#i would do this if i had a trillion dollars in my bank account

[the-firebird69]

He's going to hand off to his people to make sure it doesn't look like us doing it there's some ideas we have and they know about it and I might nudge him along cuz I know about it but seriously this is going to go ahead he's sick of these idiots it's going to show them how it works a little and they'll be dead

Mac

There's several points of law that you people violate all the time but the easiest way to kill you is by doing what our son and daughter are suggesting and they don't have any money to pay taxes and they would be under severe duress if it's real which probably you morlok can't figure out. And we're announcing it to get rid of you trying to keep that in mind it works very well

1. You do not have to pay taxes on stocks even after they split make money in a crew all sorts of money and grow and if the rate of growth increases you don't have to pay taxes unless you take dividends and our son has never taken dividends and if he did he put it on his taxes as you see in California it was only one year that he's ever done that and it was for CDs and it was a pitiful amount of money because of you people need like $100 but he forgot about the other high yield CDs but once again he's never taking dividends so he does not pay taxes does not have to and won't have to unless he divest which means takes them out and he's not taking them out and you're illegally saying he doesn't have them for who the hell knows why who doesn't do anything and Max and skincare get his coated money so he's beating you up and you're stupid

2. So starting a weed wacker or some kind of gas fired engine to threaten for what we're going to say anyways it looks like them doing it which is good. Bank accounts are different. Every year they look at the interest and they look at the money that the account has accrued and they apply a tax to it meaning that they calculate how much taxes someone would pay roughly and they just leave it there in other words the first time had a $25,000 in the bank like he did at UMass Amherst and the first year he earned about $3,000 at the end of the year they would calculate his taxes and he didn't have any income so they figured probably $28,000 no it was $3,000 so he wouldn't have to pay anything no after 4 years he was making about $20,000 on that fourth year and that's where you start paying taxes at about 30% or less probably about 15% he says and that's about right so he would have owed about 325 in taxes but it's been 30 years and it's up to 2.5 million dollars and each and every year you're supposed to pay taxes on the interest that you earn in the bank oh my gosh senior in Australia. And on that amount of money he would owe probably $300,000 and if you calculated all of it together in the bank and the interest and his regular income which is nothing and based on the interest because you don't pay on the on the major on the original sum from the last year you just pay on the interest per year so it's a lot less money than people calculate it's still more money than he could ever come up with he has like three trillion dollars in the bank and he would owe probably about $200 billion in taxes and when he would take out money out of the bank and move it we'd advise him to pay taxes on it and only when he takes the money out of each particular Bank I know it comes out in like a million dollars or $2 million dollars each time and that number it is about $100,000 each time or less and we think it's about 75,000 so $2 million dollars will be about $140,000 but all together it's $200 billion in all the bank accounts and the IRS is going nuts right now and they're mostly idiots and they're going to all die that moves us on to the next point although you guys never announced he had that money and you never told him about it and he asked and you said no and there are witnesses and that you forced them to say no

3. Social security if they knew about the interest and the bank accounts would try and discontinue his income and you idiots have been trying to do that for years and you missed this item completely and you went over it over and over. And said he doesn't know any taxes on anything and we looked at your accounts and we decided to call the IRS on all of you and a lot of your IRS people who say they're going nuts on our son's accounts some of them are cuz they're idiots like John remillard are going nuts on your accounts and you owe taxes especially Trump and we have FBI people who are Tommy Allen who are going to expose you for tax evasion cuz you never pay taxes on your bank accounts and your bank accounts are ginormous you sold all the stock and you have to pay taxes on the dividends and you didn't and you have to be taxes on the bank account interest which is humongous and you're going to owe more money than you have no but you won't pay and they're going to seek you out now the social security is starting to shut it down right now and we're going after them all of them it's a ton of money okay

5. When he was a child he had about $30,000 in one jar and 40 or 50,000 and another total of $75,000 and took the money out of circulation so the department of the US Treasury department is now seeking him and it's idiots trying to produce warrants accepting DC accepting DC they're mostly fired and Terry cheesman is the head of the treasury and she says why did you do that and I did that because people would not let me put it in the bank and use it if I did and nobody let me access it and I think someone stole it like Trump and he says no way it's been fighting over it saying I didn't steal it and it's out of circulation and it's over 20 years and it might be ruined those things they could literally charge them with if they were stupid enough to there's some laws that protect people that do that especially when they're under duress like he is by you fools so watch out for that one

5. Someone was that much money is considered to be a billionaire no matter what you do and his taxes would all be wrong and the IRS is now calling it but it's really a non threat because they'll die if they try and enforce it here or there and they're really going after you Trump because you sold all that stuff like 95% of the world stuff no it's 70% and it's going up probably will top out at 80% and you're keeping certain companies and you hit your income and you didn't report it and you didn't pay a dividends and they're going after you hard. But as a billionaire he has certain duties to perform to the United States and that's quarterly reporting no it's monthly reporting of his assets and what he's doing with them because he could be a threat and Donald Trump has not provided one quarterly report as long as he's been in the United States and most everybody else is even Terry cheesman and our son is reported to the FBI that he can't access anything and they verified it and Trump has done no such thing

6. Not only does he have to report quarterly if he could access the money but he would have to report the assets that he has and he has a lot of assets and they're unreported basically because he doesn't know about them and he doesn't know about owning companies and some of them he owns out right so we purchase them for him but nobody lets us near and his assets are huge and he would definitely be considered a threat or possible threat to national security and he be on a watch list and he's not of course the idiots will go after this and other people who are smart no it's a stupid thing to do it's an easy way for us to crush someone's balls and Donald Trump and Mar-A-Lago is hot they found the radiation it's going to come out in the news no maybe it will we don't think so

7. There's a couple other major points but that much money he is considered someone who is armed and dangerous and a lot of what he's saying online can be considered as and construed as someone who is the head of a rebel Army and that's what Donald Trump wants to say about him but Donald Trump is the one who is issuing orders not our son and he's getting information from other people and it's seen too but that's something that they could try and accuse him of if they had the government if they don't at all and they say they do but really the only part of Congress and part of the Senate about 40% of each and they're getting kicked out

8. The final thing is for now that he's exhausted but no he acts like he's poor but he always has stuff he needs and people call that poor Rich and people are accusing him of having access to the money so everybody's going after this and they're going after people with money mostly and they're saying they're going after a son but we're getting them anyways it's a huge debacle this thing weekly publishes you're going to find all these hateful f***** coming out getting killed

9. If you acknowledge that he had all that money you guys would probably try and charge him for tax fraud not to mention the tax evasion with it we mentioned it's different because fraud is intentional attempt to deceive the government and the people although Trump has huge huge cases of fraud against him it's just the surface of what Trump has been doing is the amount of money you took he took so much money that even now he could possibly just stabilize America by screwing around with the Cash Plus he'd have to just flush it but most of his people will be dead and he might be able to and might not harm anyone is not really true. And our son does not have that kind of money but he has that kind of stock and that's another item

10. With the amount of stock that our son has in companies it could be looked at as an attempt to take over the United States and other nations and he really is actually trying to do that and what he writes to say it and he doesn't have access doesn't necessarily mean it's not illegal because he has other people like Katia equus and Melissa Paris checking on the numbers and it is a conspiracy to overthrow governments. Unfortunately this is actually a real one and Max have been using it slightly because they're under duress and they know about it and they work with us and see us but some parties are not right there and don't respond to the threats very well is enough stock and ownership of companies to be considered to be one of the world's most powerful people second to not been Arnold it will be to Mac and in competition with Tommy f he's way up there and we are too that's where the ones helping with it managing with it and more so food for thought have a nice time with it more luck and we'll see you at the incinerator cuz that's where you're going

Thor Freya

Hahaha lol you people are a joke and you're going to go down you don't think we're fighting for it to get there you're wrong

Hera Zues

Olympus I'm going to war with you more luck and we're getting troops in here now cuz of this post

[sirfrogsworth]

People on disability shouldn't get a stimulus check, theirs should be donated to repaying all the money they've mooched off taxpayers.

This is not the first time I’ve gotten a message like this. I always find it curious. Because if you have this attitude you are either invincible, rich, or a fool.

I used to be in this tech nerd community and there was this older fella who slowly revealed himself to be a super right wing asshat. He complained about immigrants mooching, black people mooching, poor people mooching… everybody was mooching his taxes. Meanwhile, he was 65 and working hard. Paying his own way. Doing things proper like a good American. 

He was no damn moocher, that’s for sure.

Then he got sick.

He could not work anymore.

Lost his medical insurance.

His savings ran out in about 3 months.

And he became a fellow moocher.

He had to sign up for Medicare and disability.

But then he realized that wasn’t enough to live on. Boy, was he mad. ALL CAPS POSTS about how he can’t afford rent. He can’t afford food. He started posting links to his Paypal asking people to donate. He got furious at people because no one would give him money. Called us all bad people for not helping him in his time of need. He had to move to a smaller place. Sell a lot of his tech.

He was so very angry.

“I WORKED HARD.”

“I DID THINGS THE PROPER WAY.”

“I DESERVE MORE THAN THOSE MOOCHERS!”

Even after his experience, he viewed himself as different than other people trapped in the safety net. He deserved more because he had a bootstrap attitude. It didn’t occur to him that a lot of people on welfare or disability probably worked hard too. That he was no more or less deserving than them. It was sad to see his experience didn’t instill any empathy.

He’s a lost cause. But maybe you aren’t. Maybe you should think about how long you could last before you’d have to mooch. Are you set for life? If you were in an accident and unable to work ever again, would you be able to live comfortably and manage your expenses? Think about that. And think about the fact that disability pays less than minimum wage. Could you live your life on $750 per month? What changes would you have to make to accomplish that? Use your imagination and really try to put yourself in those shoes.

$1200 is not a windfall for me. It is maybe 4 months of having slightly less financial anxiety. That anxiety is a part of my life. It is inescapable and I have conceded it will always be there. It is the dread of seeing $14 in my bank account towards the end of the month and hoping I didn’t forget about an automatic payment. It’s the fear of looking in my freezer and wondering if two bags of frozen chicken nuggets are enough to last until I get my next payment. 

But now I am getting $1200 and for a few months maybe I don’t have to feel some of that anxiety. I can reallocate that anxiety to the world being on fire and worrying about my dad getting sick.

But you want me to send it back?

What’s even sadder about your attitude is you are focusing on the wrong people. I’m not a moocher. I’m an insignificant financial speck in the grand scheme. I’m probably a percentage of a penny on your tax bill. But then you look at companies like Amazon who used loopholes to pay no taxes. They also got cities to subsidize offices and warehouses. So not only did they not pay taxes, we paid them for the honor of giving people low wage jobs with poor benefits and dubious working conditions. 

What about our F-35 fighter jet program? For years they didn’t even work properly and they still haven’t even been used for anything and they will probably rarely be utilized because of drones. But we will spend a trillion dollars on them anyway. 

What about oil subsidies? About $20 billion of our tax dollars goes to the fossil fuel industry every year. An industry that has never struggled to turn a profit. Just look at pictures of Dubai and ask yourself why we are giving them subsidies. 

We give corporations billions upon billions of dollars even though they are making record profits. And then we find out they were operating so close to the edge that they can’t even last a month without us giving them billions more. 

But my $750 per month makes me the moocher.

Sure.

[collapsedsquid]

Suppose my kid’s meth habit got the best of him. He needs to come up with $100K quick or his dealer’s gonna whack him. But he’s a good kid, really! Coulda happened to anyone. So I “lend” him the money, even though he has no visible means of support and the sketchiest loan sharks in town wouldn’t give him the time of day. Now I believe in bootstraps and hard work, individualism and self-reliance. So I tell my son. “Son, you are going to pay me back every penny of that loan. You are going to work it off. I have arranged with one of my golf buddies, a guy who owes me a favor or three, a job that pays $200K a year. You’d better show up every day at 9 a.m. and sit behind that desk, and get me back my money!” And he does! After a year, he’s made me whole. What a good kid.

No bail out, right? He paid me back every penny! Worked it off!

Bullshit. The opportunity I provided him, the $200K job that he would not have received without my intercession, was a huge grant. On the open market, if I were to accept bribes from the highest bidder to wangle the job from my friend, that opportunity would be worth more than the $100K advanced. I paid my son’s loan with my own money. I just obscured the cash flows, so my son and I can pretend and sustain our mutual self-regard and our righteous disdain for the moochers and the hippies and the riff-raff.

After assuming the banking system’s downside risk, the US government engineered a wide variety of favorable circumstances that helped banks “earn” their way back to quasi-health. The government provided famous and obvious transfers like unwinding AIG swaps at 100¢ on the dollar. It forced short-term yields to zero and created an environment in which medium-term interest rates would be capped for several years, granting banks a near-risk-free arbitrage for a while. It emitted trillions in excess reserves on which it continues to pay interest. It forewent investigations and prosecutions that by law it should actively pursue, and settled what enforcement it could not avoid for token fees. Then there are the things conspiracy theorists and cranks like me suspect but cannot prove: that the government and the Fed have been less than aggressive in minimizing their costs when they or entities they control (AIG, Fannie, Freddie) transact with large banks, that they have left money on the table where doing so could be hidden in arcane accounts or justified as ordinary transaction expenses and trading losses. Large banks have enjoyed some rather extraordinary results for allegedly efficient markets, quarters with large trading profits and no or very few losing days. Government housing policy is pretty overtly subject to a constraint that interventions must not provoke loss realizations for banks carrying bad loans at inflated values, or interfere with servicing revenues. (If you think I am overconspiratorial, I’m still waiting for an innocent explanation of this, from 1991.)

Hyman Minsky famously described crisis stabilization as a two-step process: First, the state/central-bank steps in as lender of last resort to halt the panic. Then the state must underwrite a program of massive deficit spending in order to “validate” — Minsky’s word — the fragile capital structures and the “innovative” business practices that proliferate during periods of tranquility.

Translating into current buzzwords, when the trouble begins there is a solvency crisis. It is converted into a liquidity crisis ex post by a firehose of net spending by the state. The current crisis has followed Minsky’s script perfectly. Banks’ ability to “pay back” bailouts has depended upon continued regulatory forbearance, tacit expectations of support if shit hits the fan again, and massive government debt issuance which resuscitated assets that would otherwise be worthless.

But who has lost anything from the bailouts? Wasn’t it a win-win? This all sounds very abstract. Where are the transfers?

If the government borrowed or printed a trillion dollars and gave the money to me, would there be any losers? If you don’t think there has been a wealth transfer, if you don’t think ordinary people have lost, please call your Congressperson and ask her to cut me a trillion dollar check. In some abstract sense, this policy of giving me money would push government debt higher. But that is so very vague a cost! I promise I’d do great things with a trillion dollars. My ideas are so much cooler than Goldman Sachs’, despite all the wholesome commercials they are running.

During the run-up to the financial crisis, bank managers, shareholders, and creditors paid themselves hundreds of billions of dollars in dividends, buybacks, bonuses and interest. Had the state intervened less generously, a substantial fraction of those payouts might have been recovered (albeit from different cohorts of stakeholders, as many recipients of past payouts had already taken their money and ran). The market cap of the 19 TARP banks that received more than a billion dollars each in assistance is about 550B dollars today (even after several of those banks’ share prices have collapsed over fears of Eurocontagion). The uninsured debt of those banks is and was a large multiple of their market caps. Had the government resolved the weakest of the banks, writing off equity and haircutting creditors, had it insisted on retaining upside commensurate with the fraction of risk it was bearing on behalf of stronger banks, the taxpayer savings would have run from hundreds of billions to a trillion dollars. We can get into all kinds of arguments over what would have been practical and legal. Regardless of whether the government could or could not have abstained from making the transfers that it made, it did make huge transfers. Bank stakeholders retain hundreds of billions of dollars against taxpayer losses of the same, relative to any scenario in which the government received remotely adequate compensation first for the risk it assumed, and then for quietly moving Heaven and Earth to obscure and (partially) neutralize that risk.

The banks were bailed out. Big time.

