Google Search

Showing posts with label Global. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Global. Show all posts

Sunday, January 19, 2014

U.S. War on Poverty Failed While Global Poverty Declined 80%: Economic Liberalization Begets Prosperity and Equality


By Mary Theroux

50 years after LBJ declared a ?War on Poverty,? the U.S. would do well to take a page from the global playbook--whereby economic liberalization and more open trade has resulted in an 80% decline in abject poverty since 1976.

The graphs below, taken from the National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, ?Parametric Estimations of the World Distribution of Income,? surely ought to impress even the most avid central-planner:

To see how it happened, start with these graphs showing GDP (red) against the Poverty Rate (blue) for various regions over the past 40 years:

As the paper?s authors observe:

It is immediately visible that the series are almost perfect mirror images of each other: the poverty rate falls when per capita GDP rises and vice versa. ... In particular, we see no examples of poverty reduction without growth (or sustained rises with poverty accompanying growth) on a regional scale. [Emphasis added]
Thus, contrary to recent controversies around the issue, a rising tide does indeed raise all boats--regardless of region.

And for those decrying supposedly increasing inequality, the paper reveals very good news on this front as well--showing inequality declining in sync with poverty:

A look at China provides just one dramatic example. Since Nixon?s visit opening trade with China in 1972, and China?s subsequent ?Change, Reform, Open up? economic reforms beginning in 1978 and accelerating in the 1980s and ?90s, the Chinese economy has increased by 9.5% a year, resulting in vast improvements in both income levels and distribution:

While the paper?s authors did not include a survey of changes in economic policies across the regions covered by the study, any quick check against independent sources for such information makes its graphs just that much more exciting, with more and less dramatic improvements correlating with greater and lesser economic freedom.

It?s time for all who profess to care about the poor to join Bono in enlightenment. To all ?Progressives? in the U.S. bemoaning the U.S.?s flat poverty rate over the past 50 years, and ramping up to make 2014 the year of the fight against ?inequality?:

"Capitalism takes more people out of poverty than aid."
And the economic growth that brings individuals out of dependency flattens inequality.

On this 50th anniversary of a failed domestic War on Poverty, let?s bring this global lesson home and hold up those responsible for prolonging economic stagnation in the U.S. and increasing the numbers dependent on government assistance as the true villains in the inequality play.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Economy
- Saxo Bank CEO Warns of Collapse Into "Totalitarian" Society
- Does a Minimum Wage Reduce Poverty?
- Too Big to Pop
- Is Colorado Pot Overtaxed and Over-Regulated Already?
- Beanie Baby Founder Facing Prison Because He Only Paid Some $1 Billion In Taxes, Should Have Paid $1.0055 Billion
- UK: Young people 'feel they have nothing to live for,' third have contemplated suicide
- 70% Of Americans Have "No Faith" In Government
- Marc Faber 'Congratulates' Ben: "Well Done, Mr. Bernanke!"

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

*13tn: hoard hidden from taxman by global elite



Heather Stewart

A global super-rich elite has exploited gaps in cross-border tax rules to hide an extraordinary ?13 trillion ($21tn) of wealth offshore ? as much as the American and Japanese GDPs put together ? according to research commissioned by the campaign group Tax Justice Network.

James Henry, former chief economist at consultancy McKinsey and an expert on tax havens, has compiled the most detailed estimates yet of the size of the offshore economy in a new report, The Price of Offshore Revisited, released exclusively to the Observer.

He shows that at least ?13tn ? perhaps up to ?20tn ? has leaked out of scores of countries into secretive jurisdictions such as Switzerland and the Cayman Islands with the help of private banks, which vie to attract the assets of so-called high net-worth individuals. Their wealth is, as Henry puts it, "protected by a highly paid, industrious bevy of professional enablers in the private banking, legal, accounting and investment industries taking advantage of the increasingly borderless, frictionless global economy". According to Henry's research, the top 10 private banks, which include UBS and Credit Suisse in Switzerland, as well as the US investment bank Goldman Sachs, managed more than ?4tn in 2010, a sharp rise from ?1.5tn five years earlier.

