan threatens to undercut one of Trump’s core promises that he would take care of all Americans even if the health care law is repealed.

Only a small share of the electorate receives Obamacare subsidies, but the loss of aid could deprive tens of millions of a lifeline.

“People don’t realize that all it takes is one lost job and your goose is cooked,” said John Thompson, 59, of North Carolina.

Thompson said he voted Republican for three decades. He was let go from his work in 2013, however, and he found the only way to get health coverage was through Obamacare, whose insurance marketplaces opened in 2014.

“It literally saved my life,” said Thompson, who was diagnosed with cancer shortly afterward. Thompson is now back at work. But the Obamacare aid made him re-think his support for the Republican Party.

“People like me are going to get screwed,” he said of the GOP health care plan. “That’s just the reality.”

Yes, John, that is the reality. And I don’t mean to be cruel, but it’s not as though you weren’t warned. I mean, Trump practically begged you not to vote for him.

But you ignored his incessant lying about nearly everything, the grabbing women by the crotch, the bigotry against people of color, against immigrants, against Muslims. You ignored Trump University, his phony “birther” scandal, his cheating of his employees, the repeated warnings by every newspaper editor in America.

You ignored the pain Trump threatened to inflict on helpless minorities and on children. The list goes on and on — you ignored all that so long as you were taken care of.

And surely you remember how you stubbornly refused to listen to the people you demeaned as “libtards”? Remember them, the people who tried to help you with your health insurance coverage?

Instead, as you think about your hatred for Obama and for “Crooked Hillary,” does the phrase “from the frying pan into the fire” come to mind? Welcome to the fire, John.

And now John, as you are “rethinking” your support for the Republican party, and all your eggs are starting to hatch, I will do my best not to revel (snigger) in your pain.

I will be an adult and offer you my sincerest sympathy — more than sympathy — empathy, because your troubles only are beginning. Your world is about to come crashing down.

And it’s  your own damn fault.

But, I don’t have Schadenfreude, because you have learned something. You have learned not to be a stooge for a con artist, and you have learned not to join in the mob bigotry. And you have learned to use your brain rather than letting someone else use your brain.

And you have learned that if you lie down with swine, you will be treated like swine and be like swine.

You have learned these things, haven’t you, John?

John, haven’t you?

Ah, ’tis the season of Schadenfreude — but of course, not for me.

(Smirk)

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

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

The healthcare screwing: You voted for it; you have it

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
It takes only two things to keep people in chains: The ignorance of the oppressed and the treachery of their leaders..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Primum non nocere

It means, “First, do no harm,” and it is the primary principle of bioethics. It means, “Given any medical situation, it is better to do nothing than to do something that causes more harm than good.”Image result for first do no harm

That concept is the key element of the doctors’ Hippocratic Oath. It is the fundamental of medicine.

And it is what the Republicans have ignored in their efforts to erase everything “Obama.”

For the Republicans, the motto seems to have been, “Pass anything that eliminates ‘Obama,’ anything the rich like, and anything that won’t get the voters too angry — and to hell with the lower income people the program was designed to help.”

‘What other explanation can you offer for the 7-years-in-the-making plan the Republicans have put forward?

Here are some excerpts:

“What’s in the House Republicans’ replacement plan?” 3/8/17, Chicago Tribune, By Noam N. Levey

Washington Bureau, WASHINGTON — House Republicans have finally unveiled legislation to repeal and — just as important — replace the Affordable Care Act.

Here’s a short guide to what’s in the Republican plan and what it could mean for Americans’ health coverage:

Obamacare required Americans to have health insurance or pay a tax penalty. The penalty is assessed annually when people file their taxes.

How it would change: The tax penalty is eliminated. But the Republican bill still penalizes people who don’t get insurance. If consumers allow coverage to lapse for as long as two months, insurers would be required to charge them a 30 percent penalty when they buy a health plan.

That penalty could discourage many people from getting new coverage if they lose their plan.

