Mental cages

We have social stratification (rich and poor) because most people insist on being slaves. Because of this, when I see an intelligent comment about money, I know that readers’ responses to it will always take one of four forms…

[1] Hostility

[2] Apathy (i.e. no response at all)

[3] Meaningless gibberish

[4] Some combination of 1-through-3

Any of the four result in more collective poverty and slavery.

Below is an intelligent comment about money that I did not write. It’s from the reader response section below the article.

Since the U.S. government uses a fiat currency, it can never go broke. It can literally create money out of thin air. Anyone who says that the US is going broke either doesn’t understand our monetary system, or is lying for political reasons. Families, cities, states, and corporations can go broke, since they aren’t allowed create money out of thin air, but the US government can create money without limit. There’s no maximum ceiling that once exceeded causes bankruptcy. Unlike charities, churches, individuals, cities, and states, we can afford to help those who need assistance, especially since we seem to have an unlimited cash flow for the Military-Industrial-Complex.

One reader responds to this with [3] meaningless gibberish.

No, the US does not create money out of thin air. You do not understand the monetary system. If the US were simply printing money that was essentially worthless, a claim made by ideologues of the Right (Ryan. Paul) and the Left (Stein) inflation would have long ago erased any value. To the contrary, the dollar has retained, even gained value against other currencies, gold, whatever measure you apply. Congress played with that strength by threatening to suspend debt payments. Those debts are largely to ourselves.

Typical bullshit.

The first person comes back with this…

Yes the U.S. government does create money out of thin air. We have a fiat currency, not a currency based on finite resources such as gold, silver, lead, or dirt. There is no limit to the amount of money the federal government can create. We control how much we create to avoid unchecked inflation or deflation. But if we really wanted to, we could create a trillion-dollar coin tomorrow, pay off all of our debt, and then destroy the coin. If you believe that the U.S. government can go bankrupt, then you would have to believe that there is a ceiling on the amount of currency it can create.

Good, except the U.S. government has no “debts” in the sense of borrowing its spending money.  Also, there is no need to create a “trillion dollar coin,” just as there is no need to create a “trillion point coin” for a sports scoreboard.

But at least this reader has a clue.

Then a different reader chimes in, again using [3] meaningless gibberish…

That well is about to dry up, as a third of international trade is already bypassing the U.S. dollar and being conducted in direct currency exchange, mostly between Russia, China, Iran and various developing nations in Asia and South America. Even Canada has a direct exchange agreement with China. But if you look at the membership of the China initiated AIIB, you wonder, when the dyke will break and the greenback will be completely sidelined.

Nonsense. The U.S. government could create as many dollars as it liked out of thin air, even if the dollar was not the world’s most widely used currency. Monaco is only two square kilometers in size, which (if it was a perfect square) would measure only 1414 x 1414 meters (1546 x 1546 yards). Monaco had its own currency (the Monégasque franc) which was legal tender in Monaco, France and Andorra — until Monaco adopted the euro on 1 Jan 1999.

Other reader responses are equally meaningless, and I will not take the time to debunk them. The point is that most people are voluntarily enslaved. They enslave themselves. As the old saying goes, “When the disciple is ready, the guru appears,” meaning that we cannot be taught until we are genuinely willing to listen. Such willingness is rare.

Some people are slaves because they are lazy and arrogant. Other people are slaves because they are selfish assholes. Here’s a cowardly example of the latter from that same thread of reader comments….

For healthcare to be affordable, some people must do without it and DIE! That’s the unfiltered truth if you can handle it. If there is always an ability and willingness buy something regardless of price, it’ll never be cheap. Why will I sell a car for $15,000 if everyone will buy it at $150,000? If society will find a way to pay for Healthcare regardless of the costs, healthcare will NEVER be affordable and ultimately when you run out of other people’s money, society will go broke! It’s that simple.

Cute.

Anyway let’s rise from this cesspool and go to a different article

MMT begins with the premise that a monetary sovereign, such as the United States government, does not need to collect funds in order to spend funds. Because the U.S. government issues currency backed by its own full faith and credit, denominates its debts only in that currency, and floats its exchange rates, it does not face a solvency constraint. It cannot, legally speaking, “go broke.” In this way, it is profoundly unlike a local government, business, or household. It need not fear its own debts in the same manner. It need not balance its budget — in the short run or the long run. It need not tax, borrow, or fine in order to “afford” social programs… or social punishment.

Sounds good, except that the U.S. government does not borrow its spending money, and therefore has no “debts.”