Read More


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Economy
- Firefighters Don't Fight Fires
- Obama's Business Comment...
- Don't Die in 2013: Confiscatory 55% Death Tax Set to Take Effect
- Markets Tell the Truth
- President Obama: "If You've Got A Business - You Didn't Build That. Somebody Else Made That Happen"
- In Politics, Expect the Unexpected
- The Real Fiscal Cliff
- Marc Faber: Markets to Crash Within 12 Months

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Monday, March 19, 2012

Nutritional McCarthyism: Red Meat To Blame for Death, Global Warming, Tsunamis, Mine Collapses, and Terrorist Attacks

by Karen De Coster

Red meat is probably the cause behind?the Congo train derailment and the Yangtze River dolphin extinction, too.

The media, this week, ran the following headlines:

CNN. "Study: Too Much Red Meat May Shorten Lifespan."

LA Times. "Red Meat: What Makes It Unhealthy."

AllVoices.com. "Harvard Study Concludes Red Meat Reduces Average Life."

NY Daily News. "Red meat boosts risk of dying young: study; Just one portion of processed meat boosts death risk by 20%."

New York Times. "Risks: More Red Meat, More Mortality."

And the most comical headline of them all was from Slate: "Study: All Red Meat Linked to Premature Death."

This was undoubtedly the most popular headline of the week for the sound bite lovin', I-read-the-headline-and-that's-all-that-matters crowd. To say that the mainstream media and the blogosphere discovered a new level of idiocy is putting it much too lightly.?There were two types of people hitting the "publish" button on their blogs just a wee bit too prematurely over these headlines - (1) The vegans/vegetarians who may actually know a little something about eating good food, and have a passion for great health, yet are too motivated - perhaps politically - too see through the 40-year facade of the federal dietary sham, and (2) Bloggers who know absolutely nothing about health and wellness, let alone nutrition, and couldn't care less, except they carry a schizophrenic vendetta against people who are passionate about health and wellness and carry the torch for the paleo-primal lifestyle (you know, us nuts who advocate for such atrocities as real food, voluntary trade that is free from the force of the government's criminal agencies, and food freedom).

Many folks sent me the link and asked, "When are you going to blog on this?" For starters, I didn't have the time. But then again, I waited, because I knew the ancestral health community would light up the switchboard of ignorance with a spark of sagacity that would render the media blitz and bozo blogosphere impotent, like farts in the wind. And they didn't disappoint.

This was an observational study, where participants filled out food frequency questionnaires (here is a link to the questionnaire) every four years and lifestyle and medical data questionnaires every two years. Certainly, people are very honest and have a tremendous capacity for remembering what they ate two days ago, let alone a year ago.?First,?there is Robb Wolf, who referred to the red meat scaremongering as "nutritional McCarthyism."?Gary Taubes also commented?on the horrendous science behind the study:

The problem with observational studies like those run by Willett and his colleagues is that they do none of this. That's why it's so frustrating. The hard part of science is left out ?and they skip straight to the endpoint, insisting that their interpretation of the association is the correct one and we should all change our diets accordingly.

In these observational studies, the epidemiologists?establish a cohort of subjects to follow (tens of thousands of nurses and physicians, in this case) and then ask them about what they eat. The fact that they use questionnaires?that are notoriously fallible is almost irrelevant here because the rest of the science is so flawed. Then they follow the subjects for decades --?28 years in this case. Now they have a database of diseases, deaths and foods consumed, and they can draw associations between what these people were eating and the diseases and deaths.

The end result is an association. In the latest report, eating a lot of red meat and processed meat is?associated?with premature death and increased risk of chronic disease. That's what they observed in the cohorts -- the observation.

...An association by itself contains no causal information. There are an infinite number of associations that are not causally related for every association that is, so the fact of the association itself doesn't tell us much.

