We now live in a world, where bizarro headlines such as the ones below, have become a daily if not hourly occurrence:
*TREASURY TO STUDY IMPACT OF CLIMATE ON HOUSEHOLDS, COMMUNITIES
*TREASURY LAUNCHES EFFORT ON CLIMATE-RELATED FINANCIAL RISKS
*BRAINARD: CLIMATE-SCENARIO ANALYSIS WILL HELP IDENTIFY RISKS
*BRAINARD: CLIMATE CHANGE COULD HAVE PROFOUND ECONOMIC EFFECTS
*MESTER: FED LOOKS AT CLIMATE CHANGE FROM VIEW OF RISKS TO BANKS
*FED IS TAKING THE RIGHT COURSE ON MONITORING CLIMATE CHANGE
*FED SHOULD CONSIDER CLIMATE-CHANGE RISK TO FINANCIAL SYSTEM
Now, in case someone is still confused, none of these institutions, and not a single of the erudite officials running them, give a rat’s ass about the climate, about climate change risks, or about the fate of future generations of Americans (and certainly not about the rising water level sweeping away their massive waterfront mansions): if they did, total US debt and underfunded liabilities wouldn’t be just shy of $160 trillion.
So what is going on, and why is it that virtually every topic these days has to do with climate change, “net zero”, green energy and ESG?
The reason – as one would correctly suspect – is money. Some $150 trillion of it.
Earlier today, Bank of America published one of its massive “Thematic Research” tomes, this time covering the “Transwarming” World, and serves as a massive primer to today’s Net Zero reality. The report (which is available to all ZH pro subs) is actually a must read, interesting, chock-full of data and charts such as these…
… and handy cheat sheets…
… none of which happen to mention China’s role in the “global climate change” crisis of course (after all, can’t offend Beijing and lose the biggest revenue stream now can we) and comes at a very precarious time for the green cause, just when soaring energy prices around the globe as a result of the escalating global energy crisis, threatens to crush any grass roots support to fight “global warming.” As report author Haim Israel writes:
This is the decade of climate action and COP26 will be the tipping point of the race to reach net zero emissions – the balance of reducing and removing carbon emissions from the atmosphere. To achieve it, a transition to clean technologies in all sectors at an unprecedented pace would be required, with the steering of governments and willingness of society. This is the last decade to act. Absolute water scarcity is likely for 1.8bn people, 100mn face poverty, and 800mn are at risk from rising sea levels by 2025. Climate migration could reach 143mn from emerging markets, driven by extreme weather.
None of that is new, of course – and while it is handy to have a centralized compendium of the data, a 5 minute google search can provide all the answers that are “accepted” dogma by the green lobby.
But while we don’t care about the charts, that cheat sheets, or the propaganda, what we were interested in was the bottom line – how much would this green utopia cost, because if the “net zero”, “ESG”, “green” narrative is pushed so hard 24/7, you know it will cost a lot.
Turns out it does. A lot, lot.
Responding rhetorically to the key question, “how much will it cost?”, BofA cuts to the case and writes $150 trillion over 30 years – some $5 trillion in annual investments – amounting to twice current global GDP!
At this point the report gets good because since it has to be taken seriously, it has to also be at least superficially objective. And here, the details behind the numbers, do we finally learn why the net zero lobby is so intent on pushing this green utopia – simple answer: because it provides an endless stream of taxpayer and debt-funded “investments” which in turn need a just as constant degree of debt monetization by central banks.
Consider this: the covid pandemic has so far led to roughly $30 trillion in fiscal and monetary stimulus across the developed world. And yet, not even two years later, the effect of this $30 trillion is wearing off, yet despite the Biden’s admin to keep the Covid Crisis at bay, threatening to lock down society at a moment’s notice with the help of the complicit press, the population has made it clear that it will no longer comply with what is clear tyranny of the minority.
And so, the establishment needs a new perpetual source (and use) of funding, a crisis of sorts, but one wrapped in a virtuous, noble facade. This is where the crusade against climate change comes in.
Much digital ink has been spilled on the philosophy and debate behind the green movement, and we won’t bore you with the details, but we will instead focus on the very clear, and very tangible financial consequences of a world where the establishment agrees, whether with democratic support or not, to allocate $5 trillion in new capital toward some nebulous cause of “fighting global warming.” Here are the highlights from Bank of America:
Will it be inflationary? Yes, expect 1-3% pa shock. This is for the next 30 years… over and on top of any already present inflation!
