PDA

View Full Version : “LIMITS TO GROWTH” GENUINE WARNING OR “SCIENTIFIC” JUSTIFICATION OF THE NWO AGENDA


Institute
12-25-2004, 12:59 PM
I will always remember my excitment and fascination when as a a high school pupil accidentally found and read a book that my uncle – a 50 years old architect had to learn by heart, completing his (late) postgradute studis , in a socialist country where we lived.

The title of the book was “ LIMITS TO GROWTH”.

This book , published in 1972, was based on the report that study group of brilliant mathematic,economic and computer experts at Massachusetts Institute of Technology made for the “infamous” globalistic group -Club of Rome with main aim to examine what would happen if -the world economy continued to progress and people continued to exploit such a high amount of resources and polute the environment- what will happen if developing and undeveloped countries become developed and those that are developed continue to develop their industrial capacities – will we all die due to the global polution,warming and lack of food .

In a sentence , they studied what would be long-term causes and consequences of growth in population, industrial capital, food production, resource consumption, and pollution.

And they concluded that the physical limits to human use of materials and energy were somewhere decades ahead.
For them the old economic maxim "Grow or die could very well be "grow and die."

(in 1992 the similar group of researchers published an update book - Beyond the Limits: Confronting Global Collapse, Envisioning a Sustainable Future - The authors use updated computer models to present a comprehensive overview of what's happening to the major systems on planet Earth and to explore different scenarios of the future)

The memebers of the study group have been : Dr. D. L. Meadows (USA), Dr. A. Anderson (USA) Dr. J. Anderson(USA) , Dr. I. Bayar (Turkey), Dr. W. Behrens (USA), Dr. F.Hakimzadeh (Iran), Dr. S. Harbordt (Germany), J.Machen (USA), Dr. D. H. Meadows (USA), P. Milling(Germany), Dr. N. Murthy (India), R. Naill (USA), Dr. J. Randers (Norway), S. Shantzis (USA), J. Seeger (USA),M. Williams (USA) and Dr. E. Zahn (Germany).

At that time I did not know that acctually “LIMITS TO GROWTH” might been mathematical/computer-modeled elaboration and justification for the creation of NWO.

To be honest I thought that it was “genuine scientific effort “ to indicate and warn on the possibility of the future global populational,economical , climate and ecological catastrophe if WE ALL and world elite,particulary do not take “proper measures” to stop expansion of world economy and prevent devastating consequences of such unlimited growth and polution.

Was it ? I ask you all to discuss this issue on this forum because this study, although pretty old , might give us many clues and answers.
So I ask you TWO MAIN QUESTIONS:

IS THE INHIBITION OF THE EXORBITANT GROWTH OF THE WORLD ECONOMY REALLY NECESSARY FOR THE SURVIVAL OF THIS PLANET as the creators of NWO claim,in this publication, and finally convinced world elite?
And, to the contrary,
IS THE CURRENT UNLIMITED ECONOMICAL GROWTH AND ITS CONSEQUENCES SUCH AS ULIMITED GLOBAL POLUTION, CLIMATE CHANGES, CONSUMPTION OF RESOURCES ... etc . SUSTAINABLE?

At that time , and even today, many intellectuals and analysts claimed that this book was ”predection what will happen”- scenario of the great economic crisis in the 1990s.
Since this did not happen critics triumphed and relaxed .But governments acquired polices in accordance with this “warning”.

HOWEVER THE AIM OF THIS STUDY WAS NOT TO PREDICT, in my opinion, IT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO PROVE “SCIENTIFICALLY” THAT THE NEW WORLD ORDER MUST BE CREATED IN ORDER TO AVOID FUTURE “SELF-DISTRACTION” OF THE WORLD.
THIS WAS AN OPEN MANIFEST WHAT MUST BE TACLED OR CREATED BY THE NEW WORLD ORDER IN THE FUTURE .
THIS STUDY WAS NOT AIMED TO THE PUBLIC BUT TO THE CREATORS OF THE GLOBAL POLITICS AND ECONOMY.

As I indicated the study "LIMITS TO GROWTH" was commissioned by THE CLUB OF ROME – group of scientists, economists, managers, diplomates, and politicians from round the world and irronically financed by the “Volkswagen” .
Many researchers claim THE CLUB OF ROME is a Masonic,globalistic organization.

The Club was founded by the late Dr. Aurelio Peccei, an Italian businessman from Rome. In 1965, doctor Peccei gave a speech on the dramatic changes taking place in the world, especially relating to science and technology. The speech attracted considerable attention.
Members of the Club of Rome, at the time of publishing this study have been,among others Alexender King (a British scientist, who had been a scientific adviser to the British Government, and who was then at the Paris-based Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development),Saburo Okita (head of the Japan economic research center ), Eduard Pestel (professor at the Technical University in Hannover), Carroll Wilson (professor at MIT), etc.

These NWO “ intellectuals” according to their own statements did not think that “either the market or technology could function as a way of solving environmental problems”, enraging,in this way both capitalistic and socialistic governments ( remember that this period, 1950s and 1960s had been a period of immense economic growth in both the Western and Communist worlds, both of which had a very low rate of unemployment).

THE CLUB OF ROME swooped down on, at that time, popular belief in the Western world that another 1930s-type Depression could be avoided as a result of government intervention in the economy and criticized the prevailing notion how “Western formula for economic growth could be applied throughout the Third World.

Peccei and King,as well as others from THE CLUB OF ROME warned on the “ devastating environmental consequences” of economic growth and found irrational both capitalists and communists views on environmental crisis and their overall belief that growth was good and that the environmental consequences could be solved by administrative, legal and technological measures.

For Peccei, capitalists have wrong idea that the market would solve any environmental problem (for example, if resources were used too rapidly, then prices would go up and so usage would be forced down) just like communists who thought that technology could solve all problems (it is funny that Peccei although businessman did not consider himself to be capitalist).