Taubes calls these observational studies "the equivalent of conventional wisdom-confirmation machines." And then there is Denise Minger, guest writing for Mark Sisson's blog,?who put the entire drama to rest with her relentless pursuit of science?in the midst of a media blitz touting what she calls "ultimately wobbly, imperfect, and tragically inconclusive observational data."?Denise notes that this was a "garden-variety observational study, not an actual experiment where people change something specific they're doing and thus make it possible to determine cause and effect." Yet the researchers drew absolute conclusions from their disturbingly unscientific study.?Says Denise:
The lead researcher Frank Hu?claimed the study?"provides clear evidence that regular consumption of red meat, especially processed meat, contributes substantially to premature death," despite the fact that the study is innately incapable of providing such evidence. It's as if someone?pulled a Campbell?on us. Only an actual experiment,?with controls and manipulated variables, could start confirming causation.
There are a couple of other thrashings worth mentioning, and?the most notable of those is from Zoe Harcombe. She does a deep dive on the data and points out seven fatal flaws of the study, with one of them being the following:
As I always consider conflict of interest, it would be remiss of me to end without noting that one of the authors (if not more) is known to be vegetarian and speaks at vegetarian conferences[ii] and the invited 'peer' review of the article has been done by none other than the man who claims the credit for having turned ex-President Clinton into a vegan -- Dean Ornish.[iii]
The?Caveman Doctor also published a nice piece?on how the study was fraught with error and bias.

Latest Health
- Tom Woods Interviews Gary Taubes on Red Meat Scare Study
- Junk Science: "Red meat is blamed for one in 10 early deaths"
- Tom Woods: How Did I Lose the Weight?
- Why We Get Fat: And What To Do About It
- CrossFit - Gary Taubes: Why We Get Fat (Condensed)
- Gary Taubes about why we get fat
- Policing the Porn Business
- Embryonic Stem Cell Breakthrough Reverses Parkinson Disease In Primates

Well, if they ban all the red meat out there, I guess I'll have to eat the green meats then. That's even better than the red stuff, or so the English tell me. If I were you, I'd eat less red meat!

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Thursday, February 23, 2012

The Global Land Grab

by William Norman Grigg

In Vietnam, Peter Doan Van Vuon, a farmer who fought back when police came to confiscate his farm, is widely regarded as a hero. His neighbors have actually considered building a statue in his honor. In the United States, he would almost certainly be dead.

The strike team that assaulted Vuon?s 40-hectare fish farm in Hai Phong on January 5 did demolish the family?s modest two-story home, forcing them to live in a makeshift shelter fashioned from a tarp. On previous performance it?s reasonable to say that their counterparts in the employ of the Regime in Washington would have made sure to incinerate the family as well.

The raiders ? roughly 100 police and soldiers -- didn?t expect resistance when they arrived to evict the 49-year-old Vuon and his family and seize the property. Vuon?s wife, Ngyuen, had just returned from dropping off the kids at school when the strike team arrived. Rather than submitting meekly to the invaders, the Vuon family fought back, using improvised pellet guns and land mines. Nobody was killed or seriously injured, but the armored assailants ? six of whom suffered trivial wounds ? were forced to retreat.

In the United States, Vuon -- assuming that he survived the fire-bombing that appears to be the Regime?s preferred tactical endgame in standoffs of this kind -- would have been execrated as a would-be "cop killer." Although he and several relatives were arrested, the state-run media in Communist Vietnam ?have openly sympathized with him in investigative reports,? notes the AP. ?Their dispatches have alleged that Hai Phong officials lied about details of the eviction. They also have said the family was cheated in 1993 when they were given a lease of only 14 years instead of what should have been 20 years.?

More remarkable still is the fact that Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung intervened to investigate the matter. After the inquiry concluded that local authorities broke the law by attempting to confiscate Vuon?s land, he ordered that the officials responsible for the destruction of the family?s home be suspended and investigated for possible criminal prosecution.

In Vietnam, the government claims ownership of all land while issuing long-term land grants to farmers. In 1993, Vuon used his life savings to buy and reclaim a small tract of swampland, eventually establishing a small but profitable fish farm.

In 2009, the Hai Phong city government suddenly ?discovered? that Vuon?s land grant had expired and announced its intention to confiscate the property without compensation in order to sell it to land developers. When Vuon filed a lawsuit against the seizure, the court promised to let them keep the land if he dropped the case. This was a ruse: After Vuon dropped the suit, the city government initiated seizure proceedings. Deprived of any legal means to protect their property, Vuon and his family began making preparations to defend their land by force.

From the perspective of their rulers, Vuon and his family were engaged in a seditious conspiracy, particularly when it?s understood that they are not only capitalists but devout Catholics.