This piece was written in 2011

[donnnoir]

Hidden Economies and Currency Revaluation...

Alright, I originally intended to post/publish the following as a series of essays that I would have linked together in one fashion or another. Instead I have decided to shorten much of the content and simply “mash” it together and hope for the best. As anyone familiar with my writings knows, I tend to have a loquacious style and the content or subject matter usually requires a bit of introduction and or back story.  Since much of it is uniquely originally in nature.  The combination makes for lengthy essays and discussions.  The Forthcoming is no less so.  I hope those that indulge, enjoy the experience, maybe even learn a thing or two.

With recent events and the accompanying economic distress, I have had to interject my knowledge and experiences repeatedly, in an attempt to shed light upon factors which are in place to beneficially impact our economy, and the worlds for that matter.  President Trump and his Administration are no fools, they fully intend on taking advantage of a long standing global currency agreement. An agreement that has come full term and whose mediation and legal conditions have been meet; the only caveat that has thus far prevented its global activation and institution was the Obama Administration's ongoing efforts to block it.  This despite billions of dollars in bribes having been paid into off-shore and shell corporation held by Michelle Obama.

Beginning in 1999, I was invited to be the fourth and junior executive tasked with administering and distributing funds associated to a large international humanitarian trust, whose principal holdings were in Taiwan.  A timed legacy from when Chiang Kai-shek fled mainland China and established the Republic of China in Taiwan.  It should have been a straightforward affair.  Except elements of the then W. Bush Administration went to Taiwan misappropriated the funds and transferred them to the Bank of the Vatican.  These elements, agents or “clowns” if you prefer, similarly plundered funds from an International Trust set up by the Globalist and the IMF back in 1968 and held by the Bank of America here in the United States. Additionally monies also held in trust by the SEC as recovered assets of an immense “ponzi” scheme mostly involving shares of the Kimberlite Mining Group out of Canada.  Were similarly transferred to the Bank of the Vatican.  The monies held by the Bank of America that were misappropriated and transferred were in the amount of over 16 trillion dollars, just to have some perspective on the amounts involved (you use to be able to watch on YouTube the C-SPAN coverage; wherein the then Head of the Federal Reserve admitted to the transfer but refused to answer additional questions on the matter since the “Law” did not require him to do so.  This to a Congressional Inquiry on the subject.).  From the Bank of the Vatican the funds were distributed into “High Yield Investment Platforms”.   What are “High Yield Investment Platforms” you ask; well first off most countries deny their existence, including the United States. One of the reasons is that you have to be “invited” to participate in the program with a minimum capital investment of a billion dollars.  An amount that in some “special” cases been reduced to 500 million recently.  I could write volumes on the subject, so please if you really wish to know just dig real hard and you will find an explanation.   So following the theft of our funds, I and the other principals became entangled in an ongoing game of “three card Molly” first with W. Bush Administration and subsequently Obama and his Administration. I got a crash course in international off-book banking, high yield investment platforms, oval office payola and administrative abuse of authority, corruption and greed on a Truly Epic scale brazenly conducted under color of authority.  Additionally I became acquainted with the Revaluation Trust Fund (held by the aforementioned Bank of America; it was also referred to by a variety of names and titles) meant to equalize the global monetary system via a mediated currency revaluation.  Believe me it was enough to give me many sleepless nights and numerous headaches, be grateful you are getting the Reader's Digest abbreviated version. To assuage any curiosity, the issues became too convoluted and mired in bureaucracy, the funds when and to what degree they were recovered took more than a decade.  The instruments meant for their distribution were non-existent by then and became lost in the politics of the time.  The monies generated as interest from their being utilized in the “high yield investment platforms” in Europe was never been recovered nor accounted for in the process.  These ill gotten gains are being used to fund the current fifth column actions in Europe and elsewhere.  If Hillary (HRC) had won the Presidency, these and other stolen assets would have gone to the extermination of the population here in America. Instead the monies are having to fuel secondary protocols meant to destabilize the US and World economies.

Now back to the matter of Global Currency Revaluation, as intended by the Globalist and their fiat currency system set up by the Rothschilds and Rockefellers when the Global International Currency System we have been familiar with in our lives was put in place. The architects of this System recognized that as developing nations attempted to modernize while lacking the functioning internal markets and industrial base to support their expansion and modernization.  They would increasingly accrue debt with an ever increasing portion needed to service the interest payments, till they would have no way of ever becoming solvent.  All the while they would be giving up title to the wealth of their respective nations (neo-imperialism).  The Globalist fearing a world wide wave of nationalization and repatriation of the assets of each developing country.  Therefore agreed that at some future date all currencies would go through a revaluation and that the individual debts of each participating country would be wiped clean.  All countries signed the agreement and began contributing to a international trust held by Bank of America.  The United States, however was in a unique situation.  That being that the implementation of said revaluation would require our assent.  Well the revaluation has already been mediated, with the IMF, World Bank and Courts having signed off on the accord.  The previous Administrations have elected to abuse the circumstance for their own greed.  Even so, with the anticipated revaluation a bit of creative accounting will permit America to also walk away from its debt.

President Trump rather than continue blocking this Global Revaluation, has obviously chosen to embrace it.  Over the past decade the operations and holdings of the Federal Reserve have been transferred to the Treasury in anticipation of this eventuality.  Now during the COVID 19 operations even the positions of the Head of the Federal Reserve have been transferred.  It is the final steps to the abolishing the Federal Reserve.  It should be noted that as a non-government agency or contractor as it were. The Federal Reserve had a contract to administer Our currency, the Dollar.  That contract expired some time ago, it has not, nor shall it be renewed.  For the sake of continuity of operations the old contract has remained in place via a series of stop gap extensions, as allowed by the Law.  These extensions have permitted the transfer of assets and operations from the Federal Reserve to the United States Treasury.  Naturally the process has taken longer than anticipated, but appears to be nearing its conclusion.  Some of you may be familiar with the new two tier currency system meant to replace the old Petro-Dollar, and grant more autonomy to countries and governments worldwide.

In concert to this is that in all probability much of the amassed illicit funds acquired by the “Evil World Cabal” may trickle back into the public coffers.  Albeit, “certain” as yet non-disclosed “special covert” operations will no doubt require ongoing funding in an effort to buffer the onslaught of Our “Future” War.  Which may be fought more vehemently to force the terms of the Exo-Treaty signed by the League of Nations in the '20's.  “Crazy” I know...

[newstfionline]

Headlines

Americans hit hard by layoffs worry about homelessness (Yahoo Money) With unemployment claims at historic highs as the pandemic grounds the economy to a halt, many Americans are struggling with diminished savings, unpaid bills, and worries over homelessness, according to a new study from Varo Money shared exclusively with Yahoo Money. One in 4 renters who lost a job or income due to the COVID-19 outbreak worry they could become homeless, while 1 in 7 homeowners with a mortgage said the same, the survey of 1,234 lower and middle-class Americans earning up to $75,000 found. Among the renters who have lost their income, 2 in 5 expect to make their rent for a maximum of three to four weeks and 1 in 4 expect to be able to afford their rent for one to two months. “Many of these people actually fear if they will be able to cover the rent, and homelessness is becoming a real issue,” Varo Money’s CEO Colin Walsh told Yahoo Money. “We’re talking about people that do not have emergency savings, they really don’t have any backstop.”

Reopening Has Begun. No One Is Sure What Happens Next. (NYT) Politicians and public health experts have sparred for weeks over when, and under what circumstances, to allow businesses to reopen and Americans to emerge from their homes. But another question could prove just as thorny—how? It isn’t clear what, exactly, it means to gradually restart a system with as many interlocking pieces as the U.S. economy. How can one factory reopen when its suppliers remain shuttered? How can parents return to work when schools are still closed? How can older people return when there is still no effective treatment or vaccine? What is the government’s role in helping private businesses that may initially need to operate at a fraction of their normal capacity? “We live in an economy where there are lots of interconnections between different sectors,” said Joseph S. Vavra, an economist at the University of Chicago. “Saying you want to reopen gradually is more easily said than done.”

Advertising adjusts for a new reality: Sweatpants for staying home and toilet paper that cares (Washington Post) “Just stay home” seems like an unusual sell from a hotel-booking service, but these are unusual times. Companies large and small are figuring out how to make ads that don’t seem insensitive or as if they’re from a different time, when people took beach vacations, ate in restaurants and wore shoes. On television, brands are switching to reassuring platitudes, telling viewers, “We’re in this together,” or in the touching words of one toilet paper company, “Together, we’ll keep America rolling.” On social media sites like Instagram, more advertisements are targeting those shut in, with extremely to-the-point messages shilling sweatpants, wine and food delivery, DIY hair dye kits, and home-office gadgets.

Foreign Students Stranded by Coronavirus (NYT) When universities abruptly shut down last month because of the coronavirus pandemic, many students returned to their parents’ homes, distraught over having to give up their social lives and vital on-campus networking opportunities. Graduating seniors lost the chance to cross anything but a virtual commencement stage. But the campus closures have created much greater calamity in the lives of the more than a million international students who left their home countries to study in the United States. Many had been living in college dorms and were left to try to find new housing, far from home in a country under lockdown. A substantial number of international students are also watching their financial lives fall apart: Visa restrictions prevent them from working off campuses, which are now closed. And while some come from families wealthy enough to pay for their housing or whisk them home, many others had already been struggling to cobble together tuition fees that tend to be much higher than those paid by Americans. As their bank accounts dwindle, some international students say they have had to turn to food banks for help. Others are couch surfing in the family homes of their friends but don’t know how long they will be welcome.

Skip college this fall? (Miami Herald) With time growing short and the future uncertain, many high school students are considering skipping college in the fall. The coronavirus pandemic has left many universities uncertain whether they’ll be able to welcome students to campus after summer, and many students don’t want to pay for top-flight universities if they can’t get the full in-person experience. Some say they may skip a year. Some may opt for cheaper alternatives like community colleges. Either way, the coronavirus could leave its mark on higher education long after the pandemic fades.

US senator Lindsey Graham believes Kim Jong Un ‘dead or incapacitated’ (The Independent) US senator Lindsey Graham said he believes North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un is “dead or incapacitated” following unconfirmed reports of his demise. Rumours of Kim Jong Un’s death have swirled since he missed the commemoration of the 108th birthday of his grandfather, North Korea founder Kim Il Sung, ten days ago. North Korean authorities have said nothing to counter media reports that Mr Kim is unwell, prompting concerns about who is next in line to run a nuclear-armed country that has been ruled by the same family for seven decades. South Korean and US officials have repeatedly indicated that there have been no unusual signs that could indicate health problems for Kim. A US official told Reuters the latest rumors about Kim’s health had not changed the US assessment of the information as “speculation.”

A pandemic of corruption mars the coronavirus response (Washington Post) When officials in his home state began giving food boxes to families hit by Colombia’s coronavirus lockdown, lawmaker Ricardo Quintero was struck by the exorbitant prices being paid to the vendors. So he armed himself with pictures of the coffee, pasta and other goods and went down to his local grocery store. There, he bought the same products for roughly half the supposedly bulk-rate prices being paid by the government of Cesar state. The comparison shopping prompted one of what is now 14 coronavirus-related criminal probes in Colombia. The South American country is one of many around the world now seeing a surge in corruption allegations. Countries large and small are shelling out trillions of dollars to combat both the coronavirus outbreak and its brutal economic fallout in what analysts are calling the largest financial response ever to a single global crisis. As governments race to source everything from food aid to face masks, they are prioritizing speed over transparency, dropping competitive bidding and other safeguards to keep pace with the pandemic. Most have no choice. Given the speed of the still unfolding crisis, it’s either buy quickly or put millions at risk. But concern is rising about the percentage of the taxpayer dollars—and euros and yen and pesos and more—lining the pockets of corrupt bureaucrats, crony contractors and crime syndicates.

UK PM Boris Johnson returns to face growing virus divisions (AP) British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is returning to work after recovering from a coronavirus infection that put him in intensive care, with his government facing growing criticism over the deaths and disruption the virus has caused. Johnson’s office said he would be back at his desk in 10 Downing St. on Monday, two weeks after he was released from a London hospital. Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab, who has been standing in for the prime minister, said Sunday that Johnson was “raring to go.” Britain has recorded more than 20,000 deaths among people hospitalized with COVID-19, the fifth country in the world to reach that total. Thousands more are thought to have died in nursing homes.

Kids in Spain relish outdoor hour as virus lockdowns ease (AP) Shrieks of joy rang out Sunday in the streets of Spain as children were allowed to leave their homes for the first time in six weeks, while people in Italy and France were eager to hear their leaders’ plans for easing some of the world’s strictest coronavirus lockdowns. The sound of children shouting and the rattle of bikes on the pavement after the 44-day seclusion of Spain’s youngest citizens offered a first taste of a gradual return to normal life in the country that has the second-highest number of confirmed infections behind the United States. “This is wonderful! I can’t believe it has been six weeks,” Susana Sabaté, a mother of 3-year-old twin boys, said in Barcelona. “My boys are very active. Today when they saw the front door and we gave them their scooters, they were thrilled.”

Japan challenged in working from home amid pandemic (AP) When the Japanese government declared an emergency to curb the spread of the coronavirus earlier this month and asked people to work from home, crowds rushed to electronics stores. So much for social distancing. Many Japanese lack the basic tools needed to work from home. Contrary to the ultramodern image of Japan Inc. with its robots, design finesse and gadgetry galore, in many respects the country is technologically challenged. But the bigger obstacle is Japanese corporate culture, experts say. Offices still often rely on faxes instead of email. Many homes lack high-speed internet connections, and documents often must be stamped in-person with carved seals called “hanko,” which serve as signatures. So many Japanese really cannot work remotely, at least not all the time. A survey by YouGov, a British market researcher, found only 18% of those recently surveyed were able to avoid commuting to school or work, even though a relatively high 80% of people in Japan are afraid of catching the virus.

Netanyahu ‘confident’ US will support West Bank annexation (AP) Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he is “confident” he will be able to annex large parts of the occupied West Bank this summer, with support from the U.S. Netanyahu says President Donald Trump’s Mideast plan envisions turning over Israel’s dozens of settlements, as well as the strategic Jordan Valley, to Israeli control.

[mericurialthoughts]

#20LakhCroreReliefPackage?

Our Prime minister, on 12th May, 2020, at 8:20 PM- that is at 20:20 announced a 20 lakh crore economic package in his speech of 20 minutes.

The Prime minister merely announced it, after which our Finance minister divulged the details of the package part by part over the next five days. Come, let us find out what this package  of 20 lakh crores holds for you, for a common man and for the middle class people, what are its benefits and disadvantages?, and is the 20 lakh crore package really worth 20 lakh crores?

Come, let us see

When you hear 20 lakh crore rupees, then you might assume that this means that the government will spend 20 lakh crore rupees from its coffers to aid the public. But it is not so! In order to comprehend this, you will first have to understand that there are two kinds of policies in economics- monetary policies and fiscal policies.

The monetary policies are framed by a country's central bank RBI is the central bank in India. Monetary policies basically involves fluctuating the interest rates change the supply of money in order to control inflation. This is done by the RBI. The other policy is the fiscal policy which is made by the government. The government alters its spending- which areas to spend more, alters the tax rates. These are the fiscal policies. The monetary policies are decided by the RBI and the RBI is independent of the government that is technically- in theory and the government formulates fiscal policies 8 lakh crore rupees out of the 20 lakh crores is a liquidity infusion by the RBI.

We will know about what liquidity infusion! But the point is that since it is a measure taken by the RBI, it classifies as a a monetary package. The problem is that in 20 lakh crore rupees of economic package rolled out by the government. It is incorrect to count the monetary package of the RBI. It is unfair to do this, because whenever we have talked about the economic packages of the countries across the world, we considered only fiscal packages.

When we said USA rolled out a 2 trillion dollar economic package- it only meant fiscal package entailing what actions and decisions the government took there. Germany rolled out a package of almost 190 billion dollars. That too, was a fiscal package. But the Indian government combined the monetary and the fiscal package together to show that the "government" had rolled out a package of 20 lakh crores.