In 1991, The Club of Rome published The First Global Revolution, which argued that the
“globe was undergoing its first simultaneous revolution. However this time, technological change takes place suddenly and simultaneously, with even less scope for preparation and safety measures .As a result, many Third World countries undergone trumendous economic development - but at great environmental cost”.

To the contrary one of the prominent (current ) members of The Club of Rome Keith Suter “concerned for the Third World countries” concluded:

...as First World countries have got richer, so they have got meaner, with the result that foreign aid is now the lowest since records began three decades ago.
The Club has argued that humankind needs to re-evaluate its exploitative attitude towards humans and the earth itself. The failure to give more foreign aid is indicative of the increased selfishness of rich countries. Meanwhile, the world's richest 20 per cent of the population consume 86 per cent of its goods and services, over half its energy and nearly half its meat and fish. There is little indication that most of the world's richest people are willing to heed the warning from "Limits to Growth", they are too busy making the most of today.

Therefore, the reluctance to give foreign aid and help the Third World is in itself a reflection of the prevailing economic mindset: making a virtue out of selfishness. There is no doubt that the market system is the best way to create wealth (by encouraging everyone to look out for their own best interests). But the market system was not designed to share wealth or protect the environment - as even The Economist magazine is having to admit. So, as it stands, the market system enriches the wealthy, impoverishes the poor, and endangers the planet“
(end of the quatation).



More about “LIMITS TO GROWTH”


This study looked at five factors affecting human society: industrialization, population, food production, natural resources, and pollution.
The main aim of the study was to underline “ the consequences of ultimately limited resources being consumed at an exponential rate”.

The study's first, much discussed conclusion was that if (then) present growth trends continued, the limits to growth on this earth will be reached in the middle of the Twenty-first Century, followed by a dramatic, uncontrollable collapse of population, food production, and all the other significant measures of a society's welfare.

There are some basic conclusions of the book:

1. If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next 100 years. The most probable result will be a sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.
2. It is possible to alter these growth trends and to establish a condition of ecological and economic stability that is sustainable far into the future. The state of global equilibrium could be designed so that the basic material needs of each person on earth are satisfied and each person has an equal opportunity to realize his or her individual human potential.
3. If the world's people decide to strive for this second outcome rather than the first, the sooner they begin working to attain it, the greater will be their chances of success. (Meadows et al., 1972).
The essence of the warning from the “ LIMITS TO GROWTH” APPERENTLY is valid (for example we are all aware of the weather-related disasters).

Although the study on which was based THE book “LIMITS OF GROWTH” had many obvious limitations caused by the use of computer modelling it was considered to be “highly scientifically sophisticated”.

This was the first time that computer modelling had been used for such a project. The success of such modelling depends on both the quality of data and the capabilities of the computer. In 1970, methods of data collection were poor. Many countries, for example, did not have proper statistical data on the size of their populations, numbers of unemployed people etc.

At that time , the quality of the model used was limited by the available computer technology and could only use a low number of equations in its construction.

One of the critics of “LIMITS TO GROWTH”, when “figured out” that the prediction of the possible did not realize trimphud and concluded stupidly the following :
“ Today fertility rates in most industrialized countries are below replacement level. The birthrate is lower today in every developing country than it was when Limits to Growth was published”

He does not understand that all these “wonderful events” acctually are in accordance with hidden agenda of those that distributed “LIMITS TO GROWTH” .

In the end I will cite what authors of this study wrote in their new book “Beyond the Limits” :

“ It is even possible, we concluded, to eliminate poverty while accommodating the population growth already implicit in present population age structures - but not if population growth goes on indefinitely, not if it goes on for long, and not without rapid improvements in the efficiency of material and energy use and in the equity of material and energy distribution.
As far as we can tell from the global data, from the World3 model, and from all we have learned in the past twenty years, the three conclusions we drew in The Limits to Growth are still valid, but they need to be strengthened. Now we would write them this way:
1. Human use of many essential resources and generation of many kinds of pollutants have already surpassed rates that are physically sustainable. Without significant reductions in material and energy flows, there will be in the coming decades an uncontrolled decline in per capita food output, energy use, and industrial production.

2. This decline is not inevitable. To avoid it two changes are necessary. The first is a comprehensive revision of policies and practices that perpetuate growth in material consumption and in population. The second is a rapid, drastic increase in the efficiency with which materials and energy are used.

3. A sustainable society is still technically and economically possible. It could be much more desirable than a society that tries to solve its problems by constant expansion. The transition to a sustainable society requires a careful balance between long-term and short-term goals and an emphasis on sufficiency, equity, and quality of life rather than on quantity of output. It requires more than productivity and more than technology; it also requires maturity, compassion, and wisdom.

The ideas of limits, sustainability, sufficiency, equity, and efficiency are not barriers, not obstacles, not threats. They are guides to a new world. Sustainability, not better weapons or struggles for power or material accumulation, is the ultimate challenge to the energy and creativity of the human race.
We think the human race is up to the challenge. We think that a better world is possible, and that the acceptance of physical limits is the first step toward getting there ” (end of the quatation).

In conclusion , some old questions remain open and some new appear –
I invite you all to try to give the answer
- is the study” LIMITS TO GROWTH” genuine warning to all who believe in unlimited capitalism or NWO agenda backed by “scientific proofs” ?!

john
12-25-2004, 02:35 PM
It is of course a nonsense to continue pillaging the limited natural resources as does the current ultra-liberal logic of "evergrowing" consumerism. The "solution" of the international elite controlled think thanks (like the Club de Rome)is:

1/ Reduce the world`s population.
2/ Reduce the non-renewable resources/energy consumation.

In fact this international elite is itself the problem since owning the corporations and the banking system which is propagating the culture of hyper-consumation.

