The second great depression deepening across the globe

PressTV
Webster Tarpley

 

In Charles Dickens’ celebrated short story A Christmas Carol (1843), the Malthusian miser and London stock exchange speculator Ebenezer Scrooge is told by the ghost of his deceased partner Jacob Marley that “it is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow men, and traveled far and wide” for the purpose of doing good works of charity and thus alleviating human suffering.

In this spirit, let us briefly examine the economic condition of humanity at the close of 2012.

Our finding is sadly that the ongoing world economic depression continues to increase the needless privations of the vast majority of the inhabitants of this planet. The great scourges of mankind remain poverty, illiteracy, ignorance, disease, unemployment, homelessness, inadequate sanitation, low social mobility, and exclusion -- and many of these are getting worse.

27,000 children die each day from needless poverty

The tragic condition of humanity is perhaps most dramatically reflected in the fact that between 22,000 and 27,000 children die each day due to poverty, largely in the form of starvation, malnutrition, and diseases like diarrhea which can be cured for a few pennies. The upper end of this range corresponds to one needless childhood death caused by poverty every three seconds. Total needless childhood deaths from poverty, these data suggest, must be approaching at least 10 million per year - a yearly total which by itself rivals any of the great genocides of world history. Of the 2.2 billion children who live in today’s world, one billion live in poverty. This is the estimate from the most recent United Nations Human Development Report.

And these figures only include children. Estimates for total daily avoidable mortality, including children, suggest a level of 40,000 to 50,000 fatalities per day -- for a yearly hecatomb of over 18 million deaths.

We need look no further for the severest condemnation of the existing economic systems of the world, including especially the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Bank for International Settlements, the Asian Development Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, the international system of privatized central banks, and similar entities.

Three billion people on less than $2.50 per day

These deaths occur in the world in which about a billion people try to survive on less than one dollar per day. 2.6 billion people or 40% of the world’s population are struggling to subsist on less than two dollars a day. It is a world in which a total of 3 billion people or 50% of the world total must try to get along on less than $2.50 per day. For all the talk of a growing middle class made possible by globalization, 80% of humanity receives less than $10 per day. At the other end of the scale, the most prosperous 20% of the world’s population account for 75% of total world income, and this distribution becomes even more extreme when permanent assets are considered.

Almost a billion malnourished worldwide

Closely correlated with needless death and needless immiseration is the problem of world hunger. According to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization in Rome, there are in 2012 some 925 million persons experiencing hunger and malnutrition. Some 578 million of the hungry live in the Asian and Pacific countries, followed by 239 million malnourished in sub-Saharan Africa. Even in the developed countries, the FAO lists 19 million hungry. We should recall that, in the United States, some 50 million people rely on food stamps for their survival, meaning that they may have as little as $1.50 to spend per meal and per person.

The FAO’s world hunger estimates are very likely too low. This agency assumes that world hunger was about at its current level in 2008, and then rose to over one billion people in 2009, before returning to approximately the 2008 level in 2010. but this may turn out to be wildly optimistic, and perhaps deliberately so.

Another big factor in economic immiseration is the current high level of world unemployment. Here the statistics are even sketchier. The CIA assumes a world unemployment rate of 9.1%. The United Nations International Labor Organization (ILO) sets this rate at about 6% -- meaning about 200 million current jobless -- but at the same time concedes that in many developed countries - such as the United States and the nations of the European Union - the combined figure for unemployment and underemployment is in the neighborhood of 30%. These are depression levels by any reckoning.

Especially dramatic is the situation of youth unemployment. According to the ILO, almost 70 5 million young people between the ages of 15 and 24 were unemployed, yielding a global youth unemployment rate of 12.7%, up one full percentage point from pre-depression levels. Young people are currently three times more likely to be unemployed than adults. In Greece and Spain, 50% of youth are jobless.

The U.N.'s Internet Sneak Attack

Letting the Internet be rewired by bureaucrats would be like handing a Stradivarius to a gorilla.

Wall Street Journal
Gordon Crovitz


Who runs the Internet? For now, the answer remains no one, or at least no government, which explains the Web's success as a new technology. But as of next week, unless the U.S. gets serious, the answer could be the United Nations.