What are the bottlenecks? Geopolitics, climate wars and EM.
Do we have the resources? Nickel and Lithium are just two that could be in deficit as soon as 2024.
Is green technology really green? Not really (see below).
Drilling down on the absolutely staggering costs, at an estimated $150 trillion over 30 years, boosting funding sources to $5tn a year is equivalent to the entire US tax base, or 3x the COVID-19 stimulus this decade. Here are the details:
The energy transition to a net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) economy by 2050 will be a very expensive exercise, estimated by the IEA at $150tn of total investment, over a period of 30 year. At $5tn p.a, the IEA see it costing as much as the entire US tax base every year for 30 years.
Not high enough for you? Hang on then because…
BNEF has a higher estimate that the total investment needed for energy supply and infrastructure could be as high as $173tn through 2050, or up to $5.8tn annually, which is nearly three times the amount invested on an annual basis today.
Next follows the obligatory pitch from BofA which is reminiscent of a stalinist kolhoz pep talk from the 1950s, to wit:
… But it can be done, with technology, economy, markets and ESG joining forces. Exponential cost reductions in wind, solar and batteries technologies have made renewables the cheapest form of energy in areas producing >90% of global electricity. Market appetite is chipping in too. Labelled bonds and loans jumped to > $3tn this year, with $3 in every $10 of flows into global equities going into ESG, which will support climate-friendly investments, as well as funding new ones needed to further decarbonize our planet like green mining, green hydrogen or carbon capture.
We leave the best for last because at the end of the day, this was always about more debt, and more monetization, a process which by now even the shoeshine boy knows makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. Only this time the world’s wealthiest plan on robbing what little is left of the middle class under the guise of a noble crusade to defeat global warming… a crusade which will require over $500 billion in annual debt monetization by central banks each and every year, leading to hyperinflation in either risk assets or the broader economy, or both.
So if it sounds like “the crusade against climate change” is one giant con game meant to enrich a handful of kleptocrats here and now, while the nebulous benefits – and the all too certain debt and hyperinflation – of this revolutionary overhaul of the global economy are inherited by future generations, it’s because that’s precisely what it is.
Here is BofA’s startling admission of the above, as excerpted from the report’s Q&A on the Climate Change Conference (COP 26):
Q: What is the economic impact of net zero?
A: The inflation impact of elevated net zero funding will not be insignificant but the impact looks manageable at 1% to 3% per annum depending on central bank monetization rates, particularly if government spending is targeted and contributes to accelerate the rate of global GDP growth. The IEA also has a productive outlook for their net zero scenario, where the change in the annual growth rate of GDP accelerates by somewhere between 0.3% and 0.5% on a sustained basis over the next 10 years as a result of a shift to a green economy.
So much more QE for the next 30 years, check. What about inflation? Oh, there will be plenty of that too. As BofA admits, “green bond purchases could result in a 1% to 3% inflation p.a. shock”
To answer this question, we look at three separate cases. In our first case, the Fed, ECB and other central banks would subsidize all of the required infrastructure spending to decarbonize (translation: print the money). In a second scenario, we assume that they would absorb only half of the new bond issuance. And in a third case, we assume central banks take up only a fifth of all decarbonization spending onto their balance sheet. What is our key finding? If central banks only have to foot 20% of the bill or less, the impact of decarbonization looks fairly manageable with respect to inflation (Exhibit 108).
And just so readers know what to BofA looks “manageable” here it is: this is inflation on top of whatever inflation is already in the economy. Of course, if central banks have to “foot” 50%, 80%, or more, well… it gets much worse.
And this is where we get to the punchline: as BofA admits, it’s all about greenlighting the biggest QE episode in history!
We just see a peak of <1% additional inflation a year over a three decade horizon. Under more aggressive scenarios where central banks opt to absorb either half or the full decarbonization bills through quantitative easing, the risks of an inflation shock grow. Still, we think our third case is the most likely scenario, as it would be politically difficult to justify a much more expansive monetary impulse. True, while central bankers have expressed a desire to help green the economy, their corporate bond purchases have historically been restricted to crisis time policies through quantitative easing and remain well below purchases of sovereign debt. As such, any purchases of corporate green bonds would likely be limited both by the size of future purchase programs and their proportion relative to the overall corporate bond market, with slightly higher allocations under more progressive purchase policies that highlight environmental concerns.