Since the sixties, independent specialists have well demonstrated that this planet could easily feed a population of seven billion people or even more. One of the main problem is that the giant corporations have destroyed the agricultural independency of the so-called Third-World countries. Of course, those people who produced their own food before but lost their fields (see the Brazilian or the Indian cases) to became unemployed or employed at misery salaries cannot buy the food produced by the corporations. This doesn`t mean the planet couldn`t feed them but that the ultra-liberal system of the monopolist corporations destroys the independent small farmers who could compete with their products on the local urban market-places while in the same time these corporations refuse to feed those who can`t pay in cash.

The New World Order is tailored to the giant corporations. Their only logic is money-making. Thus, they need to consume all the natural resources they can find. When an NGO like the Club de Rome, more or less indirectly financed by those who own the giant corporations, says "reduce the consumation of the non-renewable resources", this means prevent the non-industrialised societies to develop since most of the natural resources are on their territories. Logically, these resources would be used by the locals to develop their own industry instead of leaving the international giant corporations pillaging these resources. That`s why the corporations need to corrupt the governments of these countries and, if this isn`t enough, destroy them.

The only solution for the planet is to get rid of the dictatorship of the man-eater corporations and international bankers and apply the solidarity/sharing/compassion values given us since thousand years by people as Moses (3.500 years) Jesus (2.000 years) or Mahomet (1.400 years), among others less known.

marypopinz
12-25-2004, 05:19 PM
What an excellant read for a beautiful Christmas day.

XXX

Institute
12-25-2004, 06:17 PM
oh, I have noticed that I forget to add the third possible (totally opposit) option and dilemma:
" is it likely that distributers of the "LIMITS TO GROWTH"- in fact, are creating actively "future catastrophe" stimulating global pollution, consumption of unrenewable resources?!

sablefish
12-25-2004, 06:32 PM
john.. I like what you do.. Keep up the good works...(same to you institute)

freeman
12-25-2004, 08:52 PM
- is the study” LIMITS TO GROWTH” genuine warning to all who believe in unlimited capitalism or NWO agenda backed by “scientific proofs” ?!

I have often puzzled over this same dilemma in my own mind.
But here is an everyday example that may shed some light on the subject:
Every week I am required to separate my trash and place "recyclables" in a separate bin. This, of course, is because of a law enacted in reaction to environmental concerns.
Yet for the past decade, my waste hauler has refused to recycle the materials, claiming the market prices are too low; therefore, it all gets dumped into the same landfill, and I am just performing a meaningless ritual under penalty of law. This situation is the same in most areas of my home state and many other places around the country from what I have learned.
Now, if the NWO really was serious about all of this population control and environmental conservation rhetoric that they disseminate through their respective think tanks, would they permit these kinds of glaring hypocrisies to occur? What about our auto industry, cranking out 8 MPG SUVs?; or the woeful lack of research and development in alternative energy sources despite a quarter century of recurrent "energy crises"?
Certainly the empirical evidence tends to convey the notion that the ruling elites do not take their own "doomsday" studies seriously -- or at least not constructively. The current pseudo war on terrorism appears to be a thinly veiled sham for seizing control of a monopoly of the world's energy reserves. The Illuminati may still believe some of these grim prophecies (even after the worst scenarios have yet to materialize), but so far their only reponse is to try to hoard even more of the world's limited resources to themselves.
Of course, these studies do make useful fodder to feed the sheeple when they question why personal wealth, standards of living, etc. are dropping from generation to generation even as technology and automation continually advance. "We're running out of everything," our leaders tell us, "because the world is overcrowded with non-essential consumers." Through these ploys and artifices, their best eugenics arguments are made for them by the intelligentsia.
Since the aforementioned forces control and contaminate the data and statistical bases, we may never really know just how true or false the conclusions reached by these studies may actually be. Still, it is interesting to pick out incongruous situations like the birth rate crisis in Italy, where the government is desperately imploring people to reproduce at a higher rate:

European birth rate crisis (- is the study” LIMITS TO GROWTH” genuine warning to all who believe in unlimited capitalism or NWO agenda backed by “scientific proofs” ?!)

Do you suppose it is just a coincidence that the major problem created by zero population growth is the inability of countries to finance their social welfare programs, because a smaller number of younger taxpayers will be paying into the system?

nohope187
12-25-2004, 09:02 PM
Of course not! There really is an underlying connection goin' on here. :-P

Institute
12-26-2004, 05:13 AM
Remember that G. Soros (and some nobel laureats like Joseph Stiglitz) –one of the prominent globalists and cabbalists publically swooped down on the current ultra-liberal market logic named it “market fundamentalism”, sharing the same view with the authors of the “LIMITS TO GROWTH”. Carefully read what is the the prevailing attitude towards market economy among the memebers of the the CLUB OF ROME (gatthered in Accademia dei Lincei):

“ the reluctance to give foreign aid and help the Third World is in itself a reflection of the prevailing economic mindset: making a virtue out of selfishness. There is no doubt that the market system is the best way to create wealth (by encouraging everyone to look out for their own best interests). But the market system was not designed to share wealth or protect the environment - as even The Economist magazine is having to admit. So, as it stands, the market system enriches the wealthy, impoverishes the poor, and endangers the planet“

well, this is not strange -their ultimate goal is not to dominate world economy (although it could sound silly ) BUT TO DESTROY IT-acctually "freeze" it
THEIR AIM IS NOT SUSTAINABLE GROWTH BUT
SUSTAINABLE DECLINE

freeman
12-26-2004, 05:44 AM
well, this is not strange -their ultimate goal is not to dominate world economy (although it could sound silly ) BUT TO DESTROY IT-acctually "freeze" it

Knowing what we know about central banking, aren't the two goals synonymous?
As world markets decline, won't the wealthy elites secure an even larger share of the pie for themselves, much as they did in the Great Depression? As inflation, deficit spending, etc. increase as part of this "sustainable decline" model, the central banksters are always still on the receiving end.
As Dr. Makow says, they have spend a long time contstructing this racket, and the devil is in the details.

john
12-26-2004, 06:38 AM
As well known, Soros is a key-men of the Rothschilds` led conspiracy toward a new planetary feudalism they call the "New World Order". When he says: "The market system enriches the wealthy, impoverishes the poor, and endangers the planet."... most people believe he is opposing the monopolistic corporations. As a good kabbalist ("luciferian", would say some) predator, Soros is pretty good at hijacking the words. The "market system" he is opposing to isn`t the present fascist-liberal system dominated by criminal monopolistic giant corporations. He is indeed one of the high priests of this system.