At the outset, let us talk about the 8 lakh crores set to come in from the RBI. This money will come from the reserves of RBI. It is called a liquidity infusion because in economics, "liquid" means converting any asset into cash which will make its buying and selling easier. The money lying in the reserves of RBI was not in use in the economy. It is simply laying there. When RBI will make its reserves liquid, then it will seep into the economy and the people will be able to sell or buy it once it will be converted into cash. The RBI will do this by lowering its interest rates so that the rest of the banks that take loans from the RBI are able to avail loans for lesser interest and when they take loans at lower interest rates, they would be able to loan out to the companies and people at a lower interest as well and in this way, the extra money of 8 lakh crore rupees with the RBI. The reserves of the RBI would be injected into the Indian economy basically the money would first go to the banks and then reach the companies and the people. The money would come into the economy in the form of loans so the loans that RBI gives to the other banks and the interest rates that it charges them is called repo rate.

You must have heard in the news that the RBI is cutting down the repo rate, because this is the only way- through the process that I explained- RBI would slash its interest/repo rate the other banks would be able to avail cheaper loans and this is how money would be infused in the economy. This is a very simplified explanation that I have put before you for you to understand.

So basically the point is that the 8 lakh crores from the RBI would have negligible effect on the end consumer. So, out of the 20 lakh crores, 12 lakh crores remain which is the fiscal package from the government. Out of this 12 lakh crore, the government had already announced 1.7 lakh crore in the previous package. That is being recounted in this and there are several other things in this remaining corpus that the government has already announced earlier but they are recounting it in this 20 lakh crore package. An article in the New Indian Express tells us in detail  the schemes that the government had already announced but were recounting it in this 20 lakh crore package.

For example, the PMMSY yojana which the government had announced in the 2019 union budget. Let us get a section by section overview to find out what this economic package entails: First, for the MSMEs- Micro, small and medium enterprises-The government has decided to dole out collateral free automatic loans worth 3 lakh crore rupees. The companies would definitely benefit- but keep in mind- this is a loan. Money is being loaned out and not given out. There would be a liquidity infusion worth 90,000 crore rupees for the power distribution companies. It is a loan/loan guarantee in a way and it is being expected that the power companies would pass on the benefits to the consumers.

 Our farmers would be given a concessional credit of 2 lakh crore rupees This, again, is giving out loans at lower interest rates. A special credit facility worth 5,000 crore rupees has been provided for the street vendors. This too, means giving out loans to them. A supply of free food grains will be provided for the migrant workers for the next two months which would cost around 3,500 crore rupees and the government claims that this will benefit 8 crore migrant workers.

One nation, one ration card will also be implemented by May 31st, 2021. This is a good news but it is yet to be seen how much of it is implemented on ground. The government has also said that the migrant workers returning would be given employment under MNREGA. But have you observed how most of the things in this economic package are loans, loan guarantees or credit facilities?

Basically, the people and the companies are being given out loans at lower interest rates or without collateral. There is nothing wrong with this- it would definitely benefit some companies and some people but at the end of the day, there are merely loans being given out. Today, the person who does not have a job and is not able to bear his expenses will be able to sustain himself today with the help of the loans but someday, he will have to pay it back.

So, overall, in the long term, this is not reducing the pressure or the stress upon the public. A lot of people- At least I had expected that the government would transfer money directly into the people's accounts so that they would be benefited today- not that loans would be doled out with an expectation of repayment. The situation today has developed due to the lockdown by the government. It was necessary but not all the burden should be piled up on the people. Furthermore, such things have been counted in this economic package of 20 lakh crores which is basically your money.

For example, TDS reduction by 25%. What benefit does it impart? None, actually. Just that at the moment, you would get more liquidity in TDS, but, overall, you wouldn't get a lot of money. Similarly, EPF contribution has been reduced to 10% from 12%. This too, was your money that you were going to access later. But slashing that today would mean that you are borrowing that money from the future. This is basically the public's money being given out to the public and being counted in 20 lakh crores.

So a question would arise here is that 8 lakh rupees is from the RBI loans would be provided worth this lakh crores old schemes worth this lakh crores are being counted by the government our own money worth this lakh crore is also being counted. So how much money is the government actually spending for the benefit of the people, out of the 20 lakh crores?

The right answer of this is anywhere between 1 lakh crore and 2.7 lakh crore. Different people have made an estimation of this. Yogendra Yadav ji claims that this amount would be 1.7 lakh crore rupees out of 20 lakh crore rupees which the government will actually spend. Barclays is a famous financial services company of England. It has made an estimation that this amount is 1.5 lakh crore rupees. Care ratings has made an estimation that this amount is 2.73 lakh crore rupees. HSBC India claims that this amount is around 1% of India's GDP and not 10% of India's GDP that is, around 2 lakh crore rupees out of 20 lakh crore rupees.

So where is the 1-2 lakh rupees (that the government is actually spending) being spent? Out of this, 40,000 crore rupees would go to MNREGA which is good, in my opinion. 3,500 crore rupees would be spent on buying foodgrains for the migrants, as stated earlier which is another good thing as it would aid them. Out of this, 8,000 crore rupees would be utilized in Viability Gap Funding. That is, those projects that are not economically viable but are projects of social infrastructure which the country needs- for example, constructing roads in a village.

Overall, in my opinion, there is negligible benefits for the salaried middle class people. Furthermore, the government took some major decisions like privatizing the coal sector privatizing the defense production privatizing the power distribution and privatizing the space sector.

Now, I don't not adhere to whether privatization in these sectors is a good or a bad thing. Whether the decision was good or bad will be revealed by the implementation.

 Thankyou

Content Credit- Dhruv Rathee

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bl_gcq1PmuI

[johnmauldin]

Debt Can’t Save China Anymore

The 2008 financial crisis hit China hard, as it did everyone else.

Not every country responded like China did, though. Most couldn’t do what China did because they lacked either financial resources or political ability.

China had both. And so it launched a stimulus program of mind-boggling proportions.

China’s Stimulus Is Built on Shadow Banking

Beijing compelled local governments and state-owned enterprises to take on massive debt for giant infrastructure projects. Yes, they simply built ghost cities.

The intention was to put people to work and bolster public confidence.

It’s no surprise that China has doubled its debt relative to GDP since 2000. And the bulk of that was after 2009:

But it’s how they grew that debt I find amazing. Half of the total debt is from the nonfinancial (i.e., shadow banks) sector.

And remember that the Chinese economy is managed from the top down. So the Chinese government is very aware of how its shadow banking system operates.

This Debt Has to Be Paid Off—Sooner or Later

All of this debt has a carrying cost. Even in a top-down economy. Yes, much of it is internal. But China also has a big amount of dollar-denominated debt.

Here’s economist Christopher Balding with the numbers:

According to official data, short-term debt accounted for 62 percent of the total [of almost $2 trillion in debt] as of September, meaning that $1.2 trillion will have to be rolled over this year. Just as worrying is the speed of increase: Total external debt has increased 14 percent in the past year and 35 percent since the beginning of 2017.

External debt is no longer a trivial slice of China’s foreign-exchange reserves, which stood at just over $3 trillion at the end of November, little changed from two years earlier. Short-term foreign debt increased to 39 percent of reserves in September, from 26 percent in March 2016.

The true picture may be more precarious. China’s external debt was estimated between $3 trillion and $3.5 trillion by Daiwa Capital Markets in an August report. In other words, total foreign liabilities could be understated by as much as $1.5 trillion after accounting for borrowing in financial centres such as Hong Kong, New York, and the Caribbean islands that isn’t included in the official tally.

So, China could owe non-Chinese lenders as much as $3.5 trillion. Much of it is in USD which are more expensive than they used to be.

This is why a trade war is so threatening to China. Revenue from exports to the US helps pay that debt.

The internal debt is also a problem.

Yes, a state-dominated economy like China’s can deal with debt in its own currency. It has many ways to extend and pretend.

But they have limits and don’t work forever. The debt eventually has to be worked off.

Debt Doesn’t Produce the Desired Effect Anymore

Worse, debt is like drugs to which the body adapts. Then you need more to get the same effect.

Likewise, debt is no longer having the same effect on China. An IMF study last year estimated that in less than a decade, the amount of debt needed to produce the same GDP output more than tripled.

That tells us something important. In the next downturn, slowdown, or whatever you call it, Beijing may not be able to borrow its way out of the hole.

Or if it does, the amounts could be astronomically high.

But absent debt stimulus, what else can they do? I seriously doubt Xi Jinping has any way to restore growth to what everyone wants without massive adjustments.

Don’t Rush the Process, Trump

That being the case, it’s not the best time for a trade war between the US and China. Yet we find ourselves in one.

(Quick disclaimer: Yes, China hasn’t played fairly in a number of ways. I get that. We have issues and problems that need resolution. Prior efforts haven’t worked. I get that, too. We have national security concerns about China, totally apart from our trade disputes. Granted on all counts.)

But it does not mean that slapping tariffs on Chinese imports is the right answer. We have to fix these things, but without shooting our own feet.

American and Chinese businesses have spent the last two decades integrating supply chains. The markets have been built on this integration. Every one of us benefits from it every single day.

Could we reverse the integration and become less interdependent? Yes, of course.

It’s happening already due to technology that is moving production closer to consumers. That’s a natural process that will continue.

Rushing that process, while probably possible, would have a cost.

One of my greatest short-term fears is that Trump’s hardline tactics will push China into recession. For them, less than 4% growth.

The president himself seems to relish the prospect. He’s talked proudly of the way Chinese markets fell due to his policies.

Maybe he thinks the threats will make Xi back down. I don’t think they will. We are pursuing a high-risk policy that will have massively negative consequences if it fails.

Get one of the world’s most widely read investment newsletters… free

Sharp macroeconomic analysis, big market calls, and shrewd predictions are all in a week’s work for visionary thinker and acclaimed financial expert John Mauldin. Since 2001, investors have turned to his Thoughts from the Frontline to be informed about what’s really going on in the economy. Join hundreds of thousands of readers, and get it free in your inbox every week.

[jdmainman123]

And finally all the Black skin Man are pregnant and all the white skin men will report to my beach to jerk off the board and get themselves pregnant for blacks command you guys all heard LAX 3/4 rules

Yeah that's right only if you guys would like me from Hawaii

I found you guys trying to put the vein back into my ball sack you know the vein

IT'S JUST SUCH A MEAN THING TO DO CONSIDERING I BEAT YOU GUYS FAIR AND SQUARE I FOUND MY FRIEND NACHO ON THE OUTSIDE OF TOWN

ANYWAYS I REALIZED ONE THING YOUR DAD DAUGHTER DOESN'T REALIZE YOU CAN REMOVE YOU KNOW THE UNDERWEAR okay not the underwear but she can remove that little wire

Too soon?

SO DOES THAT F****** N***** DAUGHTER FAMILY OBVIOUSLY WANTS TO TORTURE ME MORE AND PUT THE WIRE THE VEIN RIGHT BACK INTO MY BALL and and you know I'm ready to get pregnant you know I'm saying I'm ready to give up and quit

AND AND FOR YOU GUYS' RECORD I ALREADY SECURED YOU GUYS ORLANDO SO FEEL FREE TO GET ON THE PLANE AND GO THERE THEY KICKED ME OFF MY BASE AND REPLACED ME WITH MY SEXY OR YOUNGER BROTHER ABOUT 5 YEARS AGO HE WROTE TO ANY ACT STATEMENT AND HE DOESN'T KNOW HE'S CARRYING AROUND A TRILLION DOLLARS IN HIS POCKET that's right he's going to wake up one day and find all this money in his pockets and say holy s***

This is how the Spanish invaded all those white hair white skin families houses because of the English language YEAH I KNOW RIGHT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE COULD HAVE BEEN TO CHINESE

Anyway so this road regime once again is attempting to wire the vein AND AND AGAIN LET ME REMIND YOU WHY YOUR DAUGHTERS ARE DEAD THIS BLACK SKIN MAN'S HATE FOLLOWING ME IS FAR TOO LONG

Yeah in 5800 years before today to reach black and white sun didn't have a daughter and let me remind you this had nothing to do with the beach house this is a story coming from desert City casino TOLD BY YOU KNOW THE GIRL WHO SINGS ROCKABYE she's going to grow so far away from her father's daughter

SO THIS F****** LOSER BUILDS A SITE AND IT BRINGS ME TO COURT FOR THE LITTLE GIRL AND THEN GUESS WHO'S BEHIND HIM FOR HIS LITTLE GIRL THE WHITE HAIR WHITE SKIN MAN THEN I THREW UP MY HANDS AS THE X THE SQUID PRO QUO AND SAID WHY DON'T YOU TWO FIGURE IT OUT FOR YOURSELVES

How did this a****** find another white hair white skin family from snow to weaponize against me and why is this black skin man's hate still attacking me you know this it's too easy for a black skin man to deny one white skin man especially with my report and my record of how many times I caught your the man chasing me

You know for this black command to have full authority and unleash an entire virus on me it's not bad enough you got the army from Florida 3/4 I need you to kill my kids all the blacks or else someone to kill your family Phoenix I heard it loud and f****** clearP THE PROBLEM IS THIS ROAD REGIME BUILT ANOTHER BLACK SKIN FAMILY AGAINST ME IN LAX 3/4

So for this f****** n***** to still have his hate and his hands around my f****** business and just be able to call it as it is lock the bathroom have them s*** on the sidewalk still $100 from his bank account it's right there where you boys are going to run into trouble when I miss him or I was missing $100 for my bank account this is when I said how wouldn't anyone notice you know I noticed most importantly but I said you know if you guys want to steal my money I'm going I'm going to require the the welfare gig I'm going to I'm going to require hand and every one of your pockets everyone use satellite makers in now we can't go there

No no I can't go there

Z SO ANYWAYS FOR THIS BLACK SKIN MAN IT STILL HAVE HIS HANDS IN MY BUSINESS AND IT'S SO EASY FOR HIM TO PRACTICE HATE ESPECIALLY HOW MANY INCIDENCES I WON so for him to have his arm and missing Utah called is very earlier on in the in the tour and you guys may want to watch out for the train FYI

Anyways but for this black man to have his immunity here in these cities promised full immunity and a statement makeup I'm going to send you as many white hair white skin boys and girls so you can get sent into the world and you're satisfied to live forever being black skin making black skin families or they said they would quit if you guys didn't get them as many white hair white skin boys and girls to murder they want to make up for a lifetime of living around 15 years without killing a baby again

So for this black skin man it still have me in his sights and continue to attack me off of his hate alone

You know in 5800 years after the data breach it said this site was made and they anticipated bringing me here for the last 10 years so they can use the satellite on me and use and and these nuclear weapons aren't nearly as good as what we used on tour to force blood down my face they are almost like special interests like you know that family I met in Saint Jude's hospital and the other family I met and Make A wish foundation it almost seems like things you would use in their house to trick their babies

But more importantly for this black skin man to still be following me around today which is easy hate because by now he already knows me by now he already understands I'm covid and I 190 effective and his whole plan is to get all the people and say he's the one bringing the babysitting airport to be killed on the other side and I said no no no the 911 call is specific if you want to get the cops here to help the little boys we have to report your killing white hair girls white hair white skin girls it's the only way the cops will come

[patriotsnet]

Which Republicans Voted Against The Tax Bill

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/which-republicans-voted-against-the-tax-bill/

Which Republicans Voted Against The Tax Bill

Here Are The 17 Republican Senators Who Voted To Advance The $1 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

Washington When the Senate voted Wednesday to open debate on a roughly $1 trillion infrastructure package, more than a dozen Republicans sided with Democrats to advance the legislation.

proposal,

Roy Blunt of Missouri

Richard Burr of North Carolina

Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia

Bill Cassidy of Louisiana

Kevin Cramer of North Dakota

Mike Crapo of Idaho

Lindsey Graham of South Carolina

Chuck Grassley of Iowa

John Hoeven of North Dakota

Mitch McConnell of Kentucky

Thom Tillis of North Carolina

Todd Young of Indiana

Reminder: Zero Republicans Voted For The Middle Class Tax Cut Parents Are Calling A Blessing

July 14, 2021

No thanks to a single Republican, millions of middle-class families will start receiving a major tax cut tomorrow as part of the Child Tax Credit expanded in President Biden and Democrats’  American Rescue Plan. Monthly tax cuts of $250 or $300 per child will automatically hit bank accounts and will be used to pay bills, put food on the table, and alleviate stress for working and middle-class families across the country. 

