Much of this week’s news items wouldn’t be news items if the Economic Democracy Act: had been adopted. Keep that in mind as you read:
• Rethinking Retirement. As the “silvering” of America gains momentum as increasing numbers of people enter their golden years (who thinks this stuff up, by the way?), concerns about “retirement” also gain increasing momentum. In the U.S., much of this concern focuses on the insecurity of Social Security, and the fears of people regarding any fundamental change in the system. This is seen in the recent backpedaling in a discussion about raising the age at which people qualify for Social Security benefits. Social Security’s characterization as the “third rail” (i.e., fatal if touched) of American politics holds true: “In an interview with Fox Business, host Maria Bartiromo asked [Social Security Administration Commissioner Frank] Bisignano if he’d consider increasing the age for full federal retirement benefits, which currently stands at 67. ‘I think everything’s being considered and will be considered,’ he said. . . . The Social Security Administration walked back his comments in an afternoon post on the social platform X. ‘Let me be clear: President Trump and I will always protect, and never cut, Social Security. That’s why we have made many vital reforms, such as cutting waste, fraud, and abuse from the program, to ensure the solvency of Social Security for future generations of Americans,’ the statement from Bisignano said. ‘Raising the retirement age is not under consideration,’ it added.” The only real solution is obvious, and was presented in the book, Capital Homesteading for Every Citizen (2004): 1) Abolish the special Social Security tax and merge it into general revenues, 2) Keep all current promises, 3) Make the system need-based, and 4) Adopt the Economic Democracy Act.
 |
| Albert Edwards |
• U.S. On the Brink of a Depr/Rec/ession. As has become customary, some of the so-called experts are continuing to raise the specter of a coming recession, as depressions are now called since Lord Keynes abolished depressions for all time. Cassandras are always unpopular, but not always wrong. In an article in Business Insider, “Wall Street economists and investors seem mostly sanguine about the US economy's chances of avoiding a recession in the months ahead. This is despite the fact that the labor market seems to be on a losing streak lately. Though the unemployment has stayed relatively low, payroll growth in the US has been under 100,000 new jobs per month for four months now, which has historically happened during recessionary periods. The Bureau of Labor Statistics said earlier this month that it overstated the number of jobs added in the last 12 months by 911,000. Albert Edwards, the self-styled uber-bear strategist at Société Générale, says there is reason to be worried.” Admittedly, Wall Street and the secondary market plays a critical role in the global economy . . . but it is still not the primary market, and to set policy and practice on what is good for the secondary market instead of the primary market is like shifting an industry from producing new goods and services to focusing on reselling used, second-hand items. No economy can survive if it concentrates on speculation and gambling; there needs to be a focus on producing food, clothing, and shelter (and other stuff) for people to consume, not as counters in a high stakes gambling casino. The solution, of course, is to adopt the Economic Democracy Act.
 |
| Elon Musk |
• Universal High Income. Forget about the Universal Basic Income, or UBI. Elon Musk says that after AI and robots take everyone’s job, everyone will have a high income and be on Easy Street. As he was quoted in an article in Benzinga, “[I]ntelligent robots in humanoid form will far exceed the population of humans, as every person will want their own personal R2-D2 and C-3PO. And then there will be many robots in industry for every human to provide products & services.” Uh, huh. And who, exactly, is going to pay for all this, i.e., the “high income” by means of which people can buy all the stuff robots are producing? As the article continued, “America is already buried under trillions in debt, and funding a system where ‘everyone has the best of everything’ would mean rethinking the entire economic structure. Critics argue it’s a fantasy without a tax base to support it, while others counter that automation itself could generate the wealth needed. Skeptics point to today’s struggles as a warning sign. If the government can't fully fund Social Security or Medicare, how realistic is it to expect a brand-new universal income — let alone a ‘high’ one — to suddenly appear? As one response echoed, ‘If our government is cutting Social Security and Medicare, what makes you believe they’ll advocate for universal income — whether high or otherwise?’” Well, how about adopting the Economic Democracy Act?
 |
| Stephen Miran |
• What About the Fourth Mandate? As reported in an article in Fortune magazine, “If you asked the majority of Americans what the mandate of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) was, few would know and even less would care. Ask economists, Wall Street analysts, and even the Fed itself, they would likely recite the ‘dual mandate’: Price stability and maximum employment. . . . Only problem is, the Fed doesn’t have a dual mandate. It has a triple mandate. This was pointed out by Trump’s appointee to the FOMC, Stephen Miran, during his confirmation with the Senate Banking Committee this week. Miran recalled the Federal Reserve Act of the 1970s, that ‘Congress wisely tasked the Fed with pursuing price stability, maximum employment, and moderate long-term interest rates.’” Ummm . . . the only legitimate mandate here is price stability, as the original Federal Reserve Act of 1913 made clear, which sought to replace the previous government debt-backed reserve currencies with a single uniform, stable, and private sector asset-backed reserve currency . . . and (the real mandate) provide adequate liquidity for private sector commerce, industry, and agriculture. Nothing about funding government, stimulating employment, or manipulating interest rates. Just an adequate and sound reserve currency. This is the mandate built in to the Economic Democracy Act.