When Soros and his like attack the "market system", they attack the -today dead- democratic liberal economy based upon healthy competition between private entreprises (the Keynesian self-regulatory economy). For the global elite who already controls the giant corporations, economical competition is the enemy. Their ultimate goal is a monopolistic economy where a bunch of corporations controlled by themselves are sharing the planet in a sort of "gentlemen agreement".

Rockefeller John Davison (1839-1937) said in one of his famous speeches: "I want to own nothing and control everything. (...) Competition is a sin.". Yes, for the world elite, COMPETITION IS A SIN! This means they are wanting a monopolistic system, just as was the communism. By the way, many of us know who was financing the communist revolution in 1917... His son David Rockefeller repeated the same message in one of his speeches to the world elite controlled UN.

You see, the ultimate goal of this so humanitarian people is to get rid of all national sovereignties in order to have a planet entirely under their control through their almighty monopolistic corporations. The day they would realise their objective, their game would no longer be in making money (they will then control everything, as said Rockefeller) but enjoying the absolute power over an enslaved humanity and doing the necessary everyday`s brainwashing of the masses and repression of the Spartacuses, to keep their absolute power.

sablefish
12-26-2004, 07:25 AM
What terrific writing from you guys!, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. I suspect that eventually we will see a system that resembles Communism.. Where private corporations, owned by the elites own the nations of the world, and the governments they put in place will be run for their benefit. Everybody will work for the government.. essentially every man, woman, and child will be born into slavery to them, forever. Their leader is the Nameless One.

I refuse to submit to that kind of future.. We must resist it with every fiber of our being.. Using every creative means possible, to unveil the man/men behind this curtain of deceit.

marypopinz
12-26-2004, 09:39 AM
That's what they envision and it ain'y what's gonna happen.

That is the illusion they are trying to bring into reality. It is not the only possibilty of our future and is not even the probablity of our future.

The pens they have created will be for themselves,perverted members of society as they are.

Truth always comes to light.
There is no truth in evil, only illusion.
Evil is the mirage they have sewn into the network of your mind.

See beyond the programming... envision that place in time where there is peace. Bring all senses into that picture in your mind. That is our future... that is our destiny.

The truth always comes to light and the day is always darkest before the dawn. Things are very very dark right. Just because a whole lot of people have not been able to truly recognize this fact, generally because they cannot face the demons they carry within.

Fear is a demon.

I do not fear these poor excuses for human beings. It is them who need to fear me and people like me who think and feel that same way about our children and the future... it is not open season on children... not while I live and breath.

I'm gonna tell and tell and keep telling until I am heard. God gave me a voice and I am going to use it. He's the wind in my sales and the beat of my heart. Christmas was most excellant this year.

Life is a choice, a focus if you will.

1.)Choose to place your energy and faith in someone else's ugly vision? No.

2.)Place my heart and my mind into a beautiful future for me and my kids where anything is possible and anything is achievable, given time and patience. These thoughts help to bring this future into my reality. That's the way my weird mind works. Of course, I get lots of curve balss and hurdles to stepping stones, hurdles to stepping stones, yada, yada, yada.

I will my mind to focus on the positive while still being able to percieve the negative. I see both sides of the coin, most of the time. I can pick up on the emotional flavour of the past and that gives mea feeling of potential possibilities for what's coming. I am very sensitive. I think it was due to growing up in a violent household or maybe that just amplified my receptors. I don't know.

Anyhow... I'm waffling.

Think good thoughts.
It will lead to peace of mind.
There is always good to be taken out of any bad situation. Always.

XXX

sablefish
12-26-2004, 10:51 AM
Thanks Maryx.. You are right, I will put on my rose colored glasses and think nice thoughts about the future on this lovely day of The Lord.. Who knows tomorrow the world might blow up.

marypopinz
12-26-2004, 11:27 AM
No sable, that is not what I meant at all.

I do not wear rosy glasses. I see far too much; much more than I want to, and that is for certain.

I am also capable of envisioning better things for my future and the future of humanity. I believe things are possible in my life and they happen.

I believe that a more positive outlook is needed.
Otherwise, we are defeated before you even start.

I don't understand why everyone has lost hope and are ready to just give up. I really don't. Why does it have to be their way? Because he who holds the gold makes the rules?

I live my life by my rules. I wouldn't do many things that would break their laws anyhow, and, the things that I do that do break their corrupt laws I will stand up in court and defend my actions to.

That's just me.

I feel like everyone is buying into the future they are being sold. I feel like everyone is wearing these dark shady glasses that replaced their rose-colored ones.

Just my perspective. I appreciate what you have said and I believe I understand. Maybe I believe that God can achieve anything through us, if we believe. Naive or stupid, you can call me either one and I am who I am and I believe what I believe.

I don't expect anyone to see life the way I do. We've all walked in different shoes. I have just found my life is a lot sweeter and far kinder when I appreciate the good things and focus on the good things.

In my experience, when I focus on bad, that's what I get... more bad.

When I focus on good, I still get bad and the good just seems so much better.

I know I am different from most and I don't expect to be understood. I rarely am. I usually feel like I'm speaking some foreign language, that people just don't get.