Many of the U.N.'s 193 member states oppose the open, uncontrolled nature of the Internet. Its interconnected global networks ignore national boundaries, making it hard for governments to censor or tax. And so, to send the freewheeling digital world back to the state control of the analog era, China, Russia, Iran and Arab countries are trying to hijack a U.N. agency that has nothing to do with the Internet.

For more than a year, these countries have lobbied an agency called the International Telecommunications Union to take over the rules and workings of the Internet. Created in 1865 as the International Telegraph Union, the ITU last drafted a treaty on communications in 1988, before the commercial Internet, when telecommunications meant voice telephone calls via national telephone monopolies.

Next week the ITU holds a negotiating conference in Dubai, and past months have brought many leaks of proposals for a new treaty. U.S. congressional resolutions and much of the commentary, including in this column, have focused on proposals by authoritarian governments to censor the Internet. Just as objectionable are proposals that ignore how the Internet works, threatening its smooth and open operations.

Having the Internet rewired by bureaucrats would be like handing a Stradivarius to a gorilla. The Internet is made up of 40,000 networks that interconnect among 425,000 global routes, cheaply and efficiently delivering messages and other digital content among more than two billion people around the world, with some 500,000 new users a day.

Many of the engineers and developers who built and operate these networks belong to virtual committees and task forces coordinated by an international nonprofit called the Internet Society. The society is home to the Internet Engineering Task Force (the main provider of global technical standards) and other volunteer groups such as the Internet Architecture Board and the Internet Research Task Force. Another key nongovernmental group is Icann, which assigns Internet addresses and domain names.

Sacraficing The Will Of The People On The Altar of The Euro

Testosterone Pit

The Eurozone debt crisis is exacting its toll. Convoluted undemocratic taxpayer-funded bailouts of bondholders and banks designed to keep the Eurozone together can’t kick the can down the road far enough. But the price has been huge, and people have expressed their anger in massive protests. Now, these efforts are also tearing up the fabric of the 27-member European Union: the first one out may be the UK.

If offered a referendum, 56% of the British would vote for a UK exit from the EU (with 34% definitely and 22% probably). Only 30% would vote to keep the UK in the EU. It wouldn’t even be close! It would be a landslide. Thus, if it came to a referendum today, the UK, a cornerstone of the EU, would bail out.

The EU has little patience with the will of the people. In most member states, decisions such as ratification of EU treaties, scrapping one’s own currency, or bailing out holders of sovereign bonds are made by parliamentary vote. But in instances, when people were finally given a vote, they had a nasty tendency to surprise the elite—the politicians, bankers, and unelected bureaucrats that run the show.

The Lisbon Treaty, the chef d’œuvre of the EU’s political elite, was supposed to repeal existing treaties and replace them with a European Constitution that would transfer significant national sovereignty to unelected EU bureaucrats and their institutions. Negotiations started in 2001, and by 2005, a majority of member states had ratified it by parliamentary vote.

But in France, the people got an opportunity to ratify it by referendum—after parliament had passed it with 93% of the votes. What should have been a cakewalk turned into an epic battle that split the Socialist Party in two. And the people, who loved their sovereignty and wanted to hang on to it, “unexpectedly” killed the thing by a margin of 55% to 45%. In the Netherlands, a similar scenario played out. 2005 was the year that referendum became a dreadful word in the European political lexicon.

The lesson was unforgettable: don’t let the riffraff decide. Such matters should be handled by politicians, bankers, and unelected bureaucrats. And so they did damage control. Many of the measures in the failed constitution were revived as reforms in a watered-down treaty. That was in 2008. As a precaution, the uppity people in France and the Netherlands weren’t allowed to vote on it. Irish voters were, however. And they killed it. They too wanted to hang on to their sovereignty.

But then the financial crisis hit. The Irish got scared. Their banks were in trouble. The economy was going south. So the referendum was re-run after the Irish government had negotiated some concessions, and the people changed their mind (the treaty became effective December 1, 2009).

The Deception at the Heart of the Upcoming US Presidential Election

Editor's Note:  Actually, the "Internet Reformation" may be described as contributing to a big upswell of "free market thinking", but a free flow of information defines the folly behind letting "the magic of the market place" do our bidding.  That thinking has got us into this mess in the first place.