At a time when Vietnam?s economy is afflicted with the highest inflation rate in Asia and confrontations between small farmers and government officials are increasingly common, Vuon?s armed defiance is a spark that could ignite a widespread conflagration. However, rather than simply extinguishing Vuon outright, Communist government of Vietnam has actually examined his grievances on their merits.

It is impossible to believe that any affiliate or subdivision of the U.S. Government would be so conciliatory.

Similar developments are taking place in mainland China, which like Vietnam is ruled by a one-party State that is Marxist in its professed ideology but corporatist in practice.

Gu Kul, who used to own and operate an automotive parts business in Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan province, has been victimized by China?s predatory corporate elite. A few years ago, local urban planners, seeking to enhance their revenue stream, ordered the seizure of Gu?s 13-acre commercial property. In short order, a fleet of bulldozers arrived, protected by a small army of police and hired thugs.

?I had to look on as bulldozers demolished my property,? Gu recounted to Der Spiegel. Not satisfied with the trivial, paltry compensation for the destruction of a profitable and growing business and the theft of his property, Gu filed a legal challenge under recently enacted national legislation that supposedly limits seizures by local governments.

In short order, Gu found himself being constantly trailed by black-clad mercenaries in blacked-out SUVs. Their intentions were as transparent as their mirrored sunglasses were opaque. While Gu has managed to avoid capture, more than a few others have been kidnapped, tortured, and killed for objecting to the ongoing land grab ? and the revolt is propagating itself across rural China.

Yang Youde used to own a thriving cotton farm in Yuhan. In 2009, local commissars, coveting the fertile land and well-stocked trout streams, announced their intention to seize the property. After Yang filed a legal petition to protest the planned confiscation, police descended on his home and hauled him away to a ?black jail? where he was beaten and tortured. ?They strung me up by my hands and put out cigarettes on my skin,? he recalled in an interview with the Telegraph of London.

Yang survived his time in police custody; Xue Jingbo of Wukan, a fishing village of 10,000, wasn?t so fortunate. During late 2011, a revolt erupted in the village over land confiscation, and Xue was designated to negotiate on behalf of the population. Instead of listening to the village?s complaints, the local government ordered Xue?s arrest. While in police custody, Xue died very quickly of what officials insisted were ?natural causes.? His body was never returned to his family.

Rather than mourning, the locals organized. Thousands of protesters gathered in the village square to demand an investigation of Xue?s death and an end to the corrupt practice of seizing land for the benefit of politically connected corporate interests. Anticipating that the local government would demand reinforcements, the population erected roadblocks and other barricades at the village entrances. Using cellphones and social media, protesters contacted the BBC and other international media sources seeking to publicize the village?s plight and Xue?s murder.

After news of the protests reached a global audience last December, China?s Public Security Bureau ? that nation?s equivalent of the American FBI or Russian KGB ? shut down media access to Wukan and closed off most internet links to the village.

The local government, alarmed by the extent and intensity of the protests, was actually forced to flee for two weeks. Upon their return the city officials promised to halt the ongoing land grab and investigate allegations of official corruption ? for whatever a promise of that kind may be worth.

Unfortunately, rather than simply withdrawing their consent to be ruled, the people of Wukan agreed to a series of "democratic reforms," including the appointment of a protester as a local commissar. Their exemplary defiance may have a healthier impact that the useless concessions they received.

In early February, more than 5,000 people took to the streets of East and West Pahne Villages in Zhejiang Province to protest land seizures by local officials. The villagers became aware of the seizures only after construction began on some of the stolen land.

"Officials from the village sold land,? explained local resident Lu Yeqin. ?This land originally belonged to the villagers. After it was sold, the [villagers] were not given any money for it. The villagers are upset, and after all, this land was passed down through their family business. They rely on the land for their livelihood, but now it has been sold."

As happened in Wukan, local Communist Party officials took flight, regrouping in secret locations to await instructions from Beijing. Many village activists are likewise seeking intervention by the central government in the mistaken hope that this will protect them from the corruption of local functionaries.

Tragically, they don?t understand that the land grabs are a result of central government intervention: In the teeth of a catastrophic economic downturn, China?s rulers ? like their counterparts in Vietnam -- are frantically seizing land and adding to the commercial and residential real estate glut in the hope of boosting the GDP.