MMT presses us to reimagine money as a public tool rather than a private commodity, and meditate on what exactly this should mean for society.

Sounds good, except that we don’t need to “reimagine” money. We just need to cut the bullshit.

The article is very long-winded, and says what we already know…

Without sufficient federal financing, the only way courts can fulfill their function in the criminal legal system is by imposing fines and fees, and this will inevitably disproportionately hurt poor communities of color.

 Yes, and that’s the whole point of austerity: to crush the lower classes, and thereby widen the gap between them and the upper classes.

Then comes a lot of stuff that we already know, but it’s worth repeating anyway.

As long as we’re talking dollars, U.S. government payments can be met. During the debt ceiling debates, even the elites pointed this out: Greenspan, Bernanke, Krugman, Buffet. As far back as 1945, in a talk delivered to the American Bar Association, New York Fed Chair Beardsley Ruml stated flat out that we do not collect federal taxes in order to spend federal money.  In 1995, Paul Samuelson, a Nobel Prize winning economist, acknowledged that the “superstition” that the federal budget must be balanced is part of an “old fashioned religion,” meant to hush people who might otherwise demand the government create more money. The U.S. government cannot run out of dollars. If you take a Corporate Finance class at a law school, one of the first things they’ll tell you is to assume zero risk when accounting for U.S. Treasury bonds, because the payments will always clear.

Unlike you or me, the U.S. government does not face a financial survival constraint. It can always pay. On the asset side of the federal government’s balance sheet is essentially a massive INFINITY sign. So why doesn’t it spend more money? It’s a mix of malice, miseducation, and misunderstanding.

Stopping austerity will not eliminate the drive to subordinate people of color, but it will at least remove a great lie used to justify certain horrors.

When earnest liberal bureaucrats or even rebellious lawyers make demands on the state they get caught up with the question, “How are you going to pay for it?” as if the government were a household that must collect or borrow before it can spend.

Banks do not lend out deposits or even key their lending to a pile of deposits. They generate credit and because they have special legal privileges, their IOUs are very valuable. They lend and borrow whenever they see a profitable opportunity to do so, knowing the state will back them up if things go really poorly. They’re higher up on the food chain.

Lots of good stuff there, but afterward in the comments section a reader exhibits EBS (Ellen Brown Syndrome), claiming that all money is created by banks as loans.

This delusion is so absolute that no one in the universe can get you out of it. Only you can.

Cameron has a point

Neoliberal politicians want to cut social programs that help average people, in order to increase the gap between the rich and the rest.

For instance, former British PM David Cameron claims that austerity cuts are necessary, since U.K. government money is limited. Therefore, Cameron says, if you question austerity, you are “selfish.”

Cameron has a point, in a twisted way.

Suppose that you defend Cameron’s lie that money is limited, and that the U.S. and U.K. governments need tax revenue. And suppose that you also oppose austerity. In that case you would be claiming that U.K. government money is limited, while you want government spending to be unlimited.  This is a contradiction. To maintain this contradiction, you live in a dream world. Since you refuse to awaken from your dream-world, you are indeed selfish.

For the U.S. and U.K. governments, austerity is an attack on the lower classes. The beauty of this scam is that it lets neoliberals claim that there is no austerity. After all, the federal government still spends money on weapons makers. Right?

The Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier was supposed to carry F-35 fighters, but the F-35 program is six years behind schedule and tens of billions of dollars over budget. (Today’s military contractors intentionally produce trash that never becomes operational, so that government dollars never stop rolling in.) Britain initially planned to put 36 of the planes on each carrier, but at $300 million per plane (and rising) this number has shrunk to 12, assuming the planes ever become usable.

What gets me is that, judging by reader comments in British blogs, average Britons love such boondoggles. They boast about these toys. They believe David Cameron’s lies about government money being limited, but they are okay with limitless money being spent on weapons systems. And they wonder why they become poorer each day.

I think Ellen Brown means well, but because of her errors, she ultimately does more harm than good.

The P.E.P. phenomenon

I am disgusted by what I call the “PEP” phenomenon (Progressive Except for Palestine) in which people cry for refugees, immigrants, minorities, the poor, the sick, the elderly and so on, while they also cheer Israeli atrocities, and U.S. wars.  I am thinking of one blogger specifically.