As you regular readers know, the Obamacare penalty and the “Trumpcare” penalty, both are based on the “Big Lie” — the lie that our Monetarily Sovereign federal government cannot afford to pay for healthcare, so the people must pay.

(The federal government never can run short of dollars.  Can you?)

Image result for eliminate medical careThe Republican plan is more onerous for the poorest among us; it will prevent them from receiving any insurance, and thus, from receiving healthcare. The Republican plan will make America sicker.

 

 

Poor adults without children were barred from Medicaid coverage in most states. Obamacare tried to change that by offering states billions of dollars to expand Medicaid to childless adults. Thirty-one states have done so.

That has helped millions of low-income Americans get health coverage over the last several years.

The House GOP plan would phase out the additional federal money that has helped states expand their Medicaid programs.

The GOP plan would give each state a fixed amount of money every year for every person who qualifies for Medicaid. Many advocates and medical groups fear that change would force states to scale back coverage.

The sole purpose of the Republican change is to widen the Gap between the rich and the rest, by helping the Monetarily Sovereign federal government save money (which doesn’t need saving), and by charging poorer people more money.

(In the Republican plan), insurers would now be able to charge older consumers five times more than younger consumers.

If you are poor and old — the very people who most need healthcare support — what are you supposed to do about unaffordable insurance and unaffordable healthcare charges? This is yet another Gap-widening effort by the “party of the rich.”

One of the most important features of the current law are insurance subsidies that are available to low- and moderate-income people who use the marketplaces to get coverage.

Subsidies are linked to consumers’ incomes, so people who earn less get bigger subsidies.

Subsidies also are pegged to how much insurance plans cost. That means that if health plans are very expensive in one market, the subsidies in that market are larger. There are huge variations in how much health care costs around the country. So people who live in higher-cost areas are protected.

Subsidies are automatically applied to consumers’ monthly insurance bills, so low-income people don’t have to pay a large premium every month and then wait for a rebate, something that can be difficult for consumers.

The House plan completely scraps Obamacare’s subsidy system. Instead, Americans who don’t get coverage through an employer would qualify for a tax credit based on how old they are.

Older consumers would get larger credit, as much as $4,000 annually for people over 60. And younger consumers would get a smaller credit, as little as $2,000 for people younger than 30.

Linking the credit to consumers’ age risks leaving lower-income consumers without enough financial aid to buy a health plan.

And because the subsidies would increase annually at a rate slightly above inflation, they risk not keeping up with rising health insurance premiums.

In total, the above subsidy cuts reduce federal government payments by reducing support for the lower-income consumers.

Ultimately, all consumers would pay more for medical insurance than they now pay, but the poor are punished most.

Obamacare’s architects cobbled together a mix of taxes to offset the cost of subsidizing insurance for tens of millions of low- and moderate-income Americans. –

The House Republican plan scraps all Obamacare taxes. That’s a big tax cut for the medical device and insurance industry.

It’s also a large tax cut for the wealthiest taxpayers, who would no longer be subject to the Medicare payroll surtax.

Obamacare was based on the fiction (“The Big Lie”) that our Monetarily Sovereign federal government cannot afford to pay for healthcare. (Fact: Even if all federal taxes were $0, the federal government could continue spending, forever.)

As with virtually all facets of the Republican plan, the purpose is threefold:

  1. To save money, unnecessarily, for the Monetarily Sovereign federal government.
  2. To save money for the insurance and medical device industries.
  3. To widen the Gap between the rich and the rest by costing the lower income groups more and/or by eliminating healthcare coverage for these groups.

Other than the above, the plan is “change-for-the-sake-of-change,” to eliminate anything related to Obama, despite the damage caused to America.

Obamacare is not a good plan. It is based on “The Big Lie” of federal unaffordability. But the Republican plan is horrible. Ironically, it will hurt most those lower income people who formed the basis for Trump’s following.

But perhaps the ultimate irony is that the party-of-the-rich tries to reduce federal spending, not seeming to get the fact that federal spending is economically stimulative, thus helping business.

See Step 2 of the Ten Steps to Prosperity (below):

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

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

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