The Daily Bell

Romney's moment: The Republicans' chosen battleground is the very shape and scope of US government ... Mitt Romney has been introduced to the American people in many guises: the hard-nosed executive who saved Utah's Winter Olympics; the middle-of-the-road governor who brought universal health care to Massachusetts; the repentant and radicalised Right-winger who campaigned (twice) for his party's presidential nomination; and now, since the selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate, as the fiscal conservative to bring sanity to the nation's finances. – UK Telegraph

Dominant Social Theme: Paul Ryan believes in smaller government. This race is shaping up to be one of a legitimate clash of philosophies.

Free Market Analysis: It is almost time for the US presidential election. Let the lying begin. The biggest lie of all – an elite dominant social theme – is that Romney's running mate, Paul Ryan, is some sort of small-government budget cutter, and that Romney now shares that view.

But to accept Ryan's role, you have to accept the larger nonsense about this being a "generational" election – one defining America's aggregate "soul." To believe this, of course, one has to believe that modern US presidential elections actually bring change. This is hard to fathom. What's the difference between George W. Bush and Barack Obama? Not much, we'd suggest.

Even Ronald Reagan, probably the most libertarian president of the late 20th century, was more of a rhetorical change-maker than a budget cutter. He talked a good "small government" approach and seemed sincere in his sentiments but the reality was that fedgov swelled under his stewardship, especially military and Intel budgets.

Nonetheless, the power elite that wants to run the world is trying again to portray the US presidential election as some sort of important event. It is important to this elite because they seek an "electoral" buy-in. They want to give the impression of choice. Here's more from the article:

This week, in Tampa, Mr Romney will – if he can raise his voice above Tropical Storm Isaac – be attempting to synthesize these personae into something at once more complex and more simple: a commander-in-chief ...

Americans' attention will be on Tampa not merely because of the storm warnings, but because there is a palpable sense – thanks in part to the selection of Mr Ryan – of how much this contest matters.
Often in elections, what appears to be a cataclysmic contest of ideology turns out to be a choice between shades oftechnocracy. Not this time. The Republicans' chosen battleground is the very shape and scope of US government, not least since a combination of political and fiscal pressures mean that whoever is elected will face choices that could ultimately determine whether the world's greatest power remains not just prosperous, but even solvent.

Okay. Not so fast ... An article in the Daily Beast, admittedly not one of our favorite publications, gives us a different perspective on Ryan. Entitled, "Defense Hawks, Rejoice—Paul Ryan's Your Man!" and written by Eli Lake, the article reviews Ryan's stance on budget cutting and finds that his attitudes tilt toward "neocon" regarding America's "role in the world."

We learn that Ryan has been extensively briefed by such people as Elliott Abrams and Fred Kagan, both prominent militarists during the Bush years.

According to Lake, Abrams believes that Ryan's views are reflective of the historical GOP and thus, it is implied, he is more than ready to take up what could be said to be the "White Man's burden" – making the world safe for a certain kind of sociopolitical philosophy.

Ultimately, this philosophy is globalist and has little or nothing to do with the GOP or even presidential elections generally. US presidents are merely caretakers at this point.

WikiLeaks Cables Call for a Global Bank Bailout

Daily Bail

WikiLeaks Cable: "Systemic Insolvency Is Now The Problem, Global Bank Bailout Needed"

In light of the Assange speech this weekend, we are reposting three wikileaks stories.

This peice was likely missed by many readers when first published. The importance is obvious for those (ourselves and many other blogs) who have made the case since 2008 that we were, and still are, facing a solvency crisis. A tsunami of Fed liquidity and FASB accounting black magic can only do so much. The global banking pig is already wearing lipstick and full make-up and it's still pretty ugly, despite Bernanke's best efforts at printing and pretending his way to future bliss and a spot in the Keynesian hall of fame.