Every two or three years the Israelis bombard the Gaza Death Camp. They destroy schools, hospitals, day care centers, apartment buildings and so on, round the clock for two months. They call it “mowing the grass.” Many Israelis gather on hilltops to watch with glee as their victims are exterminated below.  Politicians throughout the West cheer the slaughter, proclaiming that Israel has a “right to defend itself” against its victims.  Elizabeth Warren said this during the last major bombardment. (This is why she is beloved by the one blogger I have in mind). Bernie Sanders is even worse.

My point: if you claim to care about the poor, the sick, the elderly and so on, but you support Israeli atrocities (or U.S. wars), then you are a lying, psychopathic P.O.S. just like that one blogger.

I mention this because the Israelis are preparing yet another cowardly bombardment of Gaza. It’s been three years since their last attack, and they are overdue. The proxy war against Syria has bogged down, and Netanyahu badly needs a distraction, since he is mired in three different corruption scandals. Netanyahu says he may call for early elections. Anything to distract the masses.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain and the UAE (all of them Israeli allies) are angry with Qatar for, among other things, giving humanitarian support to the Gaza victims.  These four nations will bless an Israeli attack.

On 12 June the Israelis cut electricity to Gaza to four hours per day, hoping to provoke a response from their victims in the Gaza Death Camp. When the Palestinians didn’t take the bait, the Israelis cut their electricity to two hours per day, and at random hours. This during a heat wave. The power can come on in the middle of a workday, or late at night when everyone is trying to sleep. No power means no fan and no fridge. When there is electricity, it has been cut from 120 megawatts down to 80. The normal strategies for cooling off in the summer heat — including showers, swimming, air conditioning and electric fans — have disappeared. Drinking water is rare. If the Palestinians in Gaza don’t respond soon (so that Israel has a pretext to start bombing them) the Israelis will cut them off completely.

But remember, Israel has “a right to defend itself.”

Water reaches Gaza homes only once a week, and for a few hours. Desalination plants are functioning at only 15% of their capacity. More than 108 million liters of untreated sewage flows every day into the Mediterranean. Without access to clean water, 1.45 million people in Gaza are at risk of contracting diseases from drinking contaminated water. They have been sealed up in Gaza for eleven years now.

So I think “fuck you” when I see that blogger give lip service to “progressive” issues, while he also fanatically supports Israeli atrocities.

Perhaps you know who I’m talking about.

Democrat behavior

Many people are angered and confused by Democrat behavior.

“I know that Democrats are owned by moneyed interests, but don’t Democrats want to win elections?”

Yes they do, but “winning” for the typical Democrat does not mean winning a majority in Congress, nor winning a victory for progressive ideology. “Winning” means simply staying in office. It means preventing an electoral defeat by a Democrat challenger. This requires money (i.e. bribes). The more money behind you, the more easily you can stay in office. There are exceptions to this rule, but they are not common.

To get bribes, you must obey the money masters. For example, you must make sure that the American masses never get Universal Medicare. You can pretend to want Universal Medicare, but you may never vote for it, unless you want to be defeated in the next election, which comes every two years in the House of Representatives.

Michigan Rep. John Conyers has 112 co-sponsors for his “Medicare for All” bill, but the co-sponsors put their names to the bill merely for show. Their game is an old one. Conyers (now 88 years old) has introduced this bill in almost every session of Congress for the last fifty two years.

Democrats are permitted to give half-hearted support to “Medicare for All,” but they must not whip the masses into a frenzy of hope. They are permitted to co-sponsor a bill, as long as they prevent it from coming to a vote, while they keep the masses distracted by endlessly lying about Russia, Iran, North Korea, “ISIS,” and so on. Democrats also distract by blaming everything on Republicans, even as Democrats act exactly like Republicans.

In short, most Democrats act for purely selfish reasons. They are motivated by self-interest, not by ideology. Can we blame them? After all, the American public is willfully stupid. Most Americans refuse to admit what they see with their own eyes: that the U.S. government can create infinite money, and thus has no “debt crisis,” and no need for tax revenue.

And most Americans are ungrateful. Suppose you were a Democrat in Congress who championed Universal Medicare, and it passed. If Americans got Universal Medicare, they would give you “the bird” (screw you) and say, “It’s about time, motherf–ker! What took you so damned long?” Therefore why not collect the bribe money?

If we feel angered and confused by Democrat behavior, it is because we live in a dream-world in which we imagine that Democrats “care.” We imagine that Democrats are “better” no matter how Republican they become. (In some respects Democrats are more Republican than are Republicans — e.g. pushing for mandatory vaccination.)

