Government as a service must be disconnected from the the exclusive service to wealth because it is the "source" of wealth and is mandated to create it "for the common welfare" by no lesser authority than our Constitution.
We have distorted our concept of "state" issued money by regulation and laws that, such as the debt ceiling, present distortion to its fundamental purpose in molding and growing our society's common wealth. By that distortion all distribution and reclaiming of the ''STATE'S" sovereign currency is aimed at increasing wealth for an extreme minority and making assumptions not in evidence that "THEY" will share it in a manner compatible with economic justice for the greater population.
We, since as early as '34, have an operational disconnect between funding and revenue for the common purpose in our sovereign fiat currency that is available in infinite quantity to Congress. Taxation and bond issues are no longer "funding" mechanisms and only serve as control mechanisms to accomplish secondary goals, not the source of government's ability to spend.
There is no "infinite+1" accounting function that enhances government's ability to fund the public purpose, but we force our Congress and monetary system to be held to a false reality that supports the "appearance" of such a function. This creates the falsehood that the public purpose is dependent upon the already wealthy and their wealth must be extracted in like measure to what we wish to spend.
The most damaging measure we can take against the influence of extreme wealth is to make it irrelevant to the public purpose, as it always has been in reality. However, even the misery created by misunderstanding and outright lies in our government serves the purpose of wealth, so vast networks and fortunes have been dedicated to perpetuating the myth of their importance.
Left wing politicians are particularly fond of jousting with the impossible windmills the wealthy represent. They can be seen valiantly fighting for outcomes they know will not be and enrich their own coffers in the process of losing each battle. They, unlike the right, are not philosophically required to support the wealthy's perspective, so they work the dual roles between socialism and neoliberalism that they are most comfortable in.