---

Source - UK Guardian

Wikileaks U.S. Embassy cable concerning a March 17, 2008 meeting with Central Bank of England Governor Mervyn King:

Monday, 17 March 2008, 18:27
C O N F I D E N T I A L LONDON 000797
SIPDIS
NOFORN
SIPDIS
EO 12958 DECL: 03/17/2018
TAGS ECON, EFIN, UK
SUBJECT: BANKING CRISIS NOW ONE OF SOLVENCY NOT LIQUIDITY
SAYS BANK OF ENGLAND GOVERNOR
Classified By: AMB RTUTTLE, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)

1. Since last summer, the nature of the crisis in financial markets has changed. The problem is now not liquidity in the system but rather a question of systemic solvency, Bank of England (BOE) Governor Mervyn King said at a lunch meeting with Treasury Deputy Secretary Robert Kimmitt and Ambassador Tuttle. King said there are two imperatives. First to find ways for banks to avoid the stigma of selling unwanted paper at distressed prices or going to a central bank for assistance. Second to ensure there's a coordinated effort to possibly recapitalize the global banking system. For the first imperative, King suggested developing a pooling and auction process to unblock the large volume of financial investments for which there is currently no market. For the second imperative, King suggested that the U.S., UK, Switzerland, and perhaps Japan might form a temporary new group to jointly develop an effort to bring together sources of capital to recapitalize all major banks.

Systemic Insolvency Is Now The Problem

2. King said that liquidity is necessary but not sufficient in the current market crisis because the global banking system is undercapitalized due to being over leveraged. He said it is hard to look at the big four UK banks (Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays, HSBC, and Lloyds TSB) and not think they need more capital. A coordinated effort among central banks and finance ministers may be needed to develop a plan to recapitalize the banking system.

Unblocking Illiquid Mortgage-Backed Securities

3. King said it is also imperative to find a way for banks to sell off unwanted illiquid securities, including mortgage backed securities, without resorting to sales at distressed valuations. He said sales at distressed values only serve to lower the floor to which banks must mark down their assets (mark to market), thereby forcing unwarranted additional write downs. He said we need to find an auction system where banks could move paper they want to sell without fear of stigma that the market views selling at a low price as a sign that a bank is in trouble. King said, however, he did not yet know how to structure such an auction and that further dialogue was needed. Kimmitt acknowledged the need to find ways to unblock these markets and said we should remain in touch bilaterally as well as in the G-7, the Financial Stability Forum, and the central banks.

A Possible Approach To Recapitalization

4. The G-7 is almost dysfunctional on an economic level, said King. Key economies are not included, especially those that have large and growing pools of capital. King said that a new international group was needed to address the issue. It could be a temporary group, and he suggested that perhaps the central banks and finance ministers of the U.S., the UK, and Switzerland could coordinate discussions with other countries that have large pools of capital, including sovereign wealth funds, about recycling dollars to recapitalize banks. King said Japan might not be included because it has little to offer. King noted, though that including the Japanese might force their hand in finally marking to market impaired assets. Kimmitt said that he was cautious about starting new groups in the international financial community because of the inevitable debate around whom to include.

5. The King proposals were not casual ideas developed in the course of luncheon conversation. It was clear that his principal objective in the meeting was to outline his outside-the-box thinking for Kimmitt. King included very few details about his proposals and was content to present broad concepts, thereby planting the seeds for future discussion. END COMMENT.

6. Participants: USG: Ambassador Robert Tuttle; Deputy Secretary Kimmitt; Eric Meyer, Office Director for Europe;

SIPDIS Robert Saliterman, Spokesman, International Affairs, U.S. Treasury; Warren Chane, ECONOFF. UK: Mervyn King, Governor, Bank of England; Chris Salmon, Private Secretary.

7. Deputy Secretary Kimmitt has cleared this message.

---

More coverage of this story:

BoE Sought Global Bank Bailout in 2008

The head of the Bank of England had sought to set up a group with the United States, Switzerland and Japan to recapitalize major global banks six months before the financial crisis engulfed them, U.S. diplomatic cables show.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/40654365

Mervyn King plotted a secret bailout of the banking system six months before Gordon Brown decided to take action. The Bank of England governor told U.S. officials in March 2008 that ‘a co-ordinated effort to possibly recapitalise the global banking system’ was needed to save it from collapse, according to documents released by WikiLeaks. Mr Brown did not come up with his master plan to tackle the financial crisis until September 2008 following the collapse of U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers. The delay raises a major question over his claims that he was the brains behind the bailout and had ‘saved the world’.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1338712/Bank-England-boss-Mervyn-King-Gordon-Brown-bank-bailout-mastermind.html#ixzz18DxwhY3D

LONDON (AP) — U.S. diplomats say Bank of England Governor Mervyn King suggested that Britain, the U.S., Switzerland and possibly Japan bail out the global banking system in March 2008 — some six months before the financial crisis peaked.