Our delusion is basically that we would be lost without Democrats. This delusion traps us in a co-dependent relationship. We stay with our partners no matter how much they abuse us. (“Democrats are always better.”) I know one pro-Democrat blogger who spent an entire post lambasting Democrats for their resistance to Single Payer, only to blame Democrat resistance on Republicans at the end. This is mental illness. And this illness is what keeps us from having Medicare-for-All, since the illness makes us support Democrats no matter how much they block Medicare-for-All. If we were free of this illness, then we would not give our energy to any opponent of Medicare-for-All. We would express our freedom in myriad ways, from our choice in consumer products to TV shows to blogs, and so forth.

Oh, and speaking of bullshit distractions…

Democrats are not “clueless.” It is the public that is clueless. We see this in people who still cheer for Bernie Sanders, despite Sanders being a 100% sell-out and a warmonger. (Also, when it comes to Palestinians sealed up in the Gaza Death Camp, Sanders is a Jewish supremacist.)

So if Democrats and Republicans are identical, and Greens don’t have a chance, what can we do? As individuals, nothing, except to not give any energy or attention to the lies and the bullshit.

You see, I don’t blame the rich or the politicians for our woes. I blame average people who participate in the lies.

One candle on the dark (for good or ill) cannot be seen more than a few feet away, but millions of candles can be seen from outer space.

The item below is not relevant to the post above, but I thought it was funny…


 

Taboos

French society during the 1700s was divided into three groups: the nobility, the clergy, and the peasants (99% of the French population). The nobility owned the land. The clergy protected the nobility, and enjoyed special powers and privileges. The peasants  toiled in poverty.

The clergy maintained its power by lying. For example a French clergyman named Irenaeus invented the lie that all peasants were born into “original sin.” (His lie soon spread throughout Christianity).

(And no, “original sin” was never in the Bible. Indeed very few Christian beliefs actually come from the Christian Bible. )

Because of “original sin,” it was God’s will that each peasant had to toil until death for his or her owners (i.e. toil for the nobility). Failure to toil for one’s owners, and failure to grovel before clergymen like Irenaeus, meant eternal damnation.

The peasants believed this lie because it helped them to make sense of their misery. Their belief was a mental prison, but it promised a heavenly reward after one’s death, on condition that they spent their entire lives in poverty, groveling before the clergy and the nobility.

Just as each peasant was cursed at birth by “original sin,” so is each peasant today cursed at birth by the fake “national debt crisis.”

Once again such lies help the peasants make sense of their misery, while helping to also maintain the social strata.  Poverty and social strata are maintained in all societies by lies that rich people use to justify their crimes, and that peasants use to justify their respective places in the pecking order. The peasants use the lies against each other, and especially against anyone they regard as “inferior.”

Lies that become ingrained in society are taboos that may not be questioned, and may not be called taboos. (Instead, they are called “common sense.”)

Each society has a nexus of norms and taboos (based on lies) that we call a “culture.” Some norms and taboos are shared by many societies. Other norms and taboos are limited to one society, or to a handful of societies. Lies about money are shared worldwide.

When lies and taboos are programmed into a peasant during their childhood, the lies form part of his identity, such that he feels personally attacked if you question his bullshit.

In adulthood we learn additional taboos as we interact with society…

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, all societies have lies, plus taboos against exposing the lies. Taboos can be used to reveal the histories of societies when other records are lacking.

The penalty for breaking a taboo depends on your place in society. Very rich people face little or no penalties. Poor people face severe penalties.  Germany will imprison you for five years if you question the “holocaust”™ nonsense, even if you are not a German national, and even if you were outside Germany when you questioned the hoax.

Most societies have a taboo against speaking the truth about government finances.

I mention  all this because just now I was reading about a protest last weekend in London, led by Jeremy Corbyn, who claims to oppose austerity, but who seeks more austerity in the form of deficit reduction. The masses likewise want austerity in the form of tax increases.

The London protest was also against mass privatization, but privatization cannot be halted as long as the masses obey the taboo against admitting that government finances are infinite. It’s like having a toothache: you can’t have relief as long as society obeys a taboo against dentistry.

Taboos cause us to repeat the same thing over and over without getting anywhere. In the video below (too boring to watch) Bill Moyers says, “It’s still possible for a single book to shake the foundations, rattle clichés, upend dogma, unnerve ideologues, and arm everyday people with the knowledge they need to fight back against the predatory powers that have robbed them of their birthright as citizens.”

Moyers is talking about the book on the left which, like the book on the right, everyone talks about, but no one reads, since it’s too boring. (People leave these books on their coffee tables to show they are with the “in crowd.”)