?A large portion of China?s estimated 100,000 or so public protests each year are driven by rage over compulsory evictions,? notes the Telegraph. This is the sort of thing that would never happen in the United States, of course ? except for the fact that it happens all the time.

As the Wall Street Journal has pointed out, Chinese subjects who refuse to surrender their homes to the land-grabbers ?are known as `nail households,' since their homes are sometimes left stranded in the middle of busy construction sites. More often, however, they are driven away by paid thugs."

That description summons memories of New London, Connecticut resident Lauren Canario, who was kidnapped by rented thugs ? that is, officers of the New London police department -- for refusing to vacate property that had been stolen through eminent domain on behalf of a federally subsidized "public/private partnership" (that is, fascist entity) called the New London Development Corporation (NLDC).

Lauren was not a trespasser; she was visiting the property with the permission of its owner. However, the NDLC had decided to steal the land and give it to the Pfizer Corporation, and this act of vulgar larceny received the benediction of the Supreme Court. Lauren was arrested, imprisoned for months, and -- in a touch that would have earned the admiration of Soviet or Chinese commissars -- repeatedly subjected to psychological evaluation.

The "nail households" were hammered down, the Pfizer plant was quickly erected, and the expected kickbacks were delivered. Shortly thereafter the economy collapsed and Pfizer decided to shut down the facility and move its employees elsewhere, leaving behind a rotting and useless building that had been constructed on stolen land.

This case is a mere snapshot of an ongoing national crime wave. Former real estate developer Don Corace writes in his recent book Government Pirates: The Assault on Private Property Rights and How We Can Fight It: "Arrogant and corrupt city and county officials -- with near limitless legal budgets ... continue to align themselves with well-heeled developers, political cronies, and major corporations to prey on the politically less powerful and disenfranchised, particularly minority communities.?

Eminent domain "abuse" (a term that refers to the predictable exercise of an innately illegitimate power) is just one of many ways that property can be blatantly stolen through political means: "Through local zoning and the regulation of wetlands and endangered species, governments take property without compensating owners and also extort land and money in return for approvals."

This is, of course, exactly the same racket being run by local commissars in the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. It is interesting, and somewhat unsettling, that people to whom private property may be a relatively new and exotic concept seem to have a better understanding of what is happening than do their counterparts here in the putative Land of the Free ? and that they display more intrepidity in fighting for their freedom than can be found here in the purported Home of the Brave.
__
William Norman Grigg [send him mail] publishes the Pro Libertate blog and hosts the Pro Libertate radio program.

Copyright ? 2012 William Norman Grigg


View the original article here

Monday, October 10, 2011

EU calls for global tax, Canada says can block it


(Reuters) - The European Commission said on Wednesday it would push next month's G20 summit to agree on a global financial transaction tax, but Canada said it may have enough support to block such a move.

Flanked by German Chancellor Angela Merkel at a news conference in Brussels, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said it was time to push ahead with the initiative.

"The chancellor and I agreed that the time is right to create new momentum globally and at the G20 summit in Cannes, we will press for a global financial transaction tax," Barroso said.

Read More


Latest Economy
- Marc Faber's October Outlook: Forget EU Debt Crisis, A China Meltdown Is The Real Threat
- Obama's "Millionaire Tax" Collected Over Next Ten Years Will Plug 4 Months Worth Of Deficit
- Peter Schiff On New 5.6% Millionaire Surcharge Tax
- Wrong Medicine for a Sick Economy
- Hiding Gold in All the Unusual Places
- The Top 100 Statistics About The Collapse Of The Economy That Every American Voter Should Know
- Property, Freedom and Society | Jeffrey Tucker Interviews Hans-Hermann Hoppe
- Colorado Farmers Hire Locals for Farm Labor, They Quit After Six Hours

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Global Meltdown: Investors Are Dumping Nearly Everything

By: Patti Domm

With no solution in sight for Europe and new fears of a global recession, investors dumped stocks and commodities and ran to the safety of U.S. Treasurys.

Treasury yields , as a result, slipped to historic lows with the 10-year yielding 1.75 percent and the 30-year at 2.86 percent.

The dollar was also a beneficiary of a massive fear trade that sent U.S. stocks sharply lower, on the heels of steep sell-offs in equities markets around the globe.