From Durham to Des Moines, here’s what parents are saying about Democrats’ new middle-class tax cuts:

“It’s a blessing. That’s all I can say. I just can’t put it in any other words. It’s a blessing. It’s really going to help,” said Edwina Barbee in North Carolina.

“This is really exciting and it will help our family a lot, and I’m really hopeful that it will help a lot of families,” Kayla Midthun said in Wisconsin.

“It’s really just an opportunity to take that burden off of us a little bit each month to help support our kids for the future,” Jason Burkhiser Reynolds said in Iowa.

Here’s a look at what else families had to say this week:

Here Are The 17 Republicans Who Sided With Dems And Voted For Debate On Infrastructure Bill

From NBC:

The 17 Republicans who joined all 50 Democrats were: Portman; McConnell; Roy Blunt, of Missouri; Richard Burr, of North Carolina; Shelly Moore Capito, of West Virginia; Bill Cassidy, of Louisiana; Susan Collins, of Maine; Kevin Cramer, of North Dakota; Mike Crapo, of Idaho; Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina; Chuck Grassley, of Iowa; John Hoeven, of North Dakota; Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska; James Risch, of Idaho; Mitt Romney, of Utah; Thom Tillis, of North Carolina; and Todd Young, of Indiana

Trump issued a warning about this infrastructure deal.

No Republican Voted In Favor Of Law Sending Extra Federal Child Tax Payments To Families

Other Voices

The federal child care tax credit payment checks going out to families this week are courtesy of the congressional Democrats, only. Every single Republican voted against you, the American families receiving your check. If you needed this check, bought goods or services with your check, remember who made it possible. Please tell everyone you know that every Republican who voted on this law voted against them, to deny them help. And while you are at it, if you are not already, register to vote. Your voice will be needed in 2021.

Christine M. Treu,

Solon

Note to readers: if you purchase something through one of our affiliate links we may earn a commission.

Senate Republicans Decided Bipartisanship Was In Their Interest This One Time

While infrastructure is proving to be an area where Senate Republicans are willing to break with Trump, it’s too early to say whether this is the start of a trend.

For one, some of the 18 Republican senators who voted to close debate on the infrastructure bill may still end up ultimately voting against it. But ultimately the votes are expected to be there for the bill’s passage, meaning that in this case Republican senators seem to have calculated that doing something for their constituents and demonstrating that the Senate isn’t totally broken is worth the tradeoff of handing Biden a major bipartisan win.

That doesn’t mean that it’ll be smooth sailing for Biden’s legislative agenda heading forward, however. McConnell, after all, said in May that “one hundred percent of my focus is standing up to this administration,” and with Republicans entrenched against any sort of voting rights legislation, it’s unclear what major policy areas if any could be ripe for bipartisan agreement after infrastructure.

The vast majority of Republicans are opposed to the legislation. House Republicans are as tightly bound to Mr. Trump as ever, with many continuing to support his election lies and conspiracy theories about the Jan. 6 attack at the Capitol. And with the approach of the 2022 elections, members of his party will have less and less room to maneuver away from a figure whom their base still reveres.

December 14 2017: Rubio Says He Will Not Vote For Latest Version Of Tax Bill

On December 14, 2017, Sen. Marco Rubio told reporters that he would not vote for the tax bill unless the child tax credit was increased. “Right now it’s only $1,100. It needs to be higher than that,” Rubio said. “I understand that this is a process of give and take, especially when there’s only a couple of us fighting for it,” he told reporters. “Given all the other changes they’ve made in the tax code leading into it, I can’t in good conscience support it unless we are able to increase the refundable portion of it.”

Senate Democrats Said The Bill Hurts The Poor; Republicans Say Its A Mirage

Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, called the joint committee analysis “astounding” and warned that middle-class taxpayers would get “clobbered” under the latest Republican plan.

“When you’re reaching for the cranberry sauce, Republicans are going be reaching for your pocketbooks to give handouts to multinational corporations,” Mr. Wyden said.

Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah and the chairman of the Finance Committee, said that the appearance of a tax increase was a mirage that is the result of arcane scoring rules. Because people will no longer have to purchase health insurance, they may no longer receive tax credit subsidies for insurance that they do not purchase.

“Without those credits, they see an overall uptick in their tax liability,” Mr. Hatch said.

The debate then devolved into an argument over what really counts as an increase and the murkiness of government scorekeeping, which Senator Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, called “ridiculous.”

Uninterested in letting go of numbers that supported his argument that the Republican tax plan is bad for the middle class, Mr. Wyden dismissed Mr. Toomey’s concerns.

“I’ve never heard a senator try to psychoanalyze a Joint Committee on Taxation table,” he said.

September 28 2018: House Passes Tax Package To Extend Individual Tax Cuts

On September 28, 2018, the House passed legislation that proposed making the individual and small business tax cuts in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent by a vote of 220-191. Under the law, the cuts were set to expire in 2025. The three-bill tax package, introduced by House GOP leadership as Tax Reform 2.0, also proposed making changes to taxes on retirement savings, education savings, and on start-up costs for new businesses. A breakdown of the bills appears below.

HR 6760—the Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act of 2018—proposed the following:

Making permanent the lower individual tax rates of 10, 12, 22, 24, 32, 35, and 37 percent;

Making permanent the standard deduction of $12,000 per individual and $24,000 for a married couple;

Making permanent the child tax credit of $2,000 per child;

Making permanent the $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions; and

Making permanent the 20 percent rate deduction for pass-through businesses, among other things.

HR 6760 passed the House on September 28, 2018, by a vote of 220-191. Two hundred and seventeen Republicans and three Democrats—Reps. Conor Lamb , Jacky Rosen , and Kyrsten Sinema —voted for the bill. One hundred and eighty-one Democrats and 10 Republicans, all from New York, New Jersey, and California, voted against the bill “because they did not want to cement the 2017 tax law’s $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction,” according to The Hill.

Biden Says In First News Conference That He Was Hired To ‘solve Problems’

Micah Bock, a spokesperson for Cawthorn, said that Cawthorn “firmly believes that the American Rescue Plan does more harm than good” and that Cawthorn “uses his official Twitter account to post information relevant to his constituents in NC-11.”

“Oftentimes this means providing relevant federal information on proposals that the congressman does not support,” Bock said in a statement. “There are portions of the American Rescue Plan that benefit NC-11, however, bills are not passed in portions, they are passed entirely or not at all, and this bill does significantly more harm than good.”

Cawthorn’s posts followed similar tweets and statements from other elected Republicans, such as Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, who drew attention weeks ago when he praised the part of the stimulus package that provided billions of dollars to restaurateurs.

“Independent restaurant operators have won $28.6 billion worth of targeted relief,” he tweeted. “This funding will ensure small businesses can survive the pandemic by helping to adapt their operations and keep their employees on the payroll.”

Speaking to reporters later, Wicker said his praise wasn’t an inconsistent position. The funding was the result of an amendment to the legislation that he and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., proposed.

“One good provision in a $1.9 trillion bill doesn’t mean I have to vote for the whole thing,” he said.

Huffpost: Republicans Have No Clear Message On Child Tax Credit Payments

From the Speaker’s Press Office: 

From the people who brought you…

and…

…comes a new House Republican failure to explain why they unanimously voted to block a tax cut for middle class families.

The Child Tax Credit is incredibly popular, effective, and was opposed by every single House Republican.  We wish them luck in explaining this one.

Key points from HuffPost look at the Republicans’ scramble to explain why they voted against President Biden and Congressional Democrats’ Child Tax Credit. 

Republicans Have No Clear Message On Child Tax Credit Payments

As Democrats celebrate parents across the country receiving their first checks through the child tax credit, Republicans aren’t quite sure how to respond.

Several Senate Republicans told HuffPost they didn’t have strong feelings about the policy, which was a significant part of Democrats’ American Rescue Plan. 

“I’m gonna surprise you ? I don’t really have an opinion on that right now,” Sen. John Cornyn said. 

Last week, tens of millions of American households received payments of up to $300 per child, which they will continue to get each month through the end of the year. Democrats intend to expand the program in their next big legislative package, and they have been bragging about it in a series of press conferences. 

Initial polling has shown the advance child tax credit is incredibly popular among Democrats and Independent voters, and even wins support amongst a strong contingent of Republican voters.

There Has Been Movement On Some Parts Of The Bill What Have Those Been

Some contentious parts of the bill have been negotiated, or struck by the Senate parliamentarian.

The Senate official ruled a federal minimum wage increase the House passed early Saturday morning cannot be included in the relief bill.

More:Democrats left scrambling on a $15 minimum wage now that it appears left out of COVID-19 stimulus bill

Two infrastructure projects derided by Senate Republicans were also dropped from the COVID-19 relief bill on Tuesday, following deliberations with a key Senate official, according to a spokesperson for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. 

Pelosi spokesperson Drew Hammill said the bill’s funding for an expansion of the BART, a subway system serving the San Francisco Bay Area, was struck from the bill because it was “part of a pilot project.” And $1.5 million in funding for a bridge between part of upstate New York and Canada was also scrapped.

More:San Francisco transit money, NY bridge scrapped from COVID-19 bill amid GOP complaints

Additionally, Senate Democrats reached a deal with Biden to limit the eligibility for $1,400 checks in his COVID-19 relief bill, phasing the payments out for Americans earning more than $80,000, according to two sources familiar with the deliberations not authorized to speak on the record. 

The tweak is a goal of moderates who did not want the checks to go to wealthier Americans.

Contributing: Nicholas Wu, Ledge King, Christal Hayes, Joey Garrison, Jeanine Santucci

December 15 2017: Gop Expands Child Tax Credit; Earns Rubio’s Support

On December 15, 2017, the GOP expanded the refundable part of the child tax credit from $1,100 to $1,400 of the $2,000-per-child credit to earn the support of Sen. Marco Rubio , according to Rep. Kristi Noem , a member of the House-Senate negotiating committee. Sen. Mike Lee also lobbied for the expanded child tax credit . According to The Wall Street Journal, “Lawmakers offset the change by reversing a decision to allow the child tax credit for 17-year-olds. The final bill, like current law, would make it available only for children under age 17.”

After the announcement, Rubio said that he would support the tax bill. He wrote on Twitter, “For far too long, Washington has ignored and left behind the American working class. Increasing the refundability of the Child Tax Credit from 55% to 70% is a solid step toward broader reforms which are both Pro-Growth and Pro-Worker. But there is still much more to do in the months and years to come. The progress made on the Child Tax Credit would not have been possible without the support of @SenMikeLee, @SenatorTimScott, and @IvankaTrump.”

Paul Ryan: ‘don’t Forget This Is A Big Tax Cut For Families As Well’

A day earlier, speaking on the House floor moments before the vote, Ryan said the legislation will “help hard-working Americans who have been left behind for too long.”

“Today, we are giving the people their money back,” he said, adding that a typical family would get a $2,059 tax cut next year.

Democrats opposed bill as a boon to the wealthy while offering little for the middle class, with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., calling it “the worst bill to ever come to the floor of the House.”

There were a number of protesters in Congress on Tuesday, on both the House and Senate sides. Protesters interrupted the Senate’s final late night vote numerous times, at one point shouting, “Kill the bill. Don’t kill us.” One protester interrupted Ryan in the House when he was speaking.

The GOP bill lowers individual tax rates, including the top bracket to 37 percent from 39.6, while doubling the standard deduction and replacing personal exemptions with a $2,000 partly refundable child tax credit. It eliminates various deductions while limiting others on state and local taxes and mortgage interest. It also exempts larger inheritances from the estate tax, doubling the thresholds to $11 million for individuals and $22 million for married couples.

Congratulations to Paul Ryan, Kevin McCarthy, Kevin Brady, Steve Scalise, Cathy McMorris Rodgers and all great House Republicans who voted in favor of cutting your taxes!

— Donald J. Trump December 19, 2017

And Democrats Called The Bill A Horror Show And A Missed Opportunity

“This is a horror show today,” Representative John Yarmuth of Kentucky, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee. “This is a horror show debate. This is a horror show process. But it’s a disaster for the American people. The bill we are debating today will abandon millions of American families.”

“This is a historic moment, but most importantly it’s a missed opportunity,” said Representative Richard Neal of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee. “What we’re being asked to do here today is to raise taxes on 36 million middle-class Americans.”

Another Democrat, Representative Joseph Crowley of New York, began shouting from the lectern about the drawbacks of the bill.

“Republicans and President Trump are doling out tax breaks for companies to move overseas but will take away benefits to hire American veterans right here at home.”

“On behalf of hard working Americans throughout this country I say vote no on H.R. 1. Vote no on H.R. 1 percent.”

Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader, said the package being voted on was not tax reform but “a tax scam.”

“With straight faces and with the speed of light — I have to give them credit — they raced this thing through in the dark of night. They’re trying to sell a bill of goods to the middle class that this is in their interest, that this is a middle income tax cut,” she said, adding that “Republicans are raising taxes on 36 million middle-class families.”

Republicans Pass Historic Tax Cuts Without A Single Democratic Vote

Axios

Vice President Mike Pence walks through the Capitol to the House Chamber to watch the passage of the Republican tax bill. Photo: J. Scott Applewhite / AP

For history … 12:47 a.m.: “WASHINGTON — Senate passes 1st major rewrite of US tax code in 31 years, setting stage for final House vote on Wednesday.”

Being there, per AP: “he Senate narrowly passed the legislation on a party-line 51-48 vote. Protesters interrupted with chants of ‘kill the bill, don’t kill us’ and Vice President Mike Pence repeatedly called for order. Upon passage, Republicans cheered, with Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin among them.”

Just before 2:30 p.m., the House had passed the bill 227-203. But three provisions “violated Senate rules, forcing the Senate to vote to strip them out. So the massive bill was hauled back across the Capitol for the House to vote again , and Republicans have a chance to celebrate again.”

Senate: “Voting yes were 0 Democrats and 51 Republicans. Voting no were 46 Democrats, 0 Republicans and 2 independents.”

House:“Voting yes were 0 Democrats and 227 Republicans. Voting no were 191 Democrats and 12 Republicans. … There are 3 vacancies.”

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise says House Appropriations Chair Rodney Frelinghuysen should retain his position even though he voted against the GOP tax overhaul.

These Are The 12 House Republicans Who Voted Against The Tax Bill

Congressional Republicans’ support for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was overwhelming—but not universal.

The tax reform bill easily passed the House of Representatives Tuesday, with 227 members of Congress voting for it and 203 voting against. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill late Tuesday before sending it to President Donald Trump’s desk.

The vote was almost entirely divided along party lines; no Democrats voted for the bill, and only twelve Republicans voted against it. Those Republicans are:

Rep. Dan Donovan, 11th District of New York

Rep. John Faso, 19th District of New York

Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, 11th District of New Jersey

Rep. Darrell Issa, 49th District of California

Rep. Walter Jones, 3rd District of North Carolina

Rep. Peter King, 2nd District of New York

Rep. Leonard Lance, 7th District of New Jersey

Rep. Frank LoBiondo, 2nd District of New Jersey

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, 48th District of California

Rep. Chris Smith, 4th District of New Jersey

Rep. Elise Stefanik, 21st District of New York

Rep. Lee Zeldin, 1st District of New York

Donovan said in a statement that he was unable to support the bill because it capped the state and local tax deductions at $10,000. He said he had been fighting “tooth and nail” to protect the deduction, along with fellow GOP members of the New York congressional delegation, Faso, King, Stefanik and Zeldin.