In a U.S. embassy cable published by The Guardian on Tuesday, King is reported as telling U.S. ambassador to Britain Robert Tuttle and U.S. Treasury deputy secretary Robert Kimitt that the four countries might form "a temporary new group to jointly develop an effort to bring together sources of capital to recapitalize all major banks."

King suggested the new group would override the "dysfunctional" Group of Seven industrialized nations. But Kimmitt expressed caution about starting new groups because of inclusion debates.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-14/wikileaks-boe-suggested-global-bank-bailout-in-08.html

---

This is a must see:

Assange Fracas: All About Establishing Legitimacy of International Criminal Court?

Daily Bell

Ecuador might take the case to the International Court of Justice, but would first try to convince London that it should allow Assange to travel to the South American country or give him guarantees he would not be extradited to the United States. "We're states with responsible governments that can negotiate directly about this problem. We have always been open to negotiations with the British and Swedish governments," Correa told state-run television on Monday night. Correa's government, however, says there have been no talks since August 15. – Reuters

Dominant Social Theme: It's a new era of globalization, and these delicate matters should be decided at the highest international levels.

Free-Market Analysis: Is the Julian Assange extradition standoff nothing more than a way of further establishing the legitimacy of the International Criminal Court?

This could make sense. We've been puzzled with the way things have played out regarding Assange but now we believe we may have the key.

If one accepts that Assange and WikiLeaks are at the highest level connected to representatives of a global power elite, then what's going on becomes clear.

This elite seeks to run the world and has been challenged in this effort by what we call the Internet Reformation that has exposed the globalist conspiracy for those who wish to see. As they did long ago when attempting to combat the information made available by the Gutenberg Press, the powers-that-be are once again trying to muddy the proverbial waters, or so it seems to us.

WikiLeaks is perhaps just one of a number of so-called false flag projects that have been developed to confuse people about what is really going on. Anonymous is another one, apparently. So is Occupy Wall Street, which is reportedly funded at least in part by elitist apparatchik George Soros.

All of these entities and many more seek to combat the free-market thinking and disciplined philosophical anarchy that was making it impossible to justify elitist mercantilism.

The elite conspiracy is based on control of government. No government, no conspiracy. So when one studies false-flag events, one must look to see if the individual or group is mouthing radical or fashionable rhetoric while still suggesting public solutions to private problems.

This is one of the dividing lines between elite dominant social themes and the reality of credible and sincere change making.

Occupy Wall Street utilizes much of the rhetoric of "rebellion" and proposes seemingly anti-establishment points of view. But when one unpacks the rhetoric one begins to see that almost all the solutions are government oriented.

The hacker group Anonymous claims to be motivated by Internet anarchism but their targets are often corporate and rarely government oriented. They have surely not taken aim at the West's military-industrial complex.
The elites understand this and only turn to violence as a last resort, preferring to motivate people via fear-based propaganda. But because of the Internet, these scarcity-based memes have become obvious and increasingly transparent.

This does not mean the elites have ceased to try to regenerate these approaches. Julian Assange would seem to be a case in point.

As a young man, Assange went to work for the government after losing a hacking case. Eventually, he wrote for the power-elite controlled Economist magazine and won several prizes.

Somehow, later, in the first decade of the 21st century, he burst full-blown onto the alternative journalism scene with something called WikiLeaks.

We've chronicled, as have many others, the idea that WikiLeaks is a triumph of style over substance. Having a supposedly radical "news" outlet controlled by Western Intel agencies allows the powers-that-be to leak information to the media in a credible way.

And who are Assange's partners in all of this? Why, the traditional mainstream media including such names as theNew York Times and the Washington Post.