The video below is too boring to watch, and it features the notorious liar Paul Krugman. My point is that Piketty’s book says nothing new (capitalist inequality can only be reversed through state intervention) but people buzz about it because of the taboo against speaking the truth about government finances. Truth is blasphemy. We avoid mentioning the disease so we can chatter about its symptoms forever.

“Free speech” in Germany

With increasing poverty comes increasing social unrest, which requires increasing control of information to keep the peasants in line. This means censoring the Internet.

For example, today (30 June 2017) the German parliament outlawed “hate speech” and “fake news” on the Internet. Whatever people share with each other must now be approved by German politicians and bureaucrats. Any social media company (e.g. Facebook) that fails to remove “hate speech” and “fake news” will be fined up to €50 million (USD $57 million). Also, whoever a company designates to deal with complaints about “hate speech and “fake news” will be fined up to five million euros if that person does not meet government censorship requirements.

The German law does not define “hate speech” and “fake news.” German politicians and bureaucrats will decide, and their decision will be final (the new law does not include any means to appeal censorship). If you question the government’s hate speech and their fake news, you will be deleted. If you question war and imperialism, you will be deleted. If you question any lie told by the government or the media, you will be deleted. If you question the holocaust™ you will be imprisoned for five years.

Also the law does not clarify whether it applies to content that was posted outside of Germany. (In February 2007 the District Court of Mannheim Germany sentenced Ernst Zundel to five years for questioning the holocaust™ while Zundel had been living in the USA and Canada.)

In July 2016, police raided the homes of 60 people accused of posting “racist” and “extreme” messages on social media. On 20 June 2017 German police raided the homes of 36 people in 14 states accused of posting “hate speech” online.

The law will require companies such as Facebook, Twitter and Google, (which owns YouTube) to delete things like Nazi symbols or holocaust™ denial within 24 hours of notification. Every six months, companies must publicly report the number of complaints they have received and how they have handled them.

German justice minister Heiko Maas, who was the driving force behind the bill, says, “Freedom of speech ends where the criminal law begins.” And criminal law is what Mass says it is. In 2016 Maas tried to outlaw sex in advertising, the same as radical Islamic nations have done. In 2015 he tried to expand the definition of sexual assault to include consensual sex between a woman and her male boss.

American media companies like Google and Facebook say that German politicians passed this law because they are jealous of the size and power of American media companies. Forbes annually ranks the world’s largest companies based on revenue, profit, assets, and market value. In its 2016 compilation, seven of the top 10 tech companies in the world were American. Meanwhile Europe has just three companies in the top 20 (Germany’s SAP, Sweden’s Ericsson, and Finland’s Nokia).

In any case there were already laws against making threats online. This new law is not about reducing hate. It is about increasing control. The items that German politicians will order deleted are those that threaten the rich and the bankers. Anything that displeases Germany’s rulers will be “hate speech.” Objecting to the Germany military being involved in U.S. wars will be flagged as “hate speech.” Questioning Israeli atrocities is “hate speech.” Questioning the euro scam is “hate speech.” Questioning media lies is “fake news.” Questioning government extremism is “extremism.”

What a twisted world.


 

 

Today I saw a police car painted in “gay pride” colors. A friend of mine said this is a growing phenomenon in the U.S., U.K. and Canada. Police and ambulances in “gay pride” colors. What do you think of it?

The sound of stupid

This is in connection with Ellen Brown’s latest blog post, which you see above. I once corresponded with Ellen Brown for a month, trying to explain the facts to her, but she was too “brilliant” to grasp reality.

Unfortunately her blog posts are reprinted in so-called “progressive” blogs, thereby sustaining the falsehood that the U.S. government needs tax revenue. From this falsehood come attacks on social programs as “unsustainable.”

Ellen also pushes the falsehood that all dollars are loans from bankers.

In reality, all euros are loans from bankers, but not all U.S. dollars, or Canadian dollars or Australian dollars. In fact the governments of all but a handful of nations create their own spending money out of thin air. Banks also create money out of thin air (as loans) but that is a separate matter.

As I said, all euros are created by banks as loans. Therefore any nation that uses the euro, and which has a trade deficit (like France and Greece) must fall further into debt each day. Consequently those nations’ governments must impose more austerity each day.  Therefore those nations’ politicians who cling to the euro, while also claiming to be “progressive” must be liars.