And there you have it: just as covid was one giant smokescreen to “allow” central banks and Treasuries to merge and lead us to Helicopter Money and MMT, creating some $30 trillion in liquidity in the process, the “Net Zero” myth is what will perpetuate this endless printing for the next 30 years, a period during which the only benefits will be bestowed upon those who benefit from QE and money printing. That would be the richest. As for everyone else, well you great grandchildren or their grandchildren may (or may not) live in a cleaner world. We really don’t know, but if we don’t start printing money now it will be too late.
If that sounds scarier and more manipulative than any religion in human history, it’s because it is.
The full 114 page report, which we recommend to anyone who wants to know what is coming, is available to pro subs in the usual place.
We’ve been hearing a lot about the virtues of a carbon tax. Some even have the gall to call it a “dividend”. Don’t be fooled by the fluffy talk. A tax on carbon is a bad idea—a combination of lots of big bad stuff—big government, big corporate influence, big deception, big job losses and big taxes on all of us.
The Introduction of global warming/climate change meme by the UN in 1992, called Agenda 21. The United Nations described Agenda 21 as follows:
“Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.
Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Statement of principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests were adopted by more than 178 Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992.
The Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) was created in December 1992 to ensure effective follow-up of UNCED, to monitor and report on implementation of the agreements at the local, national, regional and international levels. It was agreed that a five year review of Earth Summit progress would be made in 1997 by the United Nations General Assembly meeting in special session.
The full implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the Commitments to the Rio principles, were strongly reaffirmed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in Johannesburg, South Africa from 26 August to 4 September 2002.”
The key to Agenda 21 falling short was the lack of the yet to come Big Tech/Big Data/Deep Machine Learning/Artificial Intelligence element that would come in the mid 2010s.
One of the major proponents of Agenda 21 – and one world governance – is the Rockefeller Foundation. As Agenda 21 laid stagnant, the Foundation put this report out in 2010:
One of the most interesting early findings of the plutocracy plan for a takeover comes in the Rockefeller Foundation’s 2010 document titled “Rockefeller Foundation – Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development 2010”
As we can see once we read this document, their future scenario IN THIS DOCUMENT FROM 2010, is brought about by a global pandemic that ushers in a new order. In fact, this future scenario is the catalyst used to bring about “more authoritarian control” which ‘sticks’ and even “intensifies”. (WOW.) Here are the highlights , but link is above if you want to read the whole document. The report titledScenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development has a stated goal of creating “a world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback.” “A world in which highly coordinated and successful strategies emerge for addressing both urgent and entrenched worldwide issues… An economically unstable and shock-prone world in which governments weaken, criminals thrive, and dangerous innovations emerge… An economically depressed world in which individuals and communities develop localized, makeshift solutions to a growing set of problems.” Although the authors of the paper try to claim they are just imagining not predicting the future, given the immense role of the Rockefeller family bloodline and Rockefeller Foundation in pushing the New World Order (NWO) Global Government, this is a ruse to cover their active planning for crisis scenarios that they know will happen. It is also a fine example of predictive programming. In actuality, they are blueprints written by key insiders who already know the game plan and the agenda, and have the power to make it happen. This document expresses 4 scenarios:1) Lock Step — Tighter Top Down Government Control and Growing Citizen Pushback 2) Hack Attack — Unstable Shock Prone World In Which Criminals Thrive 3) Smart Scramble — Economically Depressed World With Make Shift Solution To Ever Growing Problems. 4) Clever Together — A Highly Coordinated Global Government Where Successful Strategies For Solving All Problems Emerges. The scenario “Lock Step”, one of four included in a publication called “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” in 2010, describes a coronavirus-like pandemic that becomes the trigger for the imposition of police-state controls on movement, economy, and other areas of society. Remove such obstacles as ‘individual rights’ and you have a recipe for surviving, even thriving in the event of a pandemic, the Foundation states. (remember, this was written in 2010): “A few countries did fare better – China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing-off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery.” The message is clear – police state good, freedom bad. And other governments rapidly get the message, according to the simulation. First and third world nations alike follow suit by “flexing their authority” and imposing quarantines, body-temperature checks, and other “airtight rules and restrictions” – most of which, the report is careful to note, remain in place even as the pandemic recedes into the past. “In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems – from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty – leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.” “This global power-grab is facilitated by a frightened citizenry who “willingly gave up some of their sovereignty – and their privacy – to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability…tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight.” “Everything from tighter biometric identification to stricter industrial regulation is welcomed with open arms. It takes over a decade for people to “grow weary” of the authoritarian controls imposed in the wake of the pandemic, and hints that even the civil unrest that ultimately manifests is focused on the developed world. After all, a popular uprising in the technocratic police state envisioned by the simulation would be all but impossible – as it will be in real life once 5G makes real-time total surveillance of all cities a reality.” Just as many scientists concluded SARS was a manmade bioweapon, many scientists, statesmen, and alternative media, have raised the alarm about coronavirus. Good luck finding any of their statements on Google, however. Facebook, Youtube and Twitter have been hard at work removing coronavirus “rumors,” and Google has memory-holed hundreds of search results regarding Chinese accusations of biowarfare. (I am not saying this is or is not true. I just find it interesting that you can not find ANY of this information online anymore. Don’t you find that odd?)