September 12 2018: Rettig Confirmed By Senate As Irs Commissioner

On September 12, 2018, the Senate voted 64-33 to approve the nomination of Charles Rettig as Internal Revenue Service commissioner. All Republicans present voted with 15 Democrats to in favor of Rettig’s nomination. “Democrats had few objections to Mr. Rettig himself. They used the debate over his nomination to highlight concerns with the 2017 tax law and with an IRS decision to let some nonprofit groups involved in politics submit less information about their donors,” according to The Wall Street Journal.

December 19 2017: House Passes Conference Version Of Tax Bill

Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

 Bill Passed on December 19, 2017

Proposed providing for reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018.

On December 19, 2017, the House passed the conference version of HR 1—the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act—by a vote of 227-203. Two hundred and twenty-seven Republicans and no Democrats voted in favor of the bill. One hundred and ninety-one Democrats and 12 Republicans voted against the bill. Two Democrats—Mark Pocan and Joseph Kennedy —did not vote.

Following the vote, President Donald Trump tweeted, “Congratulations to Paul Ryan, Kevin McCarthy, Kevin Brady, Steve Scalise, Cathy McMorris Rodgers and all great House Republicans who voted in favor of cutting your taxes!”

House Speaker Paul Ryan said to reporters, “This is one of the most important pieces of legislation that Congress has passed in decades to help the American worker, to help grow the American economy. This is profound change, and this is change that is going to put our country on the right path.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi tweeted, “There are few things more disturbing than hearing the swell of cheers from the @HouseGOP as they raise taxes on 86 million middle class families.”

The following 12 Republicans voted against the bill.

Here Are The 12 House Republicans Who Voted Against Tax Cuts

4shares

The GOP tax reform bill known as the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” came one important step closer to becoming law on Tuesday when the bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 227 to 203.

No Democrats voted for the bill, of course. The party of big, centralized government isn’t for anyone keep more of their own money, other than perhaps illegal aliens and welfare recipients, and will never vote to cut anybody’s taxes.

But not all Republicans voted for the bill either. Here are the 12 Republicans — all from high tax states — who joined Democrats in voting against passage:

Dana Rohrabacher of California

Walter B. Jones of North Carolina

Frank A. LoBiondo of New Jersey

Christopher H. Smith of New Jersey

Leonard Lance of New Jersey

Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey

Lee Zeldin of New York

Peter King of New York

Dan Donovan of New York

John J. Faso of New York

Elise Stefanik of New York

For years, conservatively-managed states have been in essence subsidizing high tax states because taxpayers from those “blue” states have been able to deduct those high state taxes from their federal income tax returns.

That is not a problem for the federal government. It is a problem of those states and the voters who enable the thievery. Let them know turn to their respective state governments and demand that their taxes be slashed.

The GOP tax bill will now be voted on by the Senate tonight, where it is expected to pass by a razor-thin margin.

4shares

The 13 House Republicans Who Voted Against The Gop Tax Plan

&nbsp

The House vote on the GOP plan to overhaul the tax code Thursday was notable for the relatively few Republicans who voted against it.

Only 13 Republicans joined with Democrats in opposing the measure, which gave GOP leaders a comfortable margin to pass their bill. Republicans could afford 23 defections with all but two members voting on Thursday.

GOP lawmakers have long wanted to cut taxes, and they face substantial pressure to secure a major legislative win before next year’s midterm elections.

Of the Republicans who voted against the bill, all but Rep. Walter JonesWalter JonesHillary Clinton brings up ‘Freedom Fries’ to mock ‘cancel culture’Georgia officials open inquiry into Trump efforts to overturn election resultsSupreme Court declines to hear case challenging unlimited super PAC fundraisingMORE were from high-taxed states such as New York, New Jersey and California. These states would be particularly hard hit by the bill’s treatment of the state and local tax deduction.

The 13 GOP defectors were Jones and New York Reps. Dan Donovan, John FasoThomas Milller McClintockHillicon Valley: House advances six bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest | Google to delay cookie phase out until 2023 | Appeals court rules against Baltimore Police Department aerial surveillance programCalifornia Democrats clash over tech antitrust fightTech antitrust bills create strange bedfellows in House markupMORE and Dana Rohrabacher.

writing

Infrastructure Bill Fails First Vote; Senate To Try Again

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and other GOP senators speak to reporters ahead of a test vote scheduled by Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York on the bipartisan infrastructure deal senators brokered with President Joe Biden, in Washington, Wednesday, July 21, 2021. Republicans are prepared to block the vote over what they see as a rushed and misguided process.

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans rejected an effort Wednesday to begin debate on the big infrastructure deal that a bipartisan group of senators brokered with President Joe Biden, but pressure was mounting as supporters insisted they just needed more time before another vote possibly next week.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., had scheduled the procedural vote to nudge along negotiations that have dragged for weeks. But Republicans mounted a filibuster, saying the bipartisan group still had a few unresolved issues and needed to review the final details. They sought a delay until Monday.

“We have made significant progress and are close to a final agreement,” the bipartisan group of senators, 11 Republicans and 11 Democrats, said in a joint statement after the vote. The senators said they were optimistic they could finish up “in the coming days.”

At another point, Biden was asked by a union electrician if it was possible to bring Congress together to pass an infrastructure bill that would help the region replace the bridge.

“Big numbers are involved,” Romney said.

___

See How Every Member Of The House Voted On The Tax Plan

Every Democrat who voted opposed the bill, but so did 13 Republicans, many of whom represent districts in high-tax states that could be particularly hurt by the repeal of the state and local income tax deduction. See a list of the votes »

Representatives voted along party lines, with the exception of 13 Republicans, many of whom fought to keep the deduction for state and local taxes.

Republicans Promote Pandemic Relief They Voted Against

NEW YORK — Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., said it pained her to vote against the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan.

But in the weeks that followed, the first-term Republican issued a news release celebrating more than $3.7 million from the package that went to community health centers in her district as one of her “achievements.” She said she prided herself on “bringing federal funding to the district and back into the pockets of taxpayers.”

Malliotakis is far from alone.

Every Republican in Congress voted against the sweeping pandemic relief bill that President Joe Biden three months ago. But since the early spring votes, Republicans from New York and Indiana to Texas and Washington state have promoted elements of the legislation they fought to defeat.

– GOP governor race: Who’s in first depends on who’s in second

The Republicans’ favorite provisions represent a tiny sliver of the massive law, which sent $1,400 checks to millions of Americans, extended unemployment benefits until September, increased the child tax credit, offered housing assistance for millions of low-income Americans and expanded health care coverage. Republicans tried to negotiate a smaller package, arguing that Biden’s plan was too expensive and not focused enough on the nation’s health and economic crises.

Politics

Wicker’s office noted that he voted against the full package, but led efforts to ensure the restaurant relief was included.

The politics of the Republican position are complicated.

$15 Trillion Tax Cut Passed By House In Mostly Party

Nov. 16, 2017

• The House passed its version of the $1.5 trillion tax bill by a vote of 227 to 205. Read more »

• Thirteen Republicans voted against the bill, and no Democrats voted for it.

• A new analysis from Congress’s bipartisan tax referee shows that under the Senate’s version of the bill, lower-income Americans would see their taxes go up in 2021.

• The analysis roiled the Senate Finance Committee, which is debating the bill ahead of a vote that could happen as soon as Thursday night.

• Before the House vote, President Trump visited Capitol Hill to rally the Republican lawmakers behind the legislation.

Trump: Tax Bill Passage ‘an Amazing Experience’

The Republican bill was initially approved on a 227-203 vote in the House Tuesday, with no Democrats supporting it. Twelve Republicans also voted against the measure.

With Vice President Mike Pence presiding and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin on hand, the Senate then voted 51-48 in favor of the bill. Again, with no Democratic support.

“After eight straight years of slow growth and underperformance, America is ready to take off,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said following the vote.

The bill, the product of negotiations between Republicans in the House and Senate, achieves longtime Republican goals, including a permanent reduction in the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent that supporters argue will make American business more competitive overseas.

Many pass-through businesses also receive a more complicated 20 percent deduction, which became a subject of fierce debate after the final bill added a provision likely to benefit real estate companies like Trump’s.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., lauded the bill during an interview with NBC’s “Today” on Wednesday morning, reiterating the GOP’s claim that cutting the corporate tax rate would allow American companies to create new jobs with the savings and rejecting criticism that companies would merely pocket the savings.

“It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of how much they benefit,” he said.

“This is a big tax cut for families as well,” he said.

[the-firebird69]

Then shot down on the developments they don't want to do it out in the land that's not developed it's for sale too and we're buying it up and they don't want to let developments go through since they do it out there and we go to court and we do and we win or doing it here if you don't win we're going to do it until we win this is no reason for it not to go through there's nothing there everyone's screaming for it and they give me a hard time over housing all the time so you have to pay for it with real money as a matter of fact I'm going to sue because I could have built a development down here houses you cut me off for my money but adding to lawsuits but I told and got his wife say they're going to fix the grammar people the ass people that need it bad he also has that we had several losses today and they went through and yeah they're the big ones they're accepted by the county level courts that have their headquarters that's New York Los Angeles San Francisco in Miami and one more is Atlanta.

Yeah permits for a gooberheim and it's in LA it's a small building and it's going to be eclectic and I have artifacts just like the one in Scotland and we have seen the idea of approved and the permit is being issued today so we're going to go pick it up we don't need any theatrics but it would be appreciated so he's trying to arrange it it's going to be issued later today and possibly within a half hour and the permit person wants to meet the people that would be us in our group and we they know what we look like but we're going to show up in costume and somehow BG is involved he says no but he's going to help pick your art as a subcontractor if you know what we mean we know what you mean like with the wink. Yep doing it on purpose someone's going to make it hard up like that.

The bank lawsuit is going well we're in and we are called we have depositions out and subpoenas and they're also to appear for a hearing tomorrow and we're getting records and all sorts of things together this is it by the way they say no we continue up the ladder as we do we're facing down the people say no and resistance areas of the financial districts and they're crazy because his money was making it grow not shrink and key Bank is an illusion no keep ankles taking over Bank still they're going to end up threatening less than $7,000 for millions and millions and millions of trillions of dollars it's ridiculous simply won't stand and we won't let it of course eventually we're going to sue them but they haven't done anything massively wrong and they have they're threatening our son like madness threatening his account it says we should bring suit right now we agree with him.

Bitol and Goddess Wife

We're putting a hot to their construction no 2 hours of snow we're doing it off for a reason we're going ahead with this too that projects planned all over Florida too we have land all over it and they're saying no so we're going to court and sees people in the way they're going to get beat up and they're going to pushed around and they're going to get pushed out because we're huge developer and we don't like saying people say no to us

Olympus

[newstfionline]

Headlines

WHO Issues Warning As Daily Caseload Grows (Foreign Policy) As dense crowds of protesters gather around the world, and New Zealand announces a return to life as usual, it’s easy to forget that a pandemic is still raging. On Monday, the WHO recorded the largest daily increase in new coronavirus cases since the pandemic began, 136,000 in total; 75 percent of new cases came from just ten countries, mostly in the Americas and South Asia.

Stress is skyrocketing among the middle-aged (Marketwatch) If you’re middle-aged and you’re thinking, “I don’t remember everyone being this angry and miserable 20 or 30 years ago,” you’re not wrong. A recent study confirms what many people in later middle age already feel: We really are much more stressed than middle-aged people were back in the 1990s. The good news? As we get older our levels of stress will go down again. We’ll be happier in retirement than we are in our 40s and 50s, even with health issues. Older people experience fewer stressors and are able to cope with them better, says David Almeida, a psychologist and professor of human development at Pennsylvania State University. Meanwhile, the simplest answer is to move more. “My advice to people is to move when you are exposed to stress,” he says. “Moving, physical activity, is probably the best stress reducer.”

After Protests, Politicians Reconsider Police Budgets and Discipline (NYT) In an abrupt change of course, the mayor of New York vowed to cut the budget of the nation’s largest police force. In Los Angeles, the mayor called for redirecting millions of dollars from policing after protesters gathered outside his home. And in Minneapolis, City Council members pledged to dismantle their police force and completely reinvent how public safety is handled. As tens of thousands of people have demonstrated against police violence over the past two weeks, calls have emerged in cities across the country for fundamental changes to American policing. The pleas for change have taken a variety of forms—including measures to restrict police use of military-style equipment and efforts to require officers to face strict discipline in cases of misconduct. Parks, universities and schools have distanced themselves from local police departments, severing contracts. In some places, the calls for change have gone still further, aiming to abolish police departments, shift police funds into social services or defund police departments partly or entirely.

U.N. General Assembly won’t meet in person for first time in 75-year history (Washington Post) For the first time in the United Nations’ 75-year history, world leaders won’t convene in New York for the annual U.N. General Assembly meeting this September. U.N. General Assembly President Tijjani Muhammad-Bande explained Monday that an in-person gathering during the coronavirus pandemic would be impossible because world leaders typically travel with large delegations of aides and security personnel, making it hard to keep the numbers of attendees at events low. “A president doesn’t travel alone, leaders don’t travel alone,” he said. The session will instead take place remotely, though U.N. officials have yet to say exactly what that might look like.

Mexico’s Leader Rejects Big Spending to Ease Virus’s Sting (NYT) Across the globe, governments have rushed to pump cash into flailing economies, hoping to stave off the pandemic’s worst financial fallout. They have mustered trillions of dollars for stimulus measures to keep companies afloat and employees on the payroll. The logic: When the pandemic finally passes, economies will not have to start from scratch to bounce back. In Mexico, no such rescue effort has come. The pandemic could lead to an economic reckoning worse than anything Mexico has seen in perhaps a century. More jobs were lost in April than were created in all of 2019. A recent report by a government agency said as many as 10 million people could fall into poverty this year. Yet most economists estimate that Mexico will increase spending only slightly. Hostile toward bailouts, loath to take on public debt and deeply mistrustful of most business leaders, Mexico’s president has opted largely to sit tight.

Cuba almost coronavirus free (Foreign Policy) Cuba—a country that prides itself on its health system—has almost vanquished its coronavirus epidemic, according to official data. It has recently averaged less than ten cases per day and on Monday went nine consecutive days without a reported death from COVID-19. “We could be shortly closing in on the tail end of the pandemic and entering the phase of recovery from COVID,” President Miguel Diaz-Canel said over the weekend.

Spain makes masks mandatory until coronavirus defeated (Reuters) Wearing masks in public will remain mandatory in Spain after the country’s state of emergency ends on June 21 until a cure or vaccine for the coronavirus is found, Health Minister Salvador Illa said on Tuesday.

This round’s on us, says Malta (Reuters) Residents of Malta will be given $112 vouchers by the government to spend in bars, hotels and restaurants in an effort to revitalize the tourist industry. Tourism accounts for a quarter of the Mediterranean island’s GDP but it has been at a standstill since mid-March when flights were stopped during the coronavirus emergency. Flights to a small number of countries will resume on July 1 but they exclude big tourism source markets Britain and Italy.

Russia rejects Iran embargo (Foreign Policy) Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov has called for “universal condemnation” of the U.S. campaign to pass a permanent arms embargo on Iran through the United Nations Security Council. In a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, Lavrov called the U.S. attempt to hold Iran to the confines of the Iran deal while the United States had already broken the deal was “ridiculous and irresponsible.”

Moscow’s strict coronavirus lockdown turns lax overnight (Washington Post) In a sudden about-face from one of the world’s strictest coronavirus lockdowns, Moscow dramatically eased restrictions Tuesday, abolishing the city’s digital-pass system for travel and allowing salons and most other nonessential businesses to open. Schedules for when Muscovites were allowed outside based on their address have also been done away with after just one week. Restaurants and cafes will be allowed to serve people on verandas starting June 16 and nearly all restrictions will be lifted by June 23—the day before Russia’s rescheduled Victory Day parade on Moscow’s Red Square. The city’s walk schedules and requirements for wearing face masks outside have increasingly been ignored by residents, and Moscow authorities might have been feeling the pressure from small businesses that have been closed since late March with little government aid to sustain them.