What I like about life most, is being myself. I'm a simpleton huh? I like being me. I like who I am. Ilike my life. I like looking on the bright side.

I see so much dark. I sense it everywhere. These days, being sensitive generally sucks. The good vibes I find are few and far between. You are a good vibe sable.

I wish you could feel the happiness that life gives me. Maybe then you would understand why I can percieve things the way I do.

Peace XXX

eddie
12-26-2004, 12:09 PM
i have always wondered what the world would be like if usery was illegal.to me it's all about control.debt is a way of control.it's a tool.
in another x years you can rent your house from the nwo.no more private property.just look at the farmers around the world.more and more debt,and at the end they end up selling to the goverment.land is what they are after.just like the roman catholic church in the past.
the elite think that they are right with their plans and have the right to use whatever it needs to complete these plans.it's a bit like killing one to save the others.they really believe this.
they use the good arguments{like population control}and combine them with their own ideas{control}
just thinking about italy,population contol?yes.control by the rc church?mmmm,yes
if you don't agree with the nwo they will trace you down and you will disappear overnight.imho this is already happening
keep them poor,dumb,and occupied. :-)

Pliny
12-27-2004, 08:01 PM
In my view, Limits to Growth is not a call for vigilance in our growth and use of world resources. It is a justification to craft the world structure according to the desires of a few men.

Rampant consumerism and exponential growth are ills of the current economic/tax structure created by the same men that would create the limits of growth.

Nonetheless it is an interesting discussion and I enjoyed the input of the contributors to this thread.

Just a few points of correction John. Keynes was never the defender of the self-regulatory economy rather his theories were based upon interventionism to regulate the economy and are employed by most governments of today with a central bank. Also David Rockefeller was JDs grandson. The son of John Jr. I liked your quote from Rockefeller which put him squarely in the camp of communism. His octupus trusts and foundations in society that are involved in its engineering are a web that rival the wonders of the world.

Institute
12-28-2004, 05:15 AM
I just want to add something about Keynes.

For example, In my opinion (of course I could be wrong) Keynesian system is inherently incapable of allocating available liquid funds among firms and activities in the society according to considerations of efficiency, productivity and growth.

Just consider this -as far as I know according to the Keynesian theory every businessman would estimate the marginal efficiency of investment MEI ( while the interest rate is determined by money demand and supply) and if
(MEI) is equal or greater than interest it will be rewarding to borrow and finance the investment project. Otherwise the project will not be undertaken.
Accordingly, available money for lending will be allocated efficiently among firms and activities.

In my opinion this Keynesian theory is wrong and we see it in practice.
Let’s say for sake of simplicity that interest measures accurately the opportunity cost of money available for lending in the credit market, and that a uniform interest rate is applied by banks (lenders) in all cases of borrowing. Hence investment projects for which (MEI) below interest will be excluded.

On the other hand all projects fulfilling the condition MEI greater then intererst will find excess to loanable funds without any preference given by banks (lenders) to projects with relatively higher (MEI).

Therefore in a Keynesian free market economy we can not claim that loanable funds would be optimally or best allocated in this way.
(theoretically speaking only interest-free financial institutions that would aim at maximizing their “interest free” revenues would give preference to projects with higher (MEI) over other projects with relatively lower MEI).

Investors with projects satisfying the (MEI) condition and seeking interest-based finance are not treated equally by banks (lenders),in a free market economy as we have simply assumed.
Large corporations are given priority and better borrowing terms, irrespective of how funds will be used by them. In fact banks (lenders) are concerned, above anything else, with borrowers solvency. Hence, preferential treatments and financing priorities are set by banks on credit-worthiness basis. Consequently small enterprises are either neglected or given least attention by bankers, even if their investment projects are expecting highest returns.
The problem of small enterprises is quite serious in the developing world..

"Surveys indicate that less than I% of small firms in developing countries obtain credit at controlled rates from financial institutions; the remainder rely on the informal sector. The combined net effect is to raise their capital costs and reduce their ability to compete against large firms", according to W.B (I987). In fact failure of small businesses to obtain finance from banks have forced them quite frequently, in the absence of equity finance, to borrow from money lenders in the informal market at very high rates of interest. So they have jumped from the frying pan to the fire.

A study concerning the informal credit market in Peru mentioned that interest rate in that market was as high as 800% - I000% per annum sometimes in the mid 1980s. Todaro, M., states that "commercial banking system of many LDCs restricts its activities almost exclusively to rationing scarce loan able funds to "credit-worthy" medium-and large-scale enterprises in the modern manufacturing sector. Small farmers and indigenous small scale entrepreneurs and traders in both the formal and informal manufacturing and service sectors must normally seek finance elsewhere sometimes from family members and relatives, but more typically from local moneylenders and loan sharks who charge exorbitant rates of interest.
And so on, and so on.

john
12-28-2004, 06:44 AM
Keynes isn`t so easy to understand. He says that economy is self-regulatory but he says not that it should be 100% independent from the citizen`s control (the state-control). This is not the theory of the "hidden hand" proned by Adam Smith.

The intervention of the state is necessary at the level of the Central Bank. We see today how a privte owned Central Bank system is social destructive. See my posts on this topic.

Ozziecynic
12-30-2004, 06:51 AM
What terrific writing from you guys!, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. I suspect that eventually we will see a system that resembles Communism.. Where private corporations, owned by the elites own the nations of the world, and the governments they put in place will be run for their benefit. Everybody will work for the government.. essentially every man, woman, and child will be born into slavery to them, forever. Their leader is the Nameless One.

Resembles communism you say that is not commmunism!.
That is Monopoly capitalism you are describing the kind of system that ultra capitalist like Market libertarians and classic liberal advocates in the Adam smith school of economics would like to see. It is hadly socialism in any shape or form i think a few of you need to read up on ideologies a little more :-?