Remember, this document is looking at a future scenario from its publish date of 2010,which was ten years ago. The Rockefeller Foundation paints a disturbing picture, a future pandemic that kills 8 million people in just seven months. (Looking at the present, the Coronavirus has not killed anywhere near that number. Most of those who died from Coronavirus had chronic health issues to begin with.
More in the document: “The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.” More scenarios in the document:“Without Government Intervention Virus Spreads” “The pandemic blanketed the planet—though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols.” Translation: In the absence of an authoritarian government, the virus was able to spread. By definition, the Rockefeller Foundation is embracing and promoting authoritarian government. In their scenario, they are seeking to remove the rights of the people in order to prevent the virus from spreading. In their mind, during a Pandemic or other similar event, the government must overturn the law and become authoritarian. That all becomes even more clear as we continue to analyze this document. In developed countries, containment was a challenge. The United States’s initial policy of “strongly discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders. In the mind of the Rockefeller Foundation, our Constitution amounts to “leniency”. Therefore, our Constitution should have been suspended, and replaced with authoritarian government in order to contain the spread of the future virus. This is a clear violation of our basic God-given rights. (remember, this was written in 2010). More from the document: “Authoritarianism Will Contain Virus Outbreak” “However, a few countries did fare better—China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post- pandemic recovery.” The globalist Rockefeller Foundation praises Communist China for their authoritarian actions, remember, this was a future scenario, not reality. However, this is exactly what happened in China! They were indeed the first to lock down their nation, and the rest of the world followed suit. By definition, the Rockefeller Foundation explains Communism, which is authoritarianism protecting the people. Of course, this is always how globalists spin their propaganda, “it’s for the good of the people”. In reality, our freedoms are removed for the good of global government, not for the people. From the 2010 document: “During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.” (ummmm, sound familiar?) If it is hard for you to differentiate this future scenario from reality, you are not alone. Their future scenario is our reality, just look at what is happening right now. “Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified.” Not only will these authoritarian controls remain according to the Rockefeller Foundation, but they will intensify. That means our freedom and rights will continue to be removed, not just in the United States, but globally. (Have you heard of “The Great Reset” yet? Read my other post linked at the top). “In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”
As we can see, their future scenario IN THIS DOCUMENT FROM 2010, is brought about by a global pandemic that ushers in a new order. In fact, this future scenario is the catalyst used to bring about “more authoritarian control” which ‘sticks’ and even “intensifies”.
So what is so interesting about this document and who wrote it, is that The Rockefeller Foundation is one of the main funders of the World Economic Forum that is implementing Agenda 2030/Sustainable Development Goals/New World Order. To change the world into Global Governance (New World Order), a world crisis needs to occur to move into “The Great Reset”. Eeeerily similar to this 2010 document written by these same GLOBALISTS funding the UN & Global Governance. This is a simple connect the dots.
Just a snippet of info about the Rockefellers: The Rockefeller family has been in the forefront of eugenics-the science of population control, since 1902. In 1952, David Rockefeller’s eldest brother John established the Population Council. In the subsequent decades, the eugenics program developed, tested, and implemented various bio-warfare tools, as a means of controlling population growth. Since then, efforts at creating the necessary infrastructure, research bodies, lab testing and experimentations, have proceeded till the present day. By the end of 1945, the dominant force in America was the 5 Rockefeller brothers. Their mandate was to take control of the entire globe, and to eliminate any rivals on its quest for global dominance.