Tracking the origin of the coronavirus outbreak (Daily Telegraph) Coronavirus may have broken out in the Chinese city of Wuhan much earlier than previously thought, according to a new US study looking at satellite imagery and internet searches. The Harvard Medical School research found that the number of cars parked at major Wuhan hospitals at points last autumn was much higher than the preceding year. It also found that searches from the Wuhan region for information on “cough” and “diarrhea”, known Covid-19 symptoms, on the Chinese search engine Baidu spiked around the same time. It has led researchers to suggest that the outbreak began much earlier than December 31, the date the Chinese government notified the World Health Organization of the outbreak.​

North Korea cuts off all communication with South Korea (AP) North Korea said it was cutting off all communication channels with South Korea on Tuesday, a move experts say could signal Pyongyang has grown frustrated that Seoul has failed to revive lucrative inter-Korean economic projects and persuade the United States to ease sanctions. The North’s Korean Central News Agency said all cross-border communication lines would be cut off at noon in the “the first step of the determination to completely shut down all contact means with South Korea and get rid of unnecessary things.” North Korea has cut communications in the past—not replying to South Korean phone calls or faxes—and then restored those channels when tensions eased.

The Palestinian Plan to Stop Annexation: Remind Israel What Occupation Means (NYT) Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel is pressing for annexation in conjunction with the Trump administration’s peace plan, which at least ostensibly contemplates an autonomous Palestinian entity as part of what it calls a “realistic two-state solution.” Mr. Netanyahu has vowed to annex up to 30 percent of the West Bank, and could do so as early as next month. But to the Palestinians, annexation flouts the ban on unilateral land grabs agreed to in the Oslo Accords in the 1990s, and would steal much of the territory they have counted on for a state. For that reason, they say it would kill all hope of a two-state solution to the conflict. In response to the annexation plan, Mr. Abbas renounced the Palestinians’ commitments under the Oslo agreements last month, including on security cooperation with Israel. The strategy aims to remind the Israelis of the burdens they would assume if the Palestinian Authority disbanded, and to demonstrate that they are willing to let the authority collapse if annexation comes to pass. The Palestinian Authority says it will cut the salaries of tens of thousands of its own clerks and police officers. It will slash vital funding to the impoverished Gaza Strip. And it will try any Israeli citizens or Arab residents of Jerusalem arrested on the West Bank in Palestinian courts instead of handing them over to Israel.

[aliens-and-shiz]

Part 20: loss

More at: @aliens-and-shiz

The day began for President Falhaven as any other day. A report on the well being of the United States of America. He’s a proud American, as any other one should. From the tip of South America to the North Pole, he was in charge of half of humanity’s home planet. And some would say another third of the human race, populating Venus and Mars, although he allowed them to run a seemingly independent government.

“Sir, General Thane-“

“Ah fuck that bitch. Let me guess, raise the defcon again?”

“Yes sir.”

“Fuck that. Nothings going to happen. Unless someone has escaped our Vesta Prison, or the Lunar Colonies want independence, don’t give me any news today about space. Now then, what’s the situation in the Rockies?”

“Sir, the third civil war is continuing in our favor. Those who still hold the values from the losing side of the second civil war in 2019 are as stubborn as ever. But, it’s contained in the mountains, and I do not recommend moving ground troops into the mountains, rather to perform an orbital strike and cleanse the area in two weeks time.”

“Sounds good to me. Anything else?”

“China and Russia are bickering as always. The African Federation wishes to annex Egypt as well and control the continent, but Egypt is standing firm. That- what the hell is that!?”

His assistant stared in awe at the scene outside. Falhaven turned around and gasped. He slammed the button under his desk and the Oval Office itself descended into the Earth. A massive ship, larger than the city of DC itself had suddenly appeared over the city. Thousands of small craft detached from the ship and flew to the earth.

And attacked anything that moved. Cars were blown up, people sucked into the ships, confined and restrained. It lasted no more than 10 minutes. And in the blink of an eye, they were gone again. The planet burned, black smoke clogged the sky, and anyone lucky enough to have been spared stood in awe.

Earth has fallen.

————————

The news spread quickly, terror reigned across the solar system. Something destroyed their home. Venus retreated beneath the clouds, Mars abandoned their surface shelters, and retreated into the mines. The first true battle of war, and they didn’t even see it coming.

———————

General Thane awoke to a siren. Red lights danced against the walls to her rooms. Oh no. Not already. She ran from her bed, still in her pajamas and robe, and strode onto the Command Deck across the hall.

“WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED!?”

“Ma’am we are getting reports that Earth has been attacked. We do not know by what.”

Images began flowing onto the main display. Horrific images. New York- burning to the ground- London, Beijing, Sydney, Tokyo. And the most beautiful city of all, New Jerusalem, a shining beacon of peace in now-neutral Isreal, a cloud of smoke.

She fell into the command chair. Tears formed in her eyes. My home. My job was to protect you. I failed.

“It’s not your fault Linda.”

Dr. Sanchez walked into the room.

“What are you doing here?”

He looked at her. “You are relieved of your duties. I’ll take over for now. It’s not the first time I’ve dealt with this. If we hurry we can-”

“NO! NO MORE LIES! NO MORE! TELL ME WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON!”

The whole command deck stared at their leader in awe. The tension between the two couldn’t even be cut with a knife.

“…fine, but we’re going to have this conversation in the Reactor Room with Skre’ve.”

“Fine. Whatever. All hands, set course for Earth. We need to help them before anything else. I will be back soon.”

She followed Ricardo off the deck.

————————

Skre’ve sat in the middle of the room, meditating. Plasma surrounded him, creating patterns that only helped his trance. Suddenly, the light he had become used to disappeared.

Dr. Sanchez and the General stepped into the room. Two chairs and a table emerged from the floor and they each took a seat.

Why are they here…

The plasma resumed its deadly arcs.

“Now, tell me what the fuck is happening.”

Sanchez looked at her and smirked. “You sure you want to know, I doubt you’ll believe me... this is such a waste of time.”

“FUCKING TALK!”

“Fine. Firstly, my name is not Ricardo Sanchez, but after this you are to continue calling me that. And I am the oldest living human, weather you realize it or not.”

Oh. He told me this might happen.

“…what the FUCK?”

“Calm down. It’s not like I can live 438 years on earth and someone not take notice without changing my name. I’ve gone by many names. My current one is based off of an early-21st -century cartoon, which had a character strikingly similar to my own self. The name I’m most famous for, though is Albert Einstein.”

“…you are fucking kidding me.”

She looked at the man claiming to be one of the most famous scientists in history with a look of utter confusion and shock. Her face amused Skre’ve, but he decided it’d be better to stay silent.

The doctor nodded.

“…wait a second, Einstein was born in 1879? And his whole life is very well documented. Also he got to a point and looked way older than you do. It’s impossible.”

“When you have the power I do, anything is possible. In fact that man in all the photos was the cover for me, to keep my true identity secret. I was really born in 1699 in England, named Ludwig Einstein. My parents, who were extremely wealthy aristocrats from the Ottoman Empire, fleed from the war against the Habsburgs in 1695, to London. They changed their names when they arrived in England to Einstein, to show that they were from Germany rather than the Ottoman Empire, and keep a low profile. They decided to stay there after the war, for but when I was 5 we traveled to the American Colonies.”

He paused, letting the General take it all in.

“My parents died when I was 15. It was 1714, and I was left a vast tract of land in what is now Maine, and an amount of money that would value 150 million dollars today. I made it grow to now value 52 trillion.”

“Holy shit! 52 TRLLION!?”

“Yeah. I have enough to build this same space station another 5 times over. And that’s just my bank account. See, here’s the account.” He flicked open his holowatch and turned it to show her. 52 trillion dollars showed up on the screen under account info.

“What the… how the… how do you keep it hidden?”

“You’d be surprised. Although owning the most influential nation in history, a continent, the bank my money is in, and multiple other multiplanetary organizations would help a lot.”

Skre’ve shifted in his seat. The look the General was giving the Doctor was pure fire. He spoke to me about this before. How he really controls the human race. And how he’s lived so long. He’s so much like our Emperor, but so much kinder.

“…No. You’re taking me for a fool. You can’t be telling the truth.”

“I’m sorry to say that this is the truth.”

She glared at him. “Fine. How the hell have you been able to live this long?”

“Oh, that’s a hard question. In fact it’s ironic, as it was a suicide attempt when I was 30. I don’t know what exactly I mixed together, but it was some combination of whiskey, bleach, sulfuric acid, ammonia, and mint. And something else I found that had a poison label on it. I took all of it and fell onto an electric generator and got shocked. I passed out for a week and woke up in a hospital bed. That’s the only way I can think of other than a possible genetic reasoning.”

She was bewildered. This is too much. One man can’t have that much power, or have done the things he has.

“Why, oh why didn’t you start publishing your work or any of that until the past 50 years!?”

“Oh. That’s when I was finally able to buy CERN. Also plastic surgery was finally perfected then. I’d just have to fake my death again and get a small surgery and bam, I’m a new person. Also, because the rest of the scientists were FINALLY catching up to my level of research and I didn’t have to build everything myself, like I did my first FTL drive.”

That’s not what he told me. He told me it was because he finally had a daughter. Something more valuable to him than anything else and had to ensure that she could do anything. He said the real reason he put the shielding up was because he just needed to talk about his daughter and how proud of her he was. And the downward spiral that he went through when even he couldn’t find her… This species has a gift of manipulation…

Her eyes widened. “What do you mean, your first FTL drive?”

“Ah, well, it was right after the American Revolutionary War -which by the way, I funded entirely, that’s how I literally own America. The main agreement behind it was I get 10% of the annual federal budget every year as payment for what I did. I again did the same with Russia when they installed their Communist regime, and made sure I kept that 10% when it collapsed and the current system took over- I had advanced computers in my mountain estate, and calculated how to create a jump drive. From there it was easy. From 1801 til 1863 I explored the cosmos. When I returned my ship burnt up in the atmosphere, and I parachuted to safety. I came back to America to see my nation in ruins. I was furious, and you’re welcome because if I didn’t step in and finally put my foot down on slavery, you’d still be in chains General.”

“YOU PUT YOUR FOOT DOWN!? THAT’S RICH!”

He sat there looking at her as he would a misbehaving child.

“Fine. Do you honestly still not believe me?”

“No I don’t. Not one ounce.”

“Alright. Well let’s go to the bridge. I want to show you something. And if you still don’t believe me after this, feel free to take me to take me straight to the prison on Vesta. I won’t be in there for more than 5 days before I’m released by Falhaven or Mai. And when that happens you’ll know I’m not lying.”

He turned off the antimatter reactor, and stormed out, fuming.

Thane shook her head. “Sorry about that Skre’ve. Is there anything I can get you?”

“Um, I mean… that steak was the best thing I’ve ever eaten… is there more?”

“Sure I’ll get you another steak.”

Oh by the Emperor this is amazing.

——————-

Fucking cunt not listening to me. It’s not like I’m totally paying her paycheck or anything or that it was my fucking idea to make the USF or anything or that I fund the whole bloody thing. Fucking bitch fucking cunt mother fucking…

The doctor swore under his breath as he stormed to the bridge, General Thane hot on his tail.

…fucking cuntbag stubborn saggy titty ass bitch fuckity shit… I need a drink. And now I have to show her, and EVERYONE ELSE ON THIS BLOODY SHIP that it can go faster than light… fucking wanted to wait til Xu got back so I had a scapegoat goddamnit mother fucker…

He stormed into the bridge.

“Get out of the FUCKING way!” He yelled at the helmsman, who quickly jumped away from the controls.

He sat down and placed his hand on the touchpad. It scanned it and did a biometric reading, confirming that it was Sanchez. He pressed a keypad at the same time, and the control panel slid aside to reveal an untouched panel of unknown use and origin. The helmsman looked at it in awe, while the General looked more puzzled than angry now.

“What are you doing?”

“…fucking bitch… How’s Sirius sound you fucking cunt!?”

He slammed a button and the ship warped to the wreckage of a couple days prior. Ships and debris scattered everywhere, dead aliens similar to Skre’ve floated in the emptiness. The general’s mouth dropped.

A ship entered the veiw, massive in its own right, but puny to the Torus.

“OH HONEY WE ARENT DONE IM NOT A FUCKING ONE TRICK PONY!!! ALPHA CENTAURI ANYONE!?”

He slammed the button again, and suddenly they were in front of a space station. If she doesn’t believe me now I’ll kill her. I’m gonna memory wipe this whole crew but no I’ll fucking murder her. The Alpha Centauri station was on fire, a trail of debris followed it in its orbit around the binary system. Oh. They got here too. Must have been on their retreat from earth. I don’t care I’m proving this bitch wrong.

“ARE YOU HAPPY NOW!? YOU JUST HAD TO KNOW THE TRUTH AND NOW WE CANT CHASE THEM BECAUSE YOU CAN’T ACCEPT THAT SOMEONES ELSE KNOWS MORE THAN YOU!?”

She dropped to her knees at the sight in front of her, and tears slid down her cheeks.

“…I’m sorry.” She whimpered.

He got down next to her. And quietly spoke, “Oh, what’s that? I couldn’t hear you.”

Still just as quietly, “…I said I’m sorry.”

He looked up, across the room, and yelled at one of the security officers, “Private Singh, could you hear her?”

“No, sir.”

“IM FUCKING SORRY!!!”

“That’s better. Alright, let’s go back home. Oh, and Singh, shut those damned doors.”

He shut the doors, and the doctor smiled. He hit the warp button with one hand and lifted three fingers into the air with the other. By the time the Torus arrived at Earth, everyone on the bridge -with the exception of the General, the doctor, and the private- was dead in their seats, the private’s energy rifle still smoking.

Linda Thane screamed. The doctor came in close to her and whispered in her ear. “Try to expose me or undermine my authority again, and it won’t be your crew on the chopping block. I hope you value your daughter as much as I value mine.”

He stood up, and walked towards the door. “Clean this up, Private. Same protocol as the last time. You know, mind wipe the entire crew. Let her keep her memory this time though.”

He walked out, whistling a tune he loved from the 1970s. Do you remember, the 21st night of September…

[over50business]

Safe Island Thinking Can Save Your Business

From my new book, FIFTEEN CRITICAL INSIGHTS FOR BUSINESS OWNERS OVER FIFTY, an advanced thinking process that can save your business. Less ego, more bank account. Chances are, you've heard of innovative thinking, or strategic thinking, or holistic thinking. But what do clinical psychologists mean by Safe Island Thinking? Safe Island thinking is a highly complex approach to peaceful coexistence between potential rivals through the use of compromise, sharing, empowerment, facilitation, and/or alliances. In many ways, this approach is the exact opposite of Reductionist thinking, as it seeks to pacify rather than conquer, and share rather than hoard.

Safe Island Thinking

Imagine being on a tropical island with everything you wanted ... ten wives (Solomon had 700 wives, but we won’t be greedy), exotic gardens and fruit trees, crystal spring water, herds of cattle and horses, rooms stocked with electronic gadgets, and ancient silver and gold mines with limitless, untapped veins of ore. Still, you have one problem. There are three other islands in the area, all with substantially fewer resources than yours. Some populations are barely subsisting with intermittent periods of famine and starvation. Increasingly, the other islanders have begun to raid your island by night, stealing food, livestock, and precious minerals, even kidnapping a couple of your wives (luckily, the two nagging wives with perpetual honey-do lists). The more the word spreads about your prosperity, the more invasions you experience, the more property losses you suffer. (Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés kept hearing about the gold and riches of 

the Aztec Empire and eventually overthrew them.) Word gets around. Your initial reaction might be to build up your defenses; hire mercenary soldiers to guard the coastline, and perhaps, build a wall. But, within the context of Safe Island thinking, these solutions are both shortsighted and hypocritical in addressing the real problem. The real problem is the clash between wealth and poverty, the haves versus the have-nots. In the distance, starving islanders see you eating steak and lobster. They become desperate, resentful, and demand a piece of the action ... by any means necessary. Thousands of years of history, hundreds of books on theocracy, modern clinical research, and personal profiles of successful individuals express the same sentiment. Predominantly, almost without exception, people living prosperously feel no innate obligation to share. Whether earned through inheritance, unscrupulous dealings, or years of sacrifice and hard work, it’s THEIR PROPERTY. They resent the idea of someone coming along, expecting a free ride. Safe Island thinking seeks to bridge the gap through compromise and pacification. Rather than building a wall to keep out invaders (at least, temporarily, as they will eventually find a way over it or under it or around it), Safe Island thinking tries to resolve the problem by eliminating the reason invaders want to come in the first place. The objective is to take away the incentive.