The worst performing stock market sectors mirrored the sell-off in global commodities markets, with materials down 4.6 percent and energy stocks down 4.1 percent.

Copper, hit by concerns of a Chinese slowdown, tumbled 7 percent to a 1-year low. Gold, usually a safety play, was sold into the maelstrom as investors raised cash. The euro [ EUR=X 1.3486 -0.0091 (-0.67%) ], broke below 1.35, a recent bottom of its range. It was trading in the 1.346 area, an eight-month low against the dollar. The dollar index [ .DXY 78.35 +1.00 (+1.30%) ] was 1.4 percent higher.

"People are finding it really isn't gold. It isn't precious metals. It's not currencies. U.S. Treasurys are where people are flocking to at a time of extreme concern about risk, and we continue to see Treasurys continue to get bid up," said Zane Brown, fixed income strategist at Lord Abbett.

Read More


Latest Economy
- Twist Paves the Way for QE III
- Is Financial Instability The New Normal?
- Gov't paid $600 million in benefits to dead people
- Marc Faber to Reuters: You dont need the fed to tell you something is wrong
- Gold & Silver Crashing Hard: Gold Down to $1630/oz, Silver $29.90/oz
- Is Gold No Longer A Safe Haven? Not According To Capital Economics: "Gold Will Surge When Euro Crisis Escalates"
- Rosenberg Presents The Three Ways Bernanke Disappointed The Market, And Why It Is Dumping
- Commodities Fall to Nine-Month Low

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Armed Troops Burn Down Homes, Kill Children To Evict Ugandans In Name Of Global Warming

by Paul Joseph Watson

Armed troops acting on behalf of a British carbon trading company backed by the World Bank burned houses to the ground and killed children to evict Ugandans from their homes in the name of seizing land to protect against ?global warming,? a shocking illustration of how the climate change con is a barbarian form of neo-colonialism.

The evictions were ordered by New Forests Company, an outfit that seizes land in Africa to grow trees then sells the ?carbon credits? on to transnational corporations. The company is backed by the World Bank and HSBC. Its Board of Directors includes HSBC Managing Director Sajjad Sabur, as well as other former Goldman Sachs investment bankers.

The company claims residents of Kicucula left in a "peaceful" and "voluntary" manner, and yet the people tell a story of terror and bloodshed.

Villagers told of how armed ?security forces? stormed their village and torched houses, burning an eight-year-child to death as they threatened to murder anyone who resisted while beating others.

"We were in church," recalled Jean-Marie Tushabe, 26, a father of two. "I heard bullets being shot into the air."

"Cars were coming with police," Mr. Tushabe said, sitting among the ruins of his old home. "They headed straight to the houses. They took our plates, cups, mattresses, bed, pillows. Then we saw them getting a matchbox out of their pockets."

?But in this case, the government and the company said the settlers were illegal and evicted for a good cause: to protect the environment and help fight global warming,? reports the New York Times.

An Oxfam report documents how the British outfit has worked with the Ugandan government to forcibly expel over 20,000 people from their homes using terror and violence as part of a lucrative scramble for arable land that can be used to satisfy the multi-billion dollar carbon trading ponzi scheme, which is worth $1.8 million a year to the company.

?I no longer own any land. It?s impossible to feed my children -- they have suffered so much. Some days all they eat is porridge from maize flour. When people can?t eat well their bodies become weak -- there have been lots of cases of malaria and diarrhoea. Some days we don?t eat anything at all,? said former farmer Francis Longoli, whose land was stolen by New Forests.

As we have previously documented, the manufactured threat of man-made global warming is being used as a tool of neo-colonialism in the third world, not only through the seizure of land and infrastructure, thereby preventing poor nations from using their resources to develop, but by literally starving poverty-stricken people to death.

Climate change alarmism and implementation of global warming policies is a crime of the highest nature, because it is already having a genocidal impact in countries like Haiti, where the doubling of food prices is resulting in a substantial increase in starvation, poverty and death, with the population being forced to live on mud pies.

As a National Geographic Report confirmed, "With food prices rising, Haiti's poorest can't afford even a daily plate of rice, and some must take desperate measures to fill their bellies," by "eating mud," partly as a consequence of "increasing global demand for biofuels."