Assange is providing credibility to facilities of elite information. The mainstream media, bought and paid for by the power elite, is foundering around the world, but these are the instruments that Assange chooses to work with nonetheless.

We won't go on about this. It's fairly evident at this point who Assange is and how he is being positioned, in our view anyway. For more on Assange, just search the Internet for Assange and the Daily Bell. Or search for Assange and "false flag." There's plenty of information out there.

Again, exposure in multiple times and ways hasn't slowed the Assange promotion. He is tall, blond, handsome and arrogant. He continues to be useful to the power elite in numerous ways. And now it would seem he's going to be used to provide credibility to the International Criminal Court.

A friend of the Daily Bell's pointed this out to us yesterday and it makes a lot of sense. The Soros-funded ICC has not met with a rapturous reception and even many developing country leaders are wary of it.

But if Ecuador can draw in the ICC as a protector of Ecuador against the big British bully that is standing in the way of Assange's legal extradition, it would be a tremendous way of positioning the Court as a friend of the developing world.

Already the Assange extradition is being seen as a struggle between North and South. People have not been able to explain the bad behavior of British officials but it all becomes clear if one looks on it as an elaborate psy-op.

Report: UN classifies climate change agenda

Washington Examiner
Joel Gehrke

United Nations officials refuse to allow observers to read the draft agenda for the Rio+20 conference on climate change, after an earlier draft called for the economic “contraction” of major countries.
“It seems the UN has taken the final pre-conference draft and classified it!” Lord Monckton, a climate skeptic with the Center for a Constructive Tomorrow reported in an email. “We were promised transparency. This is unacceptable.”

A proposal within an earlier draft agenda for the conference called for the “contraction and convergence for over- and under-consumers of natural resources,” CFACT noted. Given President Obama’s oft-repeated statistic that the United States produces 2 percent of the world’s oil but uses 20 percent, this proposal would affect the American economy significantly.

“We aspire to nothing less than a global movement for generational change,” UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon said earlier this year.

Another proposal would spread the cost of green investment throughout society, at an estimated cost of $1,300 per American family.  “We call for the fulfilment of all official development assistance commitments, including the commitments by many developed countries to achieve the target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product for official development assistance to developing countries by 2015,” the earlier draft says.

$100 Billion And All I Got Was This Lousy Climate Model?!?

Al Fin

Since 1989 the US government has spent almost $100 billion on climate studies, modeling, prediction, regulations and more. In the end, the best models developed so far do 2 - 3 X worse than chance alone. As real world temperatures continue to diverge wildly from climate model projections, US taxpayers are starting to wonder where their money is going.

Joanne Nova's report, Climate Money, documents $79 billion spent by the US on climate science up until the year 2009. Since then, over the past 3 + years the Obama government has expanded spending on climate science, regulation, enforcement, and all aspects of the carbon orthodoxy. Almost no area of US government, academia, or media is left untouched by the agenda of carbon hysteria.

Scientists and institutes associated with the IPCC receive many billions of US dollars per year to accomplish results which could be achieved by a 3 year old child with a random walk generator.

in 2008 and 2010, a team of hydrologists at the National Technical University of Athens published a pair of studies comparing long-term (100-year) temperature and precipitation trends in a total of 55 locations around the world to model projections. The models performed quite poorly at the annual level, which was not surprising. What was more surprising was that they also did poorly even when averaged up to the 30-year scale, which is typically assumed to be the level they work best at. They also did no better over larger and larger regional scales. The authors concluded that there is no basis for the claim that climate models are well-suited for long-term predictions over large regions.

A 2011 study in the Journal of Forecasting took the same data set and compared model predictions against a “random walk” alternative, consisting simply of using the last period’s value in each location as the forecast for the next period’s value in that location. The test measures the sum of errors relative to the random walk. A perfect model gets a score of zero, meaning it made no errors. A model that does no better than a random walk gets a score of 1. A model receiving a score above 1 did worse than uninformed guesses. Simple statistical forecast models that have no climatology or physics in them typically got scores between 0.8 and 1, indicating slight improvements on the random walk, though in some cases their scores went as high as 1.8.