Brace yourself. Your subconscious mind is about to scream in agony. To the dismay of many Americans, the United States has been employing Safe Island thinking for many years, sending billions in foreign aid to places like Mexico, Haiti, Central America, Africa, and Russia (yes, Russia), and signing trade agreements such as NAFTA to give regional poor countries a boost. Back in the 60s and 70s, when the United States was on the verge of a race war, the U.S. government used policies grounded in Safe Island thinking (Affirmative Action, Job Corps, and free college grants and tuition) to get angry black protesters off the streets and into the workforce. For potential protesters involved in the fight for equality, the stakes (historic, unprecedented employment offers) became too high to get involved in daily marches or join the Black Panther Party on the front lines. You had to choose between social activism and your new role as the first black face in Exxon’s accounting department, making $80,000 a year, and planning a family trip to Disneyland. It was personal risk/reward assessment at its most basic tier.

Historians agree these sophisticated Safe Island strategies were not only instrumental in averting another civil war, but, as an unexpected payoff , brought an invaluable source of diversity to corporate America, allowing U.S. companies to compete more vigorously in the global market. As far back as the end of World War II, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin used Safe Island thinking to carve up the world into three domains, with each leader agreeing NOT to interfere in the affairs of the other leader’s territory. Churchill could colonize countries rich in minerals like Palestine, South Africa, India, and Cameroon. Russia could crush independence movements and annex eastern countries like Albania, Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary. Roosevelt would get help from Russia to fight the Japanese whose ancient Samurai, fight-to-the-death culture did not embrace surrender of any kind, and have (defeated) Germany split into zones favorable to the U.S.

During the early years immediately after the War, the United States spent billions (trillions in today’s dollars) frantically rebuilding England, Germany, and Japan, even Russia, to a smaller degree. With the massive influx of immigrants trying to enter the U.S., Safe Island thinking was an easy sell to American taxpayers. “Let’s get these war-torn countries rebuilt and in order so their people won’t come here, flood the workforce, and drive our own economy into the ground.”

In this instance, the overriding objective of compromise and pacification was summed up in one word ... treaty. In corporate America, however, managers refer to the same type of arrangement as an ... alliance contract. As a new business owner, unless you understand the value of these contracts, you will forever find yourself building walls and fi ghting unnecessary wars. In 2004, sworn competitors Samsung Electronics and Sony signed an agreement to split the cost of research and development to build flat-screen LED televisions. In 2013, Ford and Toyota formed an alliance to jointly design a new futuristic hybrid vehicle. Apple and Microsoft formulated an alliance to design a mobile operating system. Amazon (Kindle) and Apple (iPad) forged an agreement to allow the distribution of Amazon e-books through an iPad/Kindle app. Safe Island thinking requires a conscious and deliberate detachment from ego-driven outcomes. Force (to contend with bad actors) is still on the table, but viewed as a last resort. The whole idea is to have potential adversaries so intrigued with the benefits of their own island, they have neither the time nor desire to invade yours. Admittedly, Safe Island thinking has become a much harder sell. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy used it to find his way out of a nuclear standoff with the Russians. This approach totally inflamed his Joint Chiefs and military advisors who saw no other viable solution except to go to war. Safe Island thinking is similar to a chess move that voluntarily relinquishes short-term power for a long-term gain. However, within our human evolution, is an overriding instinct to conquer rather than compromise.

Passively working out a deal that benefits both parties just doesn’t FEEL the same, nothing to facilitate a round of cold beers for the heroes and a victorious slap across the back. Our subconscious will remind us that to the victor go the spoils ... all of them, including the right to dictate the terms, and punish the opponents who had the audacity to challenge us.  So many new business owners go under, choosing the hard road instead of the smart road.  Don’t allow your “them vs us” ego to drive you out of business. Keep up your guard. But remember. Sometimes building a bridge can be far more profitable than building a wall. -Leander Jackie Grogan - (Join the Over-50 Entrepreneur Master Group here:  https://www.facebook.com/groups/1087477241691912 Let's GO!!! I GOTTA TO SHARE THIS ONE...   Share this...

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Linkedin Read the full article

[ericvick]

A year after COVID, personal finances are not so grim for millions of Americans

A year into the coronavirus pandemic, Megan McClelland is surprised by how steadily her credit and finances have improved.

“At first, it felt like doom and gloom,” says McClelland, 35. “But now I feel like I finally have more financial security.”

McClelland, a high school counselor in Petaluma, California, carries student loan debt from putting herself through both college and grad school while working multiple jobs. More recently, she worked a side gig at a seafood restaurant in a hotel to sock away extra money.

When she was laid off from the restaurant last spring, McClelland used her $1,200 stimulus check to meet with a financial advisor who showed her how to pay down her student debt while prioritizing saving for the future.

The year of COVID-19: Who has really benefited from the stock market boom?

‘I’m literally breaking inside’: As COVID-19 leaves millions jobless and struggling, the mental health toll rises

McClelland, who already has a 403(b) retirement plan through her employer at a public school, opened up a Roth IRA and a high-yield savings account to stash more money into her nest egg.

“The pandemic forced me to be smarter with my money,” McClelland added. “The past year has been so challenging on everyone, but I’m feeling more hopeful.”

Consumers made positive financial habits in pandemic

McClelland isn’t alone.

Americans made smart choices with their money at the start of the pandemic, according to Credit Karma, which provides consumers online tools to improve their finances. Payment delinquencies fell, consumers paid down debt and credit scores stayed relatively flat or even rose among certain score bands, says Colleen McCreary, chief people officer at Credit Karma.

This was helped in part as trillions of dollars in stimulus aid from Congress and the Federal Reserve propped up an economy gripped by recession.

“Americans are doing better financially than they think,” says McCreary. “The stimulus payments helped people pay down debt and make on-time credit card payments. There have also been fewer opportunities to spend money during the lockdowns, which has helped people save.”

Story continues

A year later: How much has the economy recovered and how far does it have to go?

As soon as Camara Queder received all three of her stimulus checks, she knew exactly what she would do with them: invest.

Camara Queder

Queder, a 43-year-old single mother who lives in Boston, Massachusetts, used her payments to help max out her Roth IRA for both 2020 and 2021. She also deposited all three of the stimulus checks she received for her 11-year-old son into a custodial account to get him started investing early.

It felt like a relief, she says, after she spent recent years aggressively paying off her student loan and car debt through extreme couponing.

“It feels great,” says Queder, a customer relations representative at an analytical-equipment maker. “I want to teach my son all of the financial lessons I didn’t learn.”

Americans save more

Consumers are also prioritizing saving in an effort to be more prepared for the next economic crisis, according to McCreary. In aggregate, Americans have saved an extra $2 trillion during the pandemic and put away 13.6% of their income in February, government data shows. That’s down from a record 33.7% last April but well above the pre-pandemic level of about 8%.

A quarter of Americans reported they saved money during the crisis, Credit Karma data shows. Of those that were able to save, half were able to stockpile more than $1,500. That’s a lot considering almost 40% of Americans wouldn’t be able to cover a $400 emergency expense, according to the Federal Reserve.

“The pandemic has really inspired people to think about their finances and build a cushion just in case something else happens again in the future,” says McCreary.

More than a third of Hispanic respondents said that since the emergence of COVID-19, they have been able to save money, compared with 26% of Black and 22% of white respondents, according to Credit Karma.

The majority of consumers were also able to maintain or improve their credit scores in the second half of 2020, says McCreary. About 82% of Credit Karma members either saw their credit score rise or remain the same in that time span. And nearly a third saw their score increase.

Financial pain still lingers

To be sure, although Americans are feeling more optimistic, many are still struggling financially.

Although job growth is expected to build in the coming months thanks to vaccinations and another round of stimulus, economists say that it may take several years for the labor market to heal. So far, the U.S. has recovered 13.9 million, or 62%, of the 22.4 million jobs lost last spring, and is still 8.4 million below the pre-pandemic level.

Deep financial scars have been inflicted by the pandemic, with low-income households, minorities and women, in particular, suffering stinging job losses, which have only widened the divide between the haves and have-nots.

“There’s a tale of two cities across the U.S. in finances,” says McCreary. “One group can save money and pay down debt, likely people in jobs where they’ve been able to work from home. But then there’s this other population who is feeling the pain from the trickle down effects of unemployment.”

Fifty-one percent of Hispanic respondents, for instance, say their financial situation had worsened as a result of the pandemic (51%), compared with 39% of Blacks and 35% of whites, according to Credit Karma.

Not everyone feels financially secure

Although a majority of middle-income families continue to feel positively about their financial situation in the face of COVID-19, underlying economic vulnerabilities have surfaced, according to the latest Middle-Income Financial Security Monitor from Primerica, a financial services provider.

It conducts a quarterly national survey to monitor the financial health of those with annual household incomes of $30,000-$100,000.

About 57% of respondents say their financial situation is in good shape, while 59% say their income is falling behind the cost of living. More than half don’t have savings to go beyond three months of living expenses.

“Stimulus checks can help shore up people’s finances, but it’s only temporary,” says Glenn Williams, CEO of Primerica. “Those who have lost jobs are having severe financial difficulties. A stimulus check will help them for a period of time, but it’s not a long-term answer.”

About a third of consumers say their financial stability depends on a third stimulus check, according to Credit Karma. Nearly 50% of Black respondents reported their financial stability depended on a third stimulus check, compared with 43% of Hispanic and 31% of white respondents.

Affluent Americans achieve milestones

The split-screen America created by the coronavirus recession left many people financially intact and others facing lasting scars. One group is saving and spending while the other counts on unemployment and stimulus to make ends meet.

For instance, nearly half of affluent Americans have been getting their financial lives in order during the past year, according to recent data from Bank of America. It surveyed more than 2,000 affluent Americans with investable assets between $100,000 and $1 million.

SUBSCRIBE: Help support quality journalism like this.

Despite challenges imposed by the pandemic, about 84% of respondents believe they are on track to reach or have already achieved several financial milestones earlier in life than their parents, including opening an investing account (54%) and starting to save for retirement (53%).

The vast majority of affluent Americans are also prioritizing many traditional milestones in life, including owning a car (98%), owning a home (97%), saving their target amount for retirement (96%) and paying off credit card debt (94%), the survey found.

How people are feeling about their current financial situation is very much based on their personal circumstances, according to Williams.

“This is not a time to give people cookie-cutter financial advice,” says Williams. “You have to really look at people’s individual needs, goals and the impact the pandemic has had on their family to figure out what challenges they may need help overcoming through the advice of a financial professional.”

Families save for future but may need to do more

More than 70% of families are confident in their knowledge of important financial fundamentals like paying down credit card debt, building good credit, budgeting and saving, the Primerica data shows.

But they are less confident in setting up investment accounts like an Individual Retirement Account. They also are less likely to know how to buy life insurance (57%). Only 40% know where to find a financial professional who could provide assistance.

“What keeps people awake at night is their personal health, finances and being unemployed,” says Williams. “If you prioritize expenses, get your debt under control, protect your family’s income with life insurance and start a small investment program, it will better position you to withstand the next economic crisis.”

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Stimulus checks 2021: Finances not so grim for millions of Americans

[joanprimmer22]

Ripple Price Predictions in 10 Years – XRP Price Prediction

After a down period recently, Ripple’s value is starting to go up again. This may be your last chance to buy on the cheap! Experts agree upon the notion that, given the network’s popularity, well-built platform, worldwide investing interests and penetration in the media and mainstream society, Ripple is bound to grow in the short, medium, and long-term.

For starters, pundits continually say that the possibility of Ripple ending 2018 at a value nearing $1 is very much attainable. You may see the figure and may think that is not a lot, but consider that it is currently at less than a dollar: that would be more than ten times its actual price! Imagine how much money could be made with high volume investments.

Based on current projections, most people within the business agree that Ripple’s value can go up to the $200-$300 range in ten years. It is in the company’s best interest if the price continues to rise, because it will make XRP less volatile. More Visit: What is cryptocurrency XRP

No one really knows when the price of Ripple will rise but we do know it will rise. Quite a significant rise as well when it happens. Many experts have been reluctant to make a Ripple price prediction higher than $500 a coin. However, this seems to have changed with usually conservative experts now suggesting XRP could reach up to $1000 a coin in a few years time. Analysts say prices of up to $10/$15 per XRP by the end of the year and up to $30 a coin by May 2019 are now thought possible.

A huge factor in our 2020 price prediction at the bottom of the blog is down to a deal signed with China. Read on and find out…

DREAM XRP PRICE PREDICTIONS

With the market being so volatile, predicting the price of cryptocurrencies is really one of the most difficult tasks.

Let’s consider the eminent publications and personalities, and their statement regarding the Ripple (XRP) price prediction, which will give us a fairer idea:

·         Ripple coin news, the second-largest news site on the basis of traffic, predicts that after a bed of thorns, the coming years might emerge as a smooth period for Ripple as there will be an addition to the partnerships and new technologies, which might surge its price to 8 to 10 dollars.

·         Investing Haven, a crypto prediction website has made an optimistic bullish prediction for 2020 as it believes that 2020 is going to be a flawless year for Ripple. They have stated that XRP might reach as high as $20 by 2020 as it thinks XRP has the highest potential, amongst all other cryptos.

·         UsLifted, a crypto prediction website believes that by 2020, XRP would attain newer heights and might reach $22.79 with a circulating supply of 38,739,145,924 XRP.

·         Oracle Times has recently mentioned in one of their articles that they predict that XRP might surge as much as 2000%, and they mentioned it could be possible only if Ripple becomes the best choice for cross-border payments by financial institutions. The cross border transactions account for around $9.8 trillion.

REALISTIC RIPPLE PRICE PREDICTIONS

The XRP powered payments processor xRapid is now live and saving many individuals, businesses and banks real money. The ever-expanding list of companies joining Ripple is making real savings in real-time. And that is the point here, Ripples XRP coin solve’s real-world problems, transaction time and above all else, saving money.

At the moment xRapid is servicing a small number of customers with a relatively low transaction volume. However, once the volume and customer base increase exponentially then we will see some seismic shifts in XRP coins value. When you analyze the potential of all of this, add in a little intelligence, you can make a reasonable Ripple price prediction for 2019.

A RIPPLE PRICE PREDICTION THAT CAME TRUE?

Ripples XRP token grabbed my attention back in Late December 2017. I found a you-tuber who had made a video all about Ripple and its crypto offering. What he showed me on a simple 10-minute video was something that has become an obsession.

In the video, he described XRP eloquently giving plenty of facts to back it up. He was telling people to invest in XRP because the price was going up soon. I checked the date and it said October 2017 – two months later it hit $4 from 25 cents. His prediction was true, everything he said made sense.

With xRapid now live, the list of users grows weekly. Every time a transaction completes a small amount of XRP is burned making it slowly more scarce. It is simple mathematics that XRP will rise. But by how much, that’s what we are going to try and predict realistically.

RIPPLE PRICE PREDICTIONS FOR 2019

If you had invested in January you would have seen a yield of over 36,000%. In fact, in 2017 Ripple’s XRP coin made the biggest gains in 2017, even bigger than Bitcoin.

Meet Ripple, the world’s most practical financial network

What are we, as a society, if we aren’t able to build robust relationships based on trust? That, and honor should be in front of every social interaction involving human beings, including financial transactions.