When the banker-vampires installed the SYRIZA coalition in Greece (Jan 2015) I commented on several blogs that SYRIZA was a fraud, since SYRIZA championed the euro. I said that Greece would have more austerity no matter what. Many people flamed me. I was correct, of course, and many people have awakened from their delusion about SYRIZA, but not all. For many people, just calling yourself “progressive” makes you progressive, no matter how neoliberal you actually are.

If your nation uses the euro, and has a trade surplus (like Germany) then your nation sucks energy and assets from nations that use the euro, and have a trade deficit. And Germany, like all parasites, claims to be the “host,” while claiming that its victims (e.g. Greece) are parasites. Meanwhile politicians in the host nations (e.g. Greece and France) cling to the euro because they are on the bankers’ payroll.

For the host nations, the euro makes endless austerity and mass privatization obligatory. Any politician who opposes the euro is condemned as a “fascist” (e.g. Marine Le Pen).

Anyway, regarding Ellen Brown’s latest blog post , if you start with false premises, you will proceed through false corollaries to false conclusions.

If the Federal Reserve raises the fed funds rate to 3.5% and sells its federal securities into the market, as it is proposing to do, by 2026 the projected tab will be $830 billion annually. That’s nearly $1 trillion owed by the taxpayers every year, just for interest!

Oh no!

Fortunately the Fed creates money out of thin air to pay interest on T-securities.  When you buy a T-security, it is exactly like when you buy a CD from a regular bank. Your money is automatically credited to a Fed savings account that is automatically created for you.  Later when your T-security (or your CD) matures, your money is debited from your Fed savings account, and is credited to your regular bank checking account, plus interest. Taxpayers owe nothing on this, and pay nothing. The computer-automated system simply changes the numbers in computer logs (otherwise known as bank accounts). This is how banks work.

Then Ellen spouts total gibberish…

Personal income taxes are at record highs, ringing in at $550 billion in the first four months of fiscal year 2017, or $1.6 trillion annually. But even at those high levels, handing over $830 billion to bondholders will wipe out over half the annual personal income tax take. Yet what is the alternative?

Japan seems to have found one. While the US government is busy driving up its “sovereign” debt and the interest owed on it, Japan has been canceling its debt at the rate of $720 billion (¥80tn) per year. How? By selling the debt to its own central bank, which returns the interest to the government. While most central banks have ended their quantitative easing programs and are planning to sell their federal securities, the Bank of Japan continues to aggressively buy its government’s debt. An interest-free debt owed to oneself that is rolled over from year to year is effectively void – a debt “jubilee.”

WTF? This is claptrap. It’s meaningless. Federal income tax revenues are effectively destroyed upon receipt, and have nothing to do with paying back the “national debt.” Also, how can “Japan sell its debt to its own central bank”? This makes no sense. The “debt” is deposits in central bank savings accounts. All Japanese sovereign bonds (aka T-securities) are issued by the Bank of Japan. People buy Japanese T-securities in order to gain interest. Meanwhile the Japanese government creates its spending money out of thin air, just like the U.S. government. It has no need or use for tax revenues, or for interest from T-securities.

True, the US and Japanese governments gain interest from T-securities, because 40% of T-securities of the USA and Japan have been purchased by the governments of the USA and Japan.  (Hence 40% of the “national debt” is what the U.S. and Japanese governments owe themselves. So much for the “crisis.”) But as I said, the central governments have no need for this interest money.

The Bank of Japan is in the process of owning most of the outstanding government debt of Japan (it currently owns around 40%). BoJ holdings are part of the consolidated government balance sheet. So its holdings are in fact the accounting equivalent of a debt cancellation. If I buy back my own mortgage, I don’t have a mortgage.

What is Ellen smoking?  The Bank of Japan is not “in the process” of anything. This is the way it has always been. Ellen thinks the “national debt” is what the USA and Japan owe to bankers, or to China, or…someone.

The Saudis have deposited $700 billion in Fed savings accounts. Where did they get that $700 billion? For Ellen, the Saudis borrowed it from the Fed, so the Saudis could deposit it in the Fed. (Huh?) In reality they got $700 billion by selling oil to the USA. The $700 billion came partly from the U.S. government, and partly from banks that gave loans to people who wanted to buy Saudi oil.

Incidentally, last year the Pentagon evaluated China’s ownership of “U.S. debt” to see if it was a national security matter. The answer was no, since “ownership of U.S. debt” simply means that China has deposited $1.4 trillion in Fed savings accounts. That $1.4 trillion is seven percent of the total “national debt,” i.e. the national deposits / national assets. (Oh no!)

I’ll stop here, because Ellen proceeds to spout more and more of the same  gibberish. And her disciples lap it up.