“This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom. We recognise that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan. We are resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty and want and to heal and secure our planet. We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path. As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets which we are announcing today demonstrate the scale and ambition of this new universal Agenda. They seek to build on the Millennium Development Goals and complete what these did not achieve. They seek to realize the human rights of all and to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. They are integrated and indivisible and balance the three dimensions of sustainable development: the economic, social and environmental.”
Take a good look at the symbols for Agenda 2030 as they now appear EVERYWHERE:
In detail, the SDGs are explained here:
Sustainable Development Goals
Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries
Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts*
Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development
THE INITIATION OF AGENDA 2030:
Key development in June 2019 – PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN UN AND WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM:
The United Nations entered into a strategic partnership with the World Economic Forum (WEF) in June 2019. Their partnership was formulated to carrying out Agenda 2030 over the course of a decade. A summary of their partnership reads as follows:
“Meeting the Sustainable Development Goals is essential for the future of humanity. The World Economic Forum is committed to supporting this effort, and working with the United Nations to build a more prosperous and equitable future,”
Klaus Schwab, World Economic Founder & Executive Chairman.
“The new Strategic Partnership Framework between the United Nations and the World Economic Forum has great potential to advance our efforts on key global challenges and opportunities, from climate change, health and education to gender equality, digital cooperation and financing for sustainable development. Rooted in UN norms and values, the Framework underscores the invaluable role of the private sector in this work – and points the way toward action to generate shared prosperity on a healthy planet while leaving no one behind,”
António Guterres, UN Secretary General.
The Gates FoundatiON:
Bill Gates face is everywhere lately. He seems to be the mouthpiece of the collective globalist agenda, spearheading the vaccine initiative, as well as making commentary on climate change, Bitcoin and smart cities – amongst other things.
Bill and Melinda Gates started the Gates Foundation and as far back as February 2000, pledged $750 Million to a Global Fund to the benefit of the UN, UN-linked World Health Organization and UNICEF – with funds earmarked for vaccines. The announcement of the donation was made at a WEF event:
John Hopkins University:
Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation have made nearly $100 Million in donations to various initiatives to John Hopkins University, beginning in 1997. The university is one of the oldest most prestigious medical schools in the world. A summary of these charitable contributions can be viewed here: Gates Foundation and John Hopkins University
From the John Hopkins University-Bloomberg School of Public Health came the think-tank the Center for Health Security.
October 2019, the John Hopkins Center for Health Security, under the guidance of the Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum, hosted Event 201. On the Center for Health Security website, Events 201 is described as follows:
“The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY. The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences.
“in recent years, the world has seen a growing number of epidemic events, amounting to approximately 200 events annually. These events are increasing, and they are disruptive to health, economies, and society. Managing these events already strains global capacity, even absent a pandemic threat. Experts agree that it is only a matter of time before one of these epidemics becomes global—a pandemic with potentially catastrophic consequences. A severe pandemic, which becomes “Event 201,” would require reliable cooperation among several industries, national governments, and key international institutions.”
-Center for Health Security, 2019
Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft. Microsoft made an investment in Facebook in 2007, years prior to Facebook’s IPO. The investment was $240 Million. At the time, Dustin Moscovitz was still materially involved at the executive levels of Facebook.
Event 201 was supported by funding from the Open Philanthropy Project, a not-for-profit foundation chaired by one of Facebook’s founders and owners, Dustin Moscovitz.
The Open Philanthropy Project recommended a grant of $16 million over three years to the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security (CHS) to provide general operating support, to support its domestic and international work on health security and public health preparedness, and to fund an initiative focused on potential global catastrophic risks (GCRs) posed by pandemic pathogens.
THE PANDEMIC BEGINS – DECEMBER 2019:
Taking a lookback at the Rockefeller document, the entire benefit of the pandemic would be economic, social and academic lockdowns around the world:
THE DECIMATION OF THE MIDDLE CLASS:
We all know of the endless microcosms as to the effect the lockdowns have had in terms of eviscerating the workling class. What I found fascinating are these two articles, published a day apart, in the same publication, Business Insider:
$3.7 vs $3.9 trillion – WEALTH TRANSFER IN PLAIN SIGHT. THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THE LOCKDOWNS OF SMALL AND MIDSIZE BUSINESSES DURING SCAMDEMIC HAS BEEN.