Also many of you believe keynes represents monopoly capitalism while this may have been so for his time what do you think an economist like Friedrich Hayek or Milton Friedman represent now they sure as hell dont represent small scale enterprise.
Infact if you readup on Adam smith classic liberalism or political economy of Market libertarians it always involves Global monopoly capitalism. What do you think your President is giving you right now.Are you stupid enough to call that Socialism too really very odd?
Get educated people in your understanding of ideology and economics!. :-?

Institute
01-08-2005, 06:31 PM
You know,it is strange,even to me (and I realized this tonight)that only a day before Tsunami catastrophe in South East Asia I posted my thread:

"LIMITS TO GROWTH"-GENUINE WARNING OR "SCIENTIFIC" JUSTIFICATION OF THE NWO AGENDA

THIS IS OPPORTUNITY FOR NWO OPERATIVES TO START THEIR STRATEGIC DEPOPULATION AGENDA SPRAEDING VARIOUS VIRUSES IN THE AREAS WHERE THEY DELIVER
HUMANITARIAN HELP"

Just think about following words from this book

"What will happen if growth in the world's population continues unchecked? What will be the environmental consequences if economic growth continues at its current pace? What can be done to ensure a human economy that provides sufficiently for all and that also fits within the physical limits of the Earth?

Ellar
01-08-2005, 09:16 PM
[This is always what THEY meant by "limited growth." THEY just use intellectually sounding rhetoric to deceive the educated egotist dummies who actually believe THEM. Most of the populace won't even know it is happening. The media will do an interpretation of it all that makes it sound like genuine concern for the betterment of the world. All the while these policy makers are really out to eliminate all the "useless eaters."]


http://www.whale.to/b/genocide_q.html

Genocide & depopulation quotes
Genocide The depopulation conspiracy

Investigations by EIR have uncovered a planning apparatus operating outside the control of the White House whose sole purpose is to reduce the world's population by 2 billion people through war, famine, disease and any other means necessary. [1981] The Haig-Kissinger depopulation policy by Lonnie Wolfe
My investigation proves that biological agents were not only developed and used in the Persian Gulf war, but that they are in fact part of the Global 2000 population downsizing program..........the information that I want to get out to the American people is that the Gulf War illnesses are actually communicable diseases. The microbes will live almost indefinitely, but for a minimum of seven years. It's on the gas masks, the clothing, the weapons -- any of the materials brought back from the Gulf War. I have reports from several different states where civilians that bought some of the clothing went home and wore them, and now the entire family is in wheel chairs; there have been some deaths as a result of this. The Resnick Interview with Peter Kawaja and Ex-NSA Agent Joe Jordan

To cause by means of limited wars in the advanced countries, by means of starvation and diseases in the Third World countries, the death of three billion people by the year 2050, people they call "useless eaters". The Committee of 300 (Illuminati) commissioned Cyrus Vance to write a paper on this subject of how to bring about such genocide. The paper was produced under the title "Global 2000 Report" and was accepted and approved for action by former President James Earl Carter, and Edwin Muskie, then Secretary of States, for and on behalf of the US Government. Under the terms of the Global 2000 Report, the population of the US is to be reduced by 100 million by the year of 2050. Targets of the Illuminati and the Committee of 300 By Dr. John Coleman

To bring about depopulation of large cities according to the trial run carried out by the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia. It is interesting to note that Pol Pot's genocidal plans were drawn up in the US by one of the Club of Rome's research foundations, and overseen by Thomas Enders, a high-ranking State Department official. It is also interesting that the committee is currently seeking to reinstate the Pol Pot butchers in Cambodia. Targets of the Illuminati and the Committee of 300 By Dr. John Coleman.

The March 1999 "Vaccines" feature in Parenting magazine provided all propaganda one would expect from a subsidiary of Time, Inc. Time-Warner, Inc., the parent company, is a corporate member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Time's president, Richard D. Parsons, and the Editor-in-Chief of TIME, Norman Pearlstine, are longstanding CFR members. One CFR published policy objective is substantial worldwide depopulation including half of the current U.S. population being targeted. This population reduction program is largely funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Merck Fund, both financially and administratively linked to the Merck pharmaceutical company--the world's leading vaccine manufacturer. Parenting with Deadly Timely Propaganda --Dr. Len Horowitz

Society is being weeded out right now, as minority species are being eliminated very specifically by biological germ warfare and other tactics meant to insure the elimination of those less genetically favourable...Our food is being tampered with, by the insertion of food additives and substances like aspartame. ....They view this as a massive genetic cleanup."--Thanks for the Memories: The Memoirs of Bob Hope's and Henry Kissinger's mind control slave by Brice Taylor p281

It was not a large leap for a J.D. Rockefeller to go from owning the oil industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the banking industry etc. to wanting to own the whole world. This is the reason that Rockefeller and his foundation have been in the forefront of the population "control" and eugenics movement. Ultimately the goal is to reduce the earth's population for the simple warped reason that the less there is for you and me, the more there will be for J.D. and his cronies. The elite just loves birth control. Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Ted Turner are among the ultra rich that have donated billions to spreading the gospel of contraception, abortion, and feminism using the United Nations and "US Aid." Rockefeller funded the invention of the pill, the IUD and owns the rights to the abortion drug RU-486. In the last 50 years, billions of public dollars have been spent on "family planning" designed to limit population by deceit and coercion, including compulsory abortion and infanticide. In "The War Against Population (1988)," Dr. Jacqueline Kasun writes that in 1981, a directory of population control agencies in Washington DC listed 92 private (but mostly publicly funded) agencies, 12 United Nations and 57 agencies of the US government (p. 198). "The real problem of government family planning is not one of families out of control but of planners out of control," she wrote (p.211). The Devil's Work: Feminism and the Elite Depopulation Agenda By Henry Makow Ph.D