 |
| Gary Cohn |
• Tariffs Causing Unemployment. According to former Trump economic advisor (with emphasis on the former part of that) Gary Cohn, “businesses are feeling the insecurity of rising input costs thanks to tariffs. And because companies feel they can’t raise prices for consumers, they turn to what they can control. ‘The one lever they can pull to make sure they keep their margins intact is they can cut down on the cost of labor,’ Cohn said in an interview on Face the Nation.” This is in sharp contrast to White House spokesman Kush Desai, who declared “that President Trump’s tariffs have led to trillions of dollars of investment for building in the U.S. and hiring Americans. ‘The Administration remains focused on implementing a full suite of supply-side growth policies like tax cuts, deregulation, and energy abundance to reduce cost and restore the economic dynamism that Americans experienced during President Trump’s first term.’” Somebody is delusional . . . and it might not be Cohn. Of course, the real path off this rather dangerous route is to adopt the rational monetary and tax policies of the Economic Democracy Act.
• Kicking Consumers in the Teeth. If anything more was needed to demonstrate that reliance on tariffs for anything is not really a good idea, it is the news that Trump’s tariffs are bringing the government “very significant revenue” to the tune of $350 billion. This sounds really good . . . but what does it mean in real terms? All taxes are disincentives, and tariffs are a direct and highly regressive tax on consumption on the lower income classes that spend virtually all of their incomes on consumption. Every cent that goes to pay for a tariff is a cent that is not spent on consumption. No, it goes directly to government spending — and government, being non-productive, is a drain on the economy. As with all taxation, a tariff simply shifts spending from productive to non-productive, making a bad situation worse. Of course, the solution is to adopt the Economic Democracy Act.
 |
| Jamie Dimon |
• Dealing With Debt. Jamie Dimon is criticizing Trump’s drive for efficiency as a way of controlling spending and is even right . . . up to a point. Dimon says cutting costs isn’t going to do the trick, but there must be economic growth to enhance revenue: “[W]e haven’t really attacked the fiscal deficit problem yet. Growth will do some of that, I don’t know if it will do all of it.” Frankly, growth will not only “do some of that,” it’s the only thing that will do any of that. You can’t get out of debt by continuing to spend. Cutting costs just means you aren’t getting into debt as fast, but it doesn’t give you any way out of it. The only thing to do is to become productive, and the way to do that is to adopt the Economic Democracy Act.
 |
| Abigail Disney |
• Why Not Tax EVERYBODY? . . . after giving everybody something to tax? In an article in Fortune magazine, Disney Princess Heiress Abigail Disney bewailed the fact that so many ultra-wealthy individuals aren’t sharing their wealth. She has “called for a tax on the richest people in the U.S., saying it’s crazy for billionaires to hold on to their wealth. She is also a major philanthropist who’s donated tens of millions of dollars over the years. She’s among a group of ultrawealthy individuals who have made a commitment to give away their vast fortunes.” As she was quoted, “‘The need to tax rich people like me has never been so dire,’ Disney wrote in a 2024 op-ed titled, ‘World Leaders Have a Chance to Raise Taxes for Rich People Like Me. I’m Begging Them to Take It,’ published by the Guardian. ‘Extreme wealth concentration in the hands of a few oligarchs is a threat to democracy the world over.’” Abigail gets points for her concern, but extreme wealth concentration is not the cause, but the symptom. It’s not that some people have access to the means of becoming wealthy, but that the rest of us don’t. This could be fixed by adopting the Economic Democracy Act.
• Why Not a Real Solution? As reported by the Motley Fool, “President Trump signed his tax and spending bill into law on July 4. The White House touted the legislation as the president keeping his campaign promise to eliminate taxes on Social Security. ‘No tax on Social Security is a reality in the One Big Beautiful Bill,’ stated a press release. But the legislation did not actually end taxes on benefits. Instead, it created a new standard deduction that will offset taxes owed on benefits for many (but not all) Social Security recipients. Specifically, about 88% of seniors (aged 65 and older) will no longer pay taxes on Social Security, up from 64% before the legislation was signed into law. However, several members of Congress still want to make big changes to the Social Security program, and truly eliminating taxes on benefits is a common goal.” That’s nice . . . but why not push for a real solution? Something (okay, not something but the thing) like the Economic Democracy Act.