The climate models, by contrast, got scores ranging from 2.4 to 3.7, indicating a total failure to provide valid forecast information at the regional level, even on long time scales. The authors commented: “This implies that the current [climate] models are ill-suited to localized decadal predictions, even though they are used as inputs for policymaking.” _FinancialPost

The table above illustrates the year on year spending increases in various US government departments, in the Obama years.

But these tables do not reveal the amount of spending related to climate policy which may go under different names in the department budgets. They likewise do not reveal the amount of climate spending at other levels of US government, or by other member governments participating in the IPCC. And they certainly do not reveal the $trillions slated to be routed through the IPCC in redistributive ransom payoffs from the developed world to the third world.

The largest costs from climate change policies will never be measured, since they are not truly measurable. These are the "opportunity costs" and the "opportunity destruction" brought about by the prevention of vital energy, commercial, industrial, and residential projects around the world. We are entering an era of climate agenda caused energy starvation and a consequent economic decay.

This is taking place at the same time that much of the developed world is experience a demographic implosion, likely to reduce the available brainpower and manpower which will be needed for humanity to work its way out of this carbon hysteria morass.

Climate Money PDF report by Joanne Nova

Validation and Forecasting Accuracy in Models of Climate Change (PDF)

The credulous attitude of academics, journalists, politicians, and media personalities toward the IPCC "consensus" reminds me of a raunchy scene from the movie "Idiocracy." The movie theatre is packed with patrons comically enchanted and amused by a single image on the giant screen: a rather ugly arse farting.

Welcome to the Idiocracy

Message of Ron Paul Candidacy Resonates with Spain

Does the Market Really Want 'Smart Meter Version 2.0'?

Daily Bell

New Arm chips herald 'Internet of things' ... New processors from Arm Holdings use so little power they could allow a new generation of connected devices, from credit cards to light bulbs. Tiny chips could mean even credit cards can be connected to the internet ... The chips, just 1mm by 1mm and powered by tiny batteries, will drive the so-called 'Internet of things', Cambridge- based Arm Holdings hopes. It anticipates uses across lighting, motor cars and a range of other devices that use new sensors. Many companies are investing machine-to-machine communications, but new processors are required if they are not to consumer significantly more power. Arm's will sell for less than 20p each, it is expected, and last for years on a single charge. Some analysts expect 60 billion connected devices to be active by 2020. Vint Cerf, one of the founders of the internet, has raised the prospect, for instance, of wine corks incorporating chips so they can alert owners to the best time for wine to be drunk, or raise the alarm if they are opened without the owner's knowledge. – UK Telegraph

Dominant Social Theme: Ain't technology grand? It's what the market wants.

Free-Market Analysis: All right, here we go. Smart Meters aren't doing so well these days. But it turns out, like the soldiers hitting the beach on D-Day, there are troops in reserve. The "free market" rolls on, as we can see from this report in the UK Telegraph.

Is all as it seems? (Is that ever the case?) We find this to be yet more evidence of a certain kind of elite dominant social theme. The power elite that we cover regularly uses these themes – fear-based promotions – to frighten Western middle classes into giving up power and wealth to specially created globalist institutions.

One of the biggest such memes is the idea that the "free market" itself is "demanding" certain technologies that are useful to the elites in their quest for ever-closer global governance.
We can see a primitive version of this approach when it comes to, say, GM: "Government Motors." Intimidated and dispirited, GM's top execs were bullied into focusing closely on "Green" electronic cars. How's that going for them? Well ... last we looked, they'd shut down their leading automotive brand, the Volt, due to lack of demand.

U.N. Policy Paper Outlines 7 Building Blocks for 'Heavy-Handed' World Government

Activist Post

The fact that the world is being restructured from decentralized diversity to collectivized hierarchy by an authoritarian regime cloaked in green trappings can hardly be disputed.

The final push toward the next and perhaps final phase may be announced this June at the 2012 U.N. Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

A Scientific American editorial by Gary Stix highlights a policy article written by several dozen scientists that appeared online March 15 in the journal Science.

The conclusions reached by the scientists, as well as the editorial from a staff member of Scientific American are incredibly unscientific and fly in the face of the many thousands of independent scientists and researchers who have refuted the theory of man-made global warming. Regardless, this small group pushes ahead with their suggestions that the only way to combat such a global catastrophe is of course to solve it through global government. And not just any global government, but one that Scientific American suggests should be "heavy-handed (in its) transnational enforcement powers."