As the world shifts towards a more digital, cryptography-protected way of doing business, traditional banking platforms are being slowly phased out the financial scope. Only those willing to adjust and including a more efficient payment system, which is both faster and safer, will be able to maintain in the business and survive.

[moodboardinthecloud]

The trillion-dollar woman

A conversation with the economist Stephanie Kelton about the "deficit myth," Modern Monetary Theory for dummies, and why the age of capital may finally be ending

Anand Giridharadas

Mar 30

Joe Biden is president of the United States, but he lives in Stephanie Kelton’s world.

An economist and champion of so-called Modern Monetary Theory, Kelton has long agitated against what she calls “the deficit myth,” which is also the title of her bestselling book on the subject.

At the most basic level, Kelton believes the United States government is capable of investing far more than it ordinarily does, or than most people think it should, in making people’s lives better. And she argues that much of the resistance to doing so is grounded in outdated, gold-standard thinking that has no place in reality today.

Whatever you think of her ideas, which have a rapidly growing number of adherents, and which tend to make Larry Summers cry, there is no question that they are carrying the day in the American public debate. Indeed, it is hard to understand the comfort the new Biden administration has had with significant government spending — contrary to Biden’s own past nature — without understanding how much the terms of the debate have shifted, and how much Kelton herself has to do with that shift.

So I’m excited to bring you this interview with her today.

But first: I will be doing my regular live chat/webinar thing today at 1 p.m. New York time, 10 a.m. Pacific time, and 6 p.m. London time. If you’re new to The Ink, they’re fun and engaging. If you haven’t yet, subscribe today to join us. Subscribers will receive login details beforehand.

Subscribing to The Ink is the best way to keep it free and open to all, and to support independent media that hopefully makes you think and enlivens your conversations. I appreciate your support for this undertaking. Every subscriber makes a difference.

“We’re closer than we’ve been in a long time”: a conversation with Stephanie Kelton

ANAND: In the wake of the passage of the American Rescue Plan, we’ve heard every manner of reaction. Joe Biden is a dangerous socialist. Joe Biden is putting lipstick on the pig of austerity politics. Joe Biden is the second coming of FDR. Or maybe LBJ. How would you assess what happened and what it tells us about where this presidency is headed?

STEPHANIE: I served as one of eight members on the Biden-Sanders “unity task force” on the economy. Some of the other members are now in the administration. I’m not sure exactly what I expected to see from Biden in his first 100 days, but the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan Act went beyond anything I would have anticipated.

And they’re not done. Later this week, we’ll get the details of a multi-trillion-dollar infrastructure package. It will almost certainly be too small, given the enormous challenges we face, and it isn’t clear how much of the proposed spending they will try to “pay for” with higher taxes. If they insist on raising a slew of taxes to offset all (or mostly all) of the spending, it could make it more difficult to hold all 50 Senate Democrats together. Any slippage risks paring back the price tag and, thus, delivering an even smaller package.  

But it’s encouraging to see the president recognize that temporary relief wasn’t enough. I think he knows that he can’t afford to preside over the kind of “recovery” we experienced after the Great Recession of 2007-2009. That’s what the “Build Back Better” agenda is about.

Biden is no socialist, but he does seem to understand that his presidency will be judged, in large part, on the degree to which his policies deliver material improvements in people’s lives.

It’s way too early for comparisons to FDR and LBJ. I think Harvey Kaye, who has written several books on FDR, has this right. He tweeted that Biden will be less like FDR or LBJ and more like Dwight Eisenhower if Dems succeed in passing an infrastructure bill but can’t bust the filibuster and pass the PRO Act and the For the People Act.

ANAND: The dog that didn’t bark during the rescue plan debate was deficit anxiety. You’ve devoted years of life to training that dog to stop barking. Can you explain what you observed in this debate regarding deficit angst fading from the culture, and why that matters?

STEPHANIE: Back in March 2020, I said, “It took a virus to kill the deficit myth.” It’s not dead, but you’re right. It’s been dormant for the last year. Angst over the deficit faded as soon as Covid became a national emergency. Congress spun out multiple packages without so-called “pay-fors.” The biggest — the CARES Act — was a $2.2 trillion spending bill. We got another one ($900 billion) in December and one more ($1.9 trillion) about a month ago. All of it added to the deficit.

Occasionally, the deficit still came up. Remember, the bipartisan group that worked out the $900 billion package in December openly worried about the “price tag” and whittled the survival checks down to $600. But Biden defended the $1.9 trillion by invoking the founding fathers, who he explained had given the federal government the ability to do what state and local governments can’t do — deficit-spend! He publicly embraced the deficit in a way I haven’t seen any president do in my lifetime.

What I’m watching for now is where the administration goes next. The Treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, raised concerns about debt and deficits in her confirmation hearings, and she has a long history of worrying about a phantom debt crisis. She has talked about the need to “pay for” the parts of the Build Back Better agenda that are permanent, “to not raise long-term deficits.” The Obama administration’s pivot to deficit reduction remains an open wound in my heart. I hope the Biden team will turn a blind eye to the deficit and stay focused on healing the real economy.

ANAND: You are a leading champion of what’s called Modern Monetary Theory. It’s a domain with a devoted fan base and many people who don’t understand a thing about it. Give me the explanation you’d give to a 10-year-old about what the old thinking was and what MMT seeks to replace it with.

STEPHANIE: The first chapter in my book is called “Don’t Think of a Household.” I open with a Sesame Street reference, so this is an explanation that most 5-year-olds can grasp. For those who grew up watching the show, a frequent segment was aimed at helping kids distinguish things that are alike from things that have some fundamentally different characteristics.

“One of these things is not like the other,” the song went. So think about these four things: A household, a business, state and local governments, and the federal government. The first three share something important in common: none of them can issue the U.S. dollar. In order to spend, they must first come up with the money.

The federal government is completely different. It has the sole legal authority to issue the currency. Biden was right! Article 1, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution enshrined that power. Unlike the rest of us, the federal government can spend money it doesn’t have. New dollars are created every time the federal government spends.

Take the Covid relief package. Congress didn’t go out and “find” $1.9 trillion before passing that legislation. It didn’t have to, because it has something the rest of us don’t — the power of the purse. The bill effectively ordered up $1.9 trillion new dollars from a bank called the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve carries out payments on behalf of Treasury, using nothing more than a computer keyboard to change the appropriate bank account numbers.

If you received one of those $1,400 stimulus checks, that money was keystroked into existence to help your family. If you’re unemployed, and you’re getting an extra $300 a week in unemployment benefits, you’re also receiving newly created dollars, courtesy of the federal government.

If households, businesses, governors, and mayors had this power, they would plug any holes in their budgets on their own. But they can’t. They are financially constrained. The federal government isn’t.

MMT is about providing an accurate description of the monetary system that exists today and government finance mechanics. In other words, MMT describes how things work. We’re not on a gold standard anymore, but we haven’t come to terms with what that means.

We still have this idea that the federal government needs our money in order to pay its bills. That is wrong. Could Congress spend too much? Absolutely! But the punishment for overspending is inflation, not insolvency, contrary to what Ron Paul, Ted Cruz, and Lindsey Graham would have us believe.

At its core, MMT is about replacing the (flawed) concept of a government budget constraint with a natural resource (inflation) constraint. It’s not that there aren’t any limits. There are! But they’re not on the financing side (as we have been trained to believe). Our government cannot run “out of money,” as President Obama once falsely claimed. We cannot end up like Greece, and, contra these economists, we were never facing a fiscal crisis.

MMT teaches us to ask not, “How will you pay for it?” but “How will you resource it?” The politics are hard, but coming up with the money for Medicare for All, tuition-free college, or a huge infrastructure package is the easy part. Managing the use of our productive resources, and respecting our ecological constraints, is the defining challenge of our time.

ANAND: How significant is the new child benefit, and do you think it creates the rudiments of a basic income in American life?

STEPHANIE: It’s significant. Anytime you can cut child poverty in half with a stroke of the pen, it is, as Biden says, “a big f-ing deal.” It is life-changing and significant for millions of families. It shows that poverty is and always has been a policy choice. But it’s also, potentially, a temporary improvement in their economic station.

It’s also the case that the aid is targeted to a particular group of people based on specific identified needs (i.e., child-related expenses), so in that respect, it is not like a universal basic income. It does get us closer to a point where every person has a guaranteed minimum income. However, it is also being considered in concert with an expansion of pre-K and a buildout of other care-related infrastructure, so it’s not just “give them cash and let the market sort it out.”

ANAND: What do you think about many of these most significant — even philosophically significant — elements of the American Rescue Plan being temporary and requiring renewal before long? Is this a dangerous way of going about things, or perhaps a clever way of whetting the public appetite for change and then pushing it through when that appetite has grown?

STEPHANIE: Remember that Democrats passed the latest rescue package through a process known as budget reconciliation. And remember that the Senate is currently bound by the Byrd Rule, which, among other things, prevents lawmakers from using reconciliation to pass legislation that increases the deficit outside the 10-year budget window.

So it’s a bit like when Republicans passed their tax cuts in December 2017. They used reconciliation as well, and they had to sunset specific provisions to comply with Byrd. Specifically, they made the corporate tax cuts permanent, but the individual income tax cuts temporary.

There was just no way for Democrats to get a package through a standalone bill with the filibuster in place. To have the kind of freedom to do bold, FDR-like stuff, they need to get rid of a whole suite of self-imposed budget rules and constraints. I think you’re right, though. The public’s appetite has been whetted. Unlike the GOP tax cuts, Biden’s rescue package was enormously popular, and that should make it easier for lawmakers to turn some of the temporary measures into longer-term commitments.

ANAND: I wanted to ask you about the minimum wage. The increase to $15 was famously removed from this rescue plan. But the same legislators like Senator Joe Manchin, who didn’t like that provision, didn’t have a problem with $1.9 trillion of government spending.

If I’m generous, it makes me wonder if the concern is the pain on small businesses. Is there any way to raise the minimum wage but spare small businesses the burden — via some public support that would, in essence, make the society pay that increase, not individual firms? Is that a terrible idea?

STEPHANIE: I think there is a way, but it’s not really about making society pay. Lawmakers could negotiate a tax cut for small businesses to get the votes needed to raise the minimum wage. It’s basically how Congress did it the last time the minimum wage was increased.

In 2007, Congress amended the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to gradually raise the federal minimum wage from $5.15 per hour to $7.25 per hour. How did it happen? The bill was introduced in the House on January 5, 2007, and passed on January 10. All 233 House Democrats voted “aye.” Eighty-two Republicans joined them in voting “aye.”

A cloture motion — to stop debate and move to a vote — in the Senate failed after President George W. Bush said he wanted tax cuts for small business owners who might be adversely impacted. The Senate included the tax cuts, and the amended bill sailed through with a vote of 94-3. I don’t see why we couldn’t do something like that again.

ANAND: So here’s confusion I hear a lot. Modern Monetary Theory proposes that we should stop thinking about what programs we can do in terms of what taxes we can raise.

Yet there are these important calls for raising taxes on the ultra-rich — and whether it’s Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, they justify them in large part because of what can be paid for with the revenues. Is this a problematic way to pitch it?

Should we do a wealth tax? And if not for paying for things, then why?

STEPHANIE: First, the economics behind the conventional way of thinking about taxes is simply flawed. As the New York Federal Reserve's former head observed way back in 1946, “Taxes for Revenue are Obsolete.” The conventional wisdom derives from outmoded, gold-standard thinking, and we should stop debating tax policy as if we have a monetary system that is no longer with us. State and local governments need tax revenue to operate. The federal government does not. To have a fruitful discussion about federal tax policy, the word “revenue” should never come up.

In addition to getting the economics wrong, I believe it is politically harmful to pretend that we cannot afford to fix our crumbling infrastructure, or care for our people, unless and until we successfully wrest part of Jeff Bezos’ fortune away from him.

I mean, come on. Congress just did something that will halve child poverty, and it didn’t raise a single tax to do it. So, of course, we don’t need to tax the rich in order to be able to spend trillions on programs that benefit the majority of the population. As I argued here, we’ve had that power all along.

Here’s how I put it in “The Deficit Myth”:

We can, and must, tax the rich. But not because we can’t afford to do anything without them. We should tax billionaires to rebalance the distribution of wealth and income and to protect the health of our democracy.

But we don’t need to crack open their piggy banks to eradicate poverty or to have the federal job guarantee with a living wage that Coretta Scott King fought for. We already have the tools we need. Feigning dependence on those with incredible wealth sends the wrong message, making them appear more vital to our cause than they are.

I think every MMT scholar strongly favors substantial tax increases on the wealthiest people in our society — not so much because they’re not paying their fair share but — because they have been taking more than their fair share for too long, something you’ve written about yourself. We have dangerous levels of income and wealth inequality, and that is all the justification I need to support many of the tax increases Senators Warren and Sanders have proposed.

But we must go further. Senator Warren admits that the uber-wealthy will barely feel the pinch of her 2 percent wealth tax (escalating by another 1 percent on fortunes over $1 billion). Why? Because, she admits, their wealth tends to grow at an annual clip that far exceeds 2 or 3 percent, meaning it doesn’t get us to a place where we’re dealing with extreme concentrations of wealth.

Ironically, I think this has to do with the fact that the wealth tax is being touted primarily as a way to “pay for” parts of the progressive agenda. It’s almost as if the goal is to peel off just enough to claim that it will “pay for” universal pre-K, some student debt cancellation, etc., rather than to aggressively deal with the concentrations of wealth that have been undermining our democracy.

That may be changing. I noticed last week that Senator Sanders seems to be inching closer to the MMT view. As Niv Elis wrote in the Hill, “Sanders also made it clear that he sees the issue not so much as a matter of paying for favored policies, but in creating a more equitable society.”

ANAND: Given the historical residue of the Cold War and the lingering American fear of big government and communism around the corner, how can those who want what you want in terms of economic policy do a better job of pitching their ideas to those millions of members of the public who are skeptical, if not hostile?

STEPHANIE: I think Biden is a pretty terrific messenger. He sold the population on the need for a nearly $2 trillion rescue package, and he’s on the verge of barnstorming the country to build support for another $3 to $4 trillion for his Build Back Better agenda. He could go even bigger, and I think he could do it without giving the other side any rope to hang him with.

It’s not communism or socialism but a kind of protectionism that he could successfully lean into to build support for a more progressive suite of economic policies.

Donald Trump successfully pushed a protectionist narrative. A typically racist and ugly kind of protectionism, but protectionism nonetheless. Much of it was purely racist. It was about protecting “us” from “them.” But he also spoke of the economic system's failures and the way he intended to protect workers from raw trade deals and the like.

“Help is on the way,” he bloviated, pretending to understand the pain of working-class voters who had seen their towns and communities become shadows of their former selves, hollowed out by decades of neoliberal trade, labor, and environmental policies.

Biden wouldn’t be selling communism or socialism, but he could sell America on a different kind of protectionism.

And now we come full circle. FDR’s Economic Bill of Rights was a protectionist document. It enumerated a set of essential protections that should be afforded to every person in this country. The right to a job and a decent wage, the right to operate a business free of unfair competition and monopolies, the right to an education, to housing and health care, and to a secure retirement.

We all want the sense of security that comes from knowing that whatever the vagaries of capitalism may throw our way, there are certain safeguards in place to protect all of us from poverty and deprivation.

Biden could even one-up FDR, presenting us with a 21st-century version of an Economic Bill of Rights. Something along these lines.

ANAND: For years, my plea has been that we have to end the age of capital — this neoliberal era — and launch an age of reform. Where do you think we are at this moment in time on that long arc?

STEPHANIE: I’d say we’re closer than we’ve been in a long time, but it could well get much worse before it gets better. I hope I’m wrong, but climate change is going to confront us with some very bad circumstances. If we can’t rebuild basic levels of empathy and communitarian commitment, those bad circumstances are going to make us meaner, more scared, more selfish, and ultimately more violent than we already are.

Stephanie Kelton is an economist, professor, and former advisor to Bernie Sanders'  2016 presidential campaign. You can order her latest book, “The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People's Economy,” here. This interview was edited and condensed for clarity.