Just when you thought the Australian Federal Politicians couldn’t get any worse. Well, they are about to.
Economist John Adams And Analyst Martin North look more deeply into the connection between the attempt to limit cash transactions and the imposition of negative interest rates. Despite what the MSM are saying there is a direct connection. In fact negative interest rates cannot work as planned if cash is freely in circulation. We cite the links and describe the impact. The deadline for submissions to stop the cash ban is 12 August 2019. Make your views know to our “elected representatives.” Email: blackeconomy@treasury.gov.au with the subject line: Submission: Exposure Draft—Currency (Restrictions on the Use of Cash) Bill 2019 As we discussed before, the real agenda is all about negative interest rates and extreme monetary policy, as prescribed by the IMF. This represents a significant curtailment of civil liberties, and more. We have just a few more days to respond.
I concur with Martin and John that we should all write our federal member to express opposition to this Bill.
If you have any problems understanding what John and Martin are talking about, I am happy to answer any questions (as best I can). Or just ask them directly at their respective sites.
This is my plea to “save the world”. (well, everyone else seems to be doing it!).
Warning: It takes time to understand how to save the world, so be prepared to sit though a fair bit of video. All worth watching though.
My plea is not to stop using plastic straws(although I don’t understand why we need them anyway), or to change your light bulb, or to even stop eating meat! My plea is for every one to stop just believing the rampant propaganda and nonsensical thinking that pervades our society through most of the media (MSM and social),and our educational institutions, and return to evidence based thinking. Searching for the truth these days is easy. It just takes a little time. The truth is there if you put aside your current beliefs, open your mind a little, and go searching for it.
For my first example, lets have a look at renewable energy.
Ps. I am not fundamentally against renewable’s. They work incredibly well in some cases, but they are totally unsuitable for large scale use in our modern society. Too costly (without mandated use and subsidies as is the current case), very unreliable, requires extra infrastructure, and still needs base load power as back up. But, you wont hear about this on the tellie, on the radio, or in the news papers. Here is a little truth as to why they are next to useless, and from an environmentalist no less.
Now why was it that we needed renewables in the first place?
My second example is about Global Warming, or is it Climate Change, or Catastrophic Climate Change or Climate Disruption, or maybe even Climate Emergency, or have they changed the name again? Anyway, the primary reason we have invested so much in renewables is because of the potential for “Catastrophic Climate Change”. This is another area where the propaganda has completely washed over the actual evidence(or lack of).
The Climate Change industry which is costing more than a billion dollars a day world wide has absolutely no benefit at all (except maybe for those collecting the cash). Ironically, one of the primary things that enabled the people of the world to eventually waste so much money on these Utopian fantasies, was the exploitation of the energy dense fuels, like coal, gas and oil! Oh the irony, again! What could have we used that money for instead? I could suggest a hundred beneficial things that would help humanity and or the environment. So why is doing anything about Catastrophic Climate Change a waste of time and money? See video.
And the following is just one of the reason’s why “Climate Change” science is flawed. There are many others.
But wait! There’s something even more insidious lurking beneath the climate rhetoric than the terrible waste of time and money that is the Climate Change industry. This is my final example for this post.
Socialism, or should I use the correct term, Marxism. Marxism, it would appear, has infiltrated our entire society. Infecting our political system (on both sides and all levels), our media, educational institutions, and maybe even the Church, and has definitely taken over our environmental organisations. It is possible that this could actually be the whole reason for AGW and renewables.
Marxist’s will use any minority group (the oppressed) or any cause (Climate Change) to aide their pursuit for power. The aim of all Marxist’s (in spite of what they publicly espouse) is a totalitarian state devoid of individual freedom and individual identity, or as close as they can get to that outcome.
Most people under 50 years of age (and even some over 50 years) would likely not know the deadly consequences of allowing Marxist philosophy to take hold in a society. The 20th century is littered with the deaths of more than 100 million people from various Marxist societies. Don’t know about this? The following video is a good start, though this example is not the worst one. I believe Mao holds the unfortunate record for being responsible for the most deaths of his own people.
Btw. Is it a coincidence that the green movement has the same aim as the Marxists? Ie the destruction of Capitalism. The green movement was such a perfect vehicle to “rally” the people to “save the world” from the evil industrialists with their evil fossil fuels. One of the original aims of Marxism was to destroy capitalism. And so it is also the environmentalist’s aim as well. Of course.
Capitalism, as it turns out, combined with democracy (even with all of it’s problems) just happened to give us the most prosperity, for the most people, in the entire history, of the entire world. Without Capitalism, most of us just would not be here to have the opportunity to complain about that same Capitalism. Oh my, another irony!
So, if you really want to “save the world”. Stop supporting any organisation or persons that espouse a “leftist” philosophy or dogma. There will be a hidden Marxist ideology driving their purpose, whether they know it or not. To understand and to identify what socialism looks like today please watch the following.
The risk of allowing Marxist (Socialist, Postmodernist, Neo-Liberal, Democratic Socialist) philosophy any foothold in our society is a risk too great. My recommendation is vote for anyone who opposes leftist positions. They will, (even the crooked ones) be far less damaging than the Marxists lurking behind the smiling faces of those who would “save the world”.