The policy paper entitled, "Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving Earth System Governance" is one of the most blatantly authoritarian among the incrementally more open policy papers that we are witnessing, as global governance continues on its runaway path in the name of saving humanity from itself.

Opening with a summary, the conclusions and solutions are clear:

Science assessments indicate that human activities are moving several of Earth's sub-systems outside the range of natural variability typical for the previous 500,000 years (1, 2). Human societies must now change course and steer away from critical tipping points in the Earth system that might lead to rapid and irreversible change (3). This requires fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions toward more effective Earth system governance and planetary stewardship. (Source)

World Banker Makes Stunning Confession

Deep Military Integration: Towards a North American Combined Military Force

Global Research
Dana Gabriel

The U.S. and Canada recently signed several bilateral agreements that will further strengthen continental security and defense cooperation. Deeper military integration between both countries is part of efforts to establish a North American security perimeter and better address common global threats.

Following the recent Permanent Joint Board on Defense (PJBD) meeting which took place in Ottawa, the Commander of Canada Command, Lt.-Gen Walter Semianiw and the Commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), Gen. Charles Jacoby, Jr. signed three military documents. The first was the Combined Defense Plan which a backgrounder described as a, “planning framework between Canada Command, its counterpart USNORTHCOM, and NORAD for enhanced defense cooperation between Canada and the U.S. should governments require each other’s assistance.” The second is the Information Sharing Memorandum of Understanding, “an arrangement between Canada Command, its counterpart USNORTHCOM and NORAD to identify and provide for ease of sharing information amongst the three organizations.” The Civil Assistance Plan, which was originally signed in 2008 and allows the armed forces of one nation to support the other during an emergency was also renewed for two years.

Lee Berthiaume of Postmedia News reported that, “The Combined Defense Plan has been under discussion for several years and would further integrate cross-border military co-operation at a time when the Harper government is trying to reassure Washington it has a reliable partner in Canada when it comes to security.” Defense Minister Peter MacKay is quoted as saying, “This agreement provides a framework for the combined defense of Canada and the U.S. during peace, contingencies, and war.” He added, “The plan describes the authorities and means by which the two governments would approve homeland military operations in the event of a mutually agreed threat, and how our two militaries would collaborate and share information.” In his speech in front of the PJBD, Minister MacKay also called for, “increased military involvement implementing the Beyond the Border strategy, saying the Canadian Forces and its American counterparts should be supporting civilian agencies monitoring the cross-border security.” Also on the agenda at the defense forum was security cooperation in the Arctic, along with Canadian and U.S. engagement in the Western Hemisphere.

In an article for iPolitics, Colin Horgan wrote that at the recent bilateral defense meeting, “MacKay noted that such initiatives as Beyond the Border and the Regulatory Cooperation Council Action Plan will work to ensure that the vital economic partnership that joins our two countries continues to be the cornerstone of our economic competitiveness and security.” Defense Minister MacKay emphasized that security is linked to the economy and called for even greater cooperation to support the dual action plans. He stated, “We need to increasingly focus our military forces in support of those civilian departments and agencies that have the lead.” MacKay also explained, “We need to all work together to mitigate capability gaps, share best practices and co-operate on new approaches.” He went on to say, “there is still room for more integrated collaboration – domestically and bi-nationally.”

The latest military agreements further promote a perimeter approach to security. They are part of the Tri Command Vision efforts to merge NORAD, USNORTHCOM and Canada Command into one. As for the PJBD, it has once again become more relevant as a venue for bilateral security and military dialogue. Created in 1940 the panel, “is the senior advisory body on continental defense. It is composed of military and diplomatic representatives from both nations.” Over the years, it has, “served as a strategic-level military board charged with considering, in a broad sense, land, sea, air and space issues.” This includes areas concerning, “policy, operations, financial, logistics and other aspects of Canada-U.S. defense relations.” The PJBD is well positioned to play a significant role in plans for a fully integrated North American security perimeter, as well as in other facets of the evolving Canada-U.S. partnership.