It was the residential "schools" that constituted the death camps of the Canadian Holocaust, and within their walls nearly one-half of all aboriginal children sent there by law died, or disappeared, according to the government's own statistics.
These 50,000 victims have vanished, as have their corpses - "like they never existed", according to one survivor. But they did exist. They were innocent children, and they were killed by beatings and torture and after being deliberately exposed to tuberculosis and other diseases by paid employees of the churches and government, according to a "Final Solution" master plan devised by the Department of Indian Affairs and the Catholic and Protestant churches.
With such official consent for manslaughter emanating from Ottawa, the churches responsible for annihilating natives on the ground felt emboldened and protected enough to declare full-scale war on non-Christian native peoples through the 20th century.
The casualties of that war were not only the 50,000 dead children of the residential schools, but the survivors, whose social condition today has been described by United Nations human rights groups as that of "a colonized people barely on the edge of survival, with all the trappings of a third-world society". (November 12, 1999)HIDDEN FROM HISTORY The Canadian Holocaust by Rev. Kevin D. Annett, MA, MDiv

Denis Halliday, who the previous year had resigned as assistant secretary general of the United Nations. He said: "We are waging a war through the United Nations on the people of Iraq. We're targeting civilians. Worse, we're targeting children. . . . What is this all about?".... he wrote, "because the policy of economic sanctions is . . . destroying an entire society. Five thousand children are dying every month. I don't want to administer a program that satisfies the definition of genocide."
Halliday's successor, Hans von Sponeck, another assistant secretary general with more than 30 years' service, also resigned in protest. ......Von Sponeck's disclosure that the sanctions restricted Iraqis to living on little more than $100 a year was not reported. "Deliberate strangulation," he called it. Neither was the fact that, up to July 2002, more than $5 billion worth of humanitarian supplies, which had been approved by the UN sanctions committee and paid for by Iraq, were blocked by George W. Bush, with Tony Blair's backing. They included food products, medicines and medical equipment, as well as items vital for water and sanitation, agriculture and education.
The cost in lives was staggering. Between 1991 and 1998, reported UNICEF, 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of five died. "If you include adults," said Halliday, "the figure is now almost certainly well over a million." The Media Culpability for Iraq By John Pilger

[Home]

Ellar
01-08-2005, 09:40 PM
http://www.muhammadfarms.com/News-Jun15-20-2004.htm

WORLD DEPOPULATION IS TOP NSA AGENDA: CLUB OF ROME

A Timely Repost:

The Haig-Kissinger depopulation policy by Lonnie Wolfe

Special Report EIR (Executive Intelligence Review) March 10, 1981


Investigations by EIR have uncovered a planning apparatus operating outside the control of the White House whose sole purpose is to reduce the world's population by 2 billion people through war, famine, disease and any other means necessary. This apparatus, which includes various levels of the government is determining U.S. foreign policy. In every political hotspot -- El Salvador, the so-called arc of crisis in the Persian Gulf, Latin America, Southeast Asia and in Africa- the goal of U.S. foreign policy is population reduction. The targeting agency for the operation is the National Security Council's Ad Hoc Group on Population Policy. Its policy-planning group is in the U.S. State Department's Office of Population Affairs, established in 1975 by Henry Kissinger. This group drafted the Carter administration's Global 2000 document, which calls for global population reduction, and the same apparatus is conducting the civil war in El Salvador as a conscious depopulation project.

"There is a single theme behind all our work-we must reduce population levels," said Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American case officer for the State Department's Office of Population Affairs (OPA). "Either they [governments] do it our way, through nice clean methods or they will get the kind of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran, or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it "The professionals," said Ferguson, "aren't interested in lowering population for humanitarian reasons. That sounds nice. We look at resources and environmental constraints. We look at our strategic needs, and we say that this country must lower its population-or else we will have trouble.

So steps are taken. El Salvador is an example where our failure to lower population by simple means has created the basis for a national security crisis. The government of El Salvador failed to use our programs to lower their population. Now they get a civil war because of it.... There will be dislocation and food shortages. They still have too
many people there."

Civil wars are somewhat drawn-out ways to reduce population, the OPA official added. "The quickest way to reduce population is through famine, like in Africa or through disease like the Black Death," all of which might occur in El Salvador. Ferguson's OPA monitors populations in the Third World and maps strategies to reduce them. Its budget for FY 1980 was $190 million; for FY 198l, it will be $220 million. The Global 2000 report calls for doubling that figure. The sphere of Kissinger In 1975, OPA was brought under a reorganized State Department Bureau of Oceans, International Environmental, and Scientific Affairs-- a body created by Henry Kissinger.

The agency was assigned to carry out the directives of the NSC Ad Hoc Group. According to an NSC spokesman, Kissinger initiated both groups after discussion with leaders of the Club of Rome during the 1974 population conferences in Bucharest and Rome. The Club of Rome, controlled by Europe's black nobility, is the primary promotion agency for the genocidal reduction of world population levels. The Ad Hoc Group was given "high priority" by the Carter administration, through the intervention of National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and
Secretaries of State Cyrus Vance and Edmund Muskie.

According to OPA expert Ferguson, Kissinger initiated a full about-face on U.S. development policy toward the Third World. "For a long time," Ferguson stated, "people here were timid" They listened to arguments from Third World leaders that said that the best contraceptive was economic reform and development. So we pushed development programs, and we helped create a population time bomb. "We are letting people breed like flies without allowing for natural causes to keep population down. We raised the birth survival rates, extended life-spans by lowering death rates, and did nothing about lowering birth rates.

That policy is finished. We are saying with Global 2000 and in real policy that you must lower population rates. Population reduction and control is now our primary policy objective- then you can have some development."Accordingly, the Bureau of Oceans, International Environmental, and Scientific Affairs has consistently blocked industrialization policies in the Third World, denying developing nations access to nuclear energy technology--the policies that would enable countries to sustain a growing population. According to State Department sources, and Ferguson himself, Alexander Haig is a "firm believer" in population control.