So please help truly save the world, by being more inquisitive. Ask more questions (of yourself, the media, pollie’s, activist’s, etc) about the evidence (propaganda?) they present, and do your own research. Our society will only progress in a healthy and sustained way if we pursue policies and behaviours based on real evidence, and not based on unproven theories (AGW), or pursuing wasteful and ineffective infrastructure (wind and solar), or worse, adopting aspects of failed social experiments like Socialism.
There are people in this world who are bat shit crazy ignorant about issues around the human population of the earth. Either that, or they are wilfully perpetuating lies to scare the populace, promote themselves, and feed their over-inflated ego’s. The likes of Paul Ehrlich, and Prince Charles are just two examples of those who have no credibility in their summations and fantasies regarding “population control”. But, this notion of overpopulation and population control has actually been going on for a very long time.
In 1798, Thomas Malthus thought the world was overpopulated when world population was under one billion. In his book, An Essay on the Principles of Population, he advocated not supporting the poor and controlling the population. He was wrong.
When world population was about 1.3 billion, Charles Darwin, who’s Theory of Evolution was based on Malthus’ book, thought the struggle for survival would cause the extinction of underdeveloped cultures by developed peoples. He was wrong.
Francis Galton, creator of Eugenics, the so-called science of improving the human race, thought the African races were so inferior genetically that Chinese should be settled in Africa to drive the Negro races to extinction and replace them. He was wrong.
Firstly, there is no population crisis, as per Hans Rosling.
So, do we have enough space for everyone? Here is the entire world’s population piled up within the Grand Canyon. I thought it would be bigger, but there you go.
For those who think we do need to do something to help with “over”population, there is an historically proven way to successfully stabilise human population. Ironically, the answer is also very positive for every one in the world.
Prosperity!
Who would have thought? No need for any of those forced sterilisations, nasty Eugenics, or one child policies. Just help nations stand on their own two feet financially, and bingo, their birth rate will reduce naturally as their prosperity improves.
In 2002, Seth Norton, a business economics professor at Wheaton College in Illinois, published a remarkably interesting study on the inverse relationship between prosperity and fertility. Norton compared fertility rates of over 100 countries with their index rankings for economic freedom and another index for the rule of law. “Fertility rate is highest for those countries that have little economic freedom and little respect for the rule of law,” wrote Norton. “The relationship is a powerful one. Fertility rates are more than twice as high in countries with low levels of economic freedom and the rule of law compared to countries with high levels of those measures.”
The developed nations of the world should be doing everything possible to help the rest of the worlds people become more prosperous. This will stabilise the world’s population, improve education, and, make available more time and money to clean up and preserve our environment. The vast majority of prosperous nations have a very good record for environmental protection (with only a few exceptions), and conversely, the poorest nations usually have the worst practices for environmental protection (again with only a few exceptions).
I only see a wins in all directions. Well, maybe not for those Despots who usually profit from keeping their populace destitute and struggling, or those well paid bureaucrats working comfortably at the UN approving funds to said despots. But for the rest, a win for the people, a win for the environment, and a win for the planet (just in case you think Gaia cares).
So, the next time you are talking with your elected parliamentary member, maybe ask them how our foreign aid is directly (and not though the UN) helping other nations infrastructure, economic freedoms, and their self generated prosperity. And maybe suggest this should be the principal use of our financial help.
In recent years the Australian Federal government has done exactly that , and is helping the pacific Islands with infrastructure progams and other aide to help them become more prosperous.
This is what environmentalist’s should be advocating.
Australia has vast reserves of Uranium. It makes sense to use it. We will not be the lucky country for very long with while continuing to install costly unreliable wind and solar.
Kirbati is, pretty much in the middle of the Pacific ocean. Only a few metres above sea level, and has been that way for a very, very long time. The idea that it may disappear under the rising seas in the near future is fanciful gloom mongering at it’s best.
Current rate of sea level movement = +1mm per year. I think the Islanders are safe.
How is that “disappearing” Arctic ice going anyway?
The gloom and doom from those who oft say, we should all use less, and much more we should pay. For the gas that is rare, .04 of the air. It feeds all the plants, with greening enhanced, and the sea that has rose to just cover my toes. “Is a crisis, a crime, we pay penance and time”. I call it unfair, and call out the big scare. For there are things that are real on this earth all around, so treasure the gifts and the beauty abound. Kiribati in the sea, still an Island here with, above the high waves, it’s sinking a myth!
I personally believe that Kiribati should be in the news and promoted for the paradise that it is. The proud people of the Islands should not be represented as victims in this world. Unable to look after themselves, and in need of help from “grown up nations”.
I say, support them in the right way. For those with a bit of an adventurist spirit, visit the damn place! Fishing, surfing, and diving. History, and some great Pacific Island culture. Just have a look at Traveller.com for an overview of the Islands.
It is noted that the current Prime Minister does not appear to be so “victimised” about climate change. Especially after having a go at film maker Matthieu Rytz and his film about the so called “sinking Island” and all of the “climate refugees”. See Radio NZ for the full story. Seems Matthieu was a little loose with the truth and was a little dis-respectful of the Islanders.
Ps. It also appears the film has not made much of an impact either with yawning reviews, and FB support in the “TENS” of people.
Anyway. How’s that sea level rise thing going atm?
It seems the rise in sea level around Kiribati is quite meaningless with a mere 66mm increase over nearly 70 years. With an R² of 0.02 over the last 42 years, and only 0.04 over the last 60 years I would suggest this is statistically insignificant. Less than 1mm per year over the entire record.