In April 2008, World Bank President Robert Zoellick admitted that biofuels were a "significant contributor" to soaring food prices that have led to poor people dying from starvation as a result of biofuels dominating land that would normally be used to harvest food.

Even man-made global warming advocate George Monbiot admits that promotion of biofuels "is causing starvation in the poor world," particularly in Swaziland, where the decision to allocate several thousand hectares of farmland to ethanol production despite the country being in the grip of a famine was labeled "a crime against humanity" by Jean Ziegler, the UN's special rapporteur.

But it's not just biofuels, a product of global warming alarmism, that are unleashing a genocide against black people in poorer countries, it's the whole anti-development mantra embraced by climate change activists that is being enforced by supranational organizations like the World Bank and the IMF in the name of reducing carbon dioxide, the evil life-giving gas that plants breathe and humans exhale.

Indeed, poorer countries rejected the 2009 Copenhagen climate agreement precisely because it discriminated against third world nations.

In addition, the Obama administration, firmly supported by Al Gore, last year ordered the World Bank to keep "developing" countries underdeveloped by blocking them from building coal-fired power plants, ensuring that poorer countries remain in poverty as a result of energy demands not being met.

By preventing poor nations from becoming self-sufficient in blocking them from producing their own energy, the Obama administration is ensuring that millions more will die from starvation and lack of access to hospitals and medical treatment.

While ignorant environmentalist leftists preach all day about the effects of global warming having the most impact on poorer countries, it is in fact the poorer countries and their people who are suffering most from global warming alarmism, and predators like the banker-backed New Forests Company.

The seizure of arable land in the name of ?global warming? is set to become big business, which is why the United Nations recently announced it is preparing to roll out an army of green helmeted ?climate peacekeepers? to intervene in poorer countries to protect ?shrinking resources?.

Transnational corporations, in league with western governments and offshore banks, have seized upon the climate change scam to carry out genocidal policies and land grabs in the pursuit of selling carbon credits to other transnational corporations who then merely pass on the cost to the consumer.
__
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.


View the original article here

Thursday, June 30, 2011

The Big Brother State and Global Surveillance

Click to expand conspiracy quotes from this video If you ask a politician assigned to security matters today what he or she thinks about the surveillance techniques used to prevent crime, there’s a good chance that you’d be told about the benefits of closed circuit camera systems. You’d here convincing arguments about the additional safety in their vicinity because they act as a crime deterrent, Or you might here about the virtue of being able to track terrorists, by filing information about airline passengers, or by enforcing the use of biometric passports. Maybe you’d find out how trusted computing protects you from malicious software and viruses. Or how scanning emails and eavesdropping on phone calls helps the police find potential criminals of all kinds. It would probably all sound great, because the idea is that you should start thinking of these techniques as being the cream of the crop. But let’s face the not quite so obvious but nevertheless omnipresent downside of this. While public cameras may actually help these defined criminals, modern CCTV systems like the ones used in London, are even today able to lock onto any person the operators wish to track using automatic facial identification, thus enabling the police to create a detailed database of say all of your movements. The keeping of records about airline passengers flying to the U.S. and in addition the obligation for everyone to submit biometric passports, are supposed to help fight terrorism. But this also allows the secret services to gather explicit information about the nationality of every traveler. Explicit information such as your fingerprints, the color of your eyes, and a high resolution picture of your face. Information you would usually expect to be taken from suspected criminals.

Trusted computing promises to enhance security on your PC, by only allowing certain trustworthy software to run on your machine. What you’re not told is that the person who decides which software you can trust, and are therefore allowed to install on your PC, will certainly not be you. On the one hand, scanning emails and wiretapping emails for ominous keywords, could convict a few small time criminals, but on the other it allows all sorts of people involved in this monitoring process to retrieve all sorts of private information. Information you just might not want to share with the staff of your local police station.

These symptoms can all be taken as evidence of the slow but steady conversion of our western societies into police states. Our western societies, claiming to be liberal democracies, but our leaders try to enforce more and more pressive laws and instrumentalize public fear of terror to justify them.

Stop the big brother state.

Conspiracy of Global Surveillance - The Big Brother State Related conspiracies: big brother, global surveillance, police state, trusted computing, wiretapping

View the original article here