"We will go into a country," said Ferguson, "and say, here is your goddamn development plan. Throw it out the window. Start looking at the size of your population and figure out what must be done to reduce it."If you don't like that, if you don't want to choose to do it through planning, then you'll have an El Salvador or an Iran, or worse, a Cambodia."According to an NSC spokesman, the United States now shares the view of former World Bank President Robert McNamara that the "population crisis" is a greater threat to U.S. national security interests than "nuclear annihilation." "Every hot spot in the world corresponds to a population crisis point," said Ferguson who would rename Brzezinski's arc of crisis doctrine the "arc of population crisis."


This is corroborated by statements in the NSC Ad Hoc Group's April 1980 report. There is "an increased potential for social unrest, economic and political instability, mass migration and possible international conflicts over control of land and resources," says the NSC report. It then cites "demographic pressures" as key to understanding "examples of recent warfare in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, El Salvador. Honduras, and Ethiopia, and the growing potential for instability in such places as Turkey, the Philippines, Central America, Iran, and Pakistan." Through extraordinary efforts, the Ad Hoc Group and OPA estimate that they may be able to keep a billion people from being born through contraceptive programs.

But as the Ad Hoc Group's report states, the best efforts of the Shah of Iran to institute "clean programs" of birth control failed to make a significant dent in the country's birth rate. The promise of jobs, through an ambitious industrialization program, encouraged migration toward "overcrowded cities" like Teheran. Now under Ayatollah Khomeini, the "clean programs" have been dismantled. The government may make progress because it has a program "to induce up to half of Teheran's 6 million residents to relocate, as well as possible measures to keep rural migrants from moving to the cities." Behind the back of the President Ferguson and others involved with the OPA and NSC group maintain that the United States will continue a foreign policy based on a genocidal reduction of the world's population.

"We have a network in place of cothinkers in the government," said the OPA case officer. "We keep going, no matter who is in the White House." But Ferguson reports that the "White House" does not really understand what they are saying and that the President "thinks that population policy means how do we speed up population increase."As long as no one says differently," said Ferguson, "we will continue to do our jobs. "

marypopinz
01-08-2005, 09:44 PM
The canadian holocaust gives greater meaning toour anthem:

O Canada, my home and native land?

The take I got on that story was that Indian parents were told they were unfit to raise children and the children were placed in white families, often abused.

Us whitey's have so much to be "proud" of in our canadian history and present day society, as we have refuse to acknowledge the past. Charming.

XXX

DarkChilde3D
01-08-2005, 10:02 PM
WOW.

Do you want to know what my FORMER thoughts were?

I used to think that the NWO would be a good thing.

I'm a fan of the Star Trek Series' . . . and I'm not one of those Vulcan Ear wearing freaks, either, so no rude comments, please.

For most of my natural born life, I would alway wonder what it would be like to find and visit an alien race. What would they be like, what would they look like, etc.?

And I thought that the only way this type of look into leaving our solar system with the equivalent of the 'warp' engine to explore the new and vast unknow, would be to have a single government on earth, so that countries weren't in competition with each other . . . so we could work on the whole of humanity. But it would be a government OF, BY, and FOR the people. And the worries of money would not be an issue anymore.

And I still think a government like this wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, except this NWO is NOT OF, BY, or FOR the people . . . it is OF, BY and FOR money.

The reason this is the way it is, in my microscopic mind among a global billions . . .

WE PLACE A VALUE ON EVERYTHING. Even things that don't really matter at all. WHY THE FUCK SHOULD WE HAVE TO PAY FOR WATER OUT OF A STORE? Because the people that run the plant that sends the water to us don't maintain the ducts and filters and whatever else goes into maintaining the water supply. And the same people that sell the water through the pipes are part of the same people that get paid the taxes through the sale of store-bought water.

Now, water in the store that averages 1.00 USD per quart bottle, has (in NJ) a .06 USD tax on it. Funny . . . .06 USD is EXACTLY WHAT IT COSTS for 10 Gallons of water . . . it is a money making thing . . . something that falls down so totally free from the sky is also tainted. The rain has acid in it that comes from the smoke being put in the atmosphere by the corporations. Now the corporations can leaan the sulfates out of the smoke . . . but that would cost money.

Lets review, class. . .

Corporation produces and sells product, makes money.

Corporation Refuses to clean the smoke from the stacks, makes money.

Corporation poisons the rain so the average person needs to get it out of the tap, makes money.

Corporation doesn;t thouroughly maintain the equipment to pipe water into homes, saves, makes money

Government getting paid for ALL OF THIS SHIT. It comforts the average person to know that they have OPTIONS. What they do not realize is that they are being corralled.

And this is just one example . . . this is happening on some level with EVERY ASPECT of society.

and this is the reasons why companies grow.

They make problems for everyone, and then they sell the solution for a profit.

Think of it as Tony Soprano coming into your pizzaria and telling you that you better pay him for protection. The protection is . . . you pay him, and he doesn't have you killed.

To the corporations: Congradulations guys . . . you have taken tribute payments to a whole new level.

But as to the original post . . . there is no limit as to how far this government can go . . . befor you know it, we'll make some alien race into the New American Indian . . . forcing them off of their planet so that we can put our shit there.

DC

freeman
01-08-2005, 10:53 PM
Ultimately the goal is to reduce the earth's population for the simple warped reason that the less there is for you and me, the more there will be for J.D. and his cronies.

Absolutely. And when the time comes to eiliminate the "useless eaters", there may be a big surprise in store for a lot of people.
Those of us who can still perform the menial labors necessary for the elites and don't have too high a standard of living may fare better than some of the NWO's low to mid-level flunkies.
This is something I hope to disucss in more detail at a later time. In the meanwhile, check out Dr. Henry's brilliant article:

The Red Symphony -- Part 2 (http://www.rense.com/general44/makpr2.htm)