• Phantom Prosperity. The stock market is booming, the politicians are smirking, and America has been made great again. So, what’s the problem? Evidently, ordinary people are not seeing how all this greatness is doing anything except decreasing their quality of life and driving them slowly into poverty. In an article in USA Today, it is stated that “America’s middle class is spooked about the economy.” And exactly what is spooking them? “‘There was a big spike in confidence in the spring of this year among the middle class, and then it fell back down,’ said Jeremy Horpedahl, an economist at the University of Central Arkansas and adjunct scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute. Heading into autumn, big retailers report middle-class shoppers are combing bargain bins and hitting the checkout aisle with lighter carts. In an August earnings call, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon spoke of seeing ‘more adjustments’ in spending ‘in middle- and lower-income households’ than among higher-income consumers. In another earnings call, Kohl’s interim CEO Michael Bender reported that ‘our lower- to middle-income customers remain the most challenged,’ trading down to cheaper wares, ‘while our higher-income customers have proven to be more resilient.’” As usual, the solution is to adopt the Economic Democracy Act . . . and the problem is getting the powers-that-be to see it.
 |
| Jean Chatzky |
• Cutting Consumption to Save. All your retirement worries are over . . . if you started forty years ago and saved 10-15% of your gross income (and didn’t see this video) . . . and undermined the viability of the economy to do so. In an article in Yahoo! Finance, Jean Chatzky, host of the HerMoney podcast declared, “Knowing that you hit that 10-times [your annual salary] mark is a very easy benchmark to grab onto and something to aim for.” Nevertheless, Ms. Chatzky says to forget about objective numbers. Instead, “Focus on the process, not the number. ‘If you can get yourself to the point where you are putting away a consistent 15% of your income year in and year out for retirement — and that can include any matching dollars that you receive from an employer — you actually should hit those numbers.’” Unfortunately, if everyone saves 15% of his or her income every year, that translates into a decrease in consumer demand of 15% . . . and that spells an unending depression. The solution? Invest by using future savings that increase consumer power instead of past savings that decrease it, and that means adopting the Economic Democracy Act.
• Greater Reset “Book Trailers”. We have produced two ninety-second “Book Trailers” for distribution (by whoever wants to distribute them), essentially minute-and-a-half commercials for The Greater Reset. There are two versions of the videos, one for “general audiences” and the other for “Catholic audiences”. Take your pick.
• The Greater Reset. CESJ’s book by members of CESJ’s core group, The Greater Reset: Reclaiming Personal Sovereignty Under Natural Law is, of course, available from the publisher, TAN Books, an imprint of Saint Benedict Press, and has already gotten a top review on that website. It can also be obtained from Barnes and Noble, as well as Amazon, or by special order from your local “bricks and mortar” bookstore. The Greater Reset is the only book of which we’re aware on “the Great Reset” that presents an alternative instead of simply warning of the dangers inherent in a proposal that is contrary to natural law. It describes reality, rather than a Keynesian fantasy world. Please note that The Greater Reset is NOT a CESJ publication as such, and enquiries about quantity discounts and wholesale orders for resale must be sent to the publisher, Saint Benedict Press, NOT to CESJ.
• Economic Personalism Landing Page. A landing page for CESJ’s latest publication (now with an imprimatur), Economic Personalism: Property, Power and Justice for Every Person, has been created and can be accessed by clicking on this link. Everyone is encouraged to visit the page and send the link out to their networks.
• Economic Personalism. When you purchase a copy of Economic Personalism: Property, Power and Justice for Every Person, be sure you post a review after you’ve read it. It is available on both Amazon and Barnes and Noble at the cover price of $10 per copy. You can also download the free copy in .pdf available from the CESJ website. If you’d like to order in bulk (i.e., 52 or more copies) at the wholesale price, send an email to info@cesj.org for details. CESJ members get a $2 rebate per copy on submission of proof of purchase. Wholesale case lots of 52 copies are available at $350, plus shipping (whole case lots ONLY). Prices are in U.S. dollars.
• Sensus Fidelium Videos, Update. CESJ’s series of videos for Sensus Fidelium are doing very well, with over 155,000 total views. The latest Sensus Fidelium video is “The Five Levers of Change.” The video is part of the series on the book, Economic Personalism. The latest completed series on “the Great Reset” can be found on the “Playlist” for the series. The previous series of sixteen videos on socialism is available by clicking on the link: “Socialism, Modernism, and the New Age,” along with some book reviews and other selected topics. For “interfaith” presentations to a Catholic audience they’ve proved to be popular, edging up to 150,000 views to date. They aren’t really “Just Third Way videos,” but they do incorporate a Just Third Way perspective. You can access the playlist for the entire series. The point of the videos is to explain how socialism and socialist assumptions got such a stranglehold on the understanding of the role of the State and thus the interpretation of Catholic social teaching, and even the way non-Catholics and even non-Christians understand the roles of Church, State, and Family, and the human persons place in society.
Those are the happenings for this week, at least those that we know about. If you have an accomplishment that you think should be listed, send us a note about it at mgreaney [at] cesj [dot] org, and well see that it gets into the next “issue.” Due to imprudent and intemperate language on the part of some commentators, we removed temptation and disabled comments.
#30#