It runs much deeper. The underbelly of the Great Reset is a shift from the past 100+/- years of a fiat currency based global system of debt-laden, consumerist capitalism – which I firmly believe that in the past three decades of the internet and world wide web made open to the common public – this information age has exposed that the “rulers of the world” are the globalist/elitist/ZIONIST money changing families that have pilfered all the natural, needed and precious resources from the people in exchange of this worthless debt-based system of credit which uses currency – fiat – which has no intrinsic value. The system was coming down in 1986, again in 2001, heavy exposure in the 2008 “crisis” and the blackhole of FOREVER-DEBT is all a huge SCAM.
Therefore – with Agenda 2030, which is being spearheaded into place by the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset – a new paradigm of VALUE is being manufactured by the UN’s many programs, the IMF, the Bank of International Settlements, the mega-investment firms (BlackRock, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs), the critical global consulting firms (McKinsey, Accenture, Deloitte, KPMG, E&Y, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, etc), the powerful think tanks (Brookings Institution, the Chatham House, Council on Foreign Relations) and on and on….this new measure of value will be determined by a yet to be finalized set of SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS. However, provided are the UNITED NATION’S ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMME FINANCE INITITATIVE’s cute little pamphlet on how banks will become signatories for the Sustainable Development Goals.
This would all seem like fluff – only – the sentiment of (((Western Democracies))) is to capitulate to the BIG BAD CLIMATE CHANGE EXTINCTION EVENT which is inevitable unless a ONE WORLD CULTURE emerges that will acquiesce and give in to the climate change atomwaffen blast that is inevitable.
Check out policy papers by corporations, think tanks, NGOs, governments far and wide, etc etc
Deloitte with the WEF:
CHINA will lead the way:
RESCUE NGO MEME’S REFUGEES WITH CLIMATE CHANGE:
Petronas – gayOped
McKinsey (STATING PANDEMIC WILL LAST 18 MONTHS:
The Economist (Rothschild Consortium publication)
I have found over one thousand documents all regurgitating the same shit. Over the span of two decades.
KPMG is known as one of the “Big Four” global accounting firms. From their website:
“Through helping other organizations mitigate risks and grasp opportunities, we can drive positive, sustainable change for clients, our people and society at large.
KPMG firms operate in 146 countries and territories, and in FY20, collectively employed close to 227,000 people, serving the needs of business, governments, public-sector agencies, not-for-profits and through KPMG firms’ audit and assurance practices, the capital markets. KPMG is committed to quality and service excellence in all that we do, bringing our best to clients and earning the public’s trust through our actions and behaviours both professionally and personally.
We lead with a commitment to quality and integrity across the KPMG global organization, bringing a passion for client success and a purpose to serve and improve the communities in which KPMG firms operate. In a world where rapid change and unprecedented disruption are the new normal, we inspire confidence and empower change in all we do.”
What alarms me about KPMG, not only are they onboard with the Great Reset, but they have been behind Sustainable Development Goals since 2014 – as evidenced by this document:
Of course, it was not until 2015 that the United Nations unveiled Agenda 2030, which made public the “17 Sustainable Development Goals” . So KPMG is deep in this shit. I love their new “Our Impact Plan” which is a nice amalgamation of globalist/Great Reset/hell on earth key words like:
People, Planet, Profits
Inclusion and Diversity
Net-Zero Carbon Emissions by 2030
Responsible Tax Program
Enhancing social inclusion and prosperity through education
This is one of the most revealing captions of their bullshit:
“Our Purpose and Values guide us and continue to shape our business, informing our actions and defining the work we do every day. To inspire confidence and empower change, we need to consider the economic, environmental and social impact of our activities, align our financial and societal performance as part of a shift towards stakeholder capitalism, and ensure we have strong governance to oversee all our activities.
Our work with the World Economic Forum, setting the IBC metrics for ESG reporting, is one example of how we’re using our experience and knowledge to help shape the future of sustainable business. We are seeing this work as part of the wider role we believe we must play to get to harmonized, consistent and credible information on sustainability matters — both risks to and impacts by companies. We have been pleased to accept roles at the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), FSB Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), Corporate Reporting Dialogue and Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), among others.”
The reason for pinpointing KPMG is for they are one of the important entities behind the coming valuation of companies performances in compliance with ESGs.