Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Originally Posted by calculator
and here's a snippet of my research, quoted from Michael Snyder
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
Isn't that the dude who runs "economiccollapseblog" making a living on adclicks by selling fear?
I did a search on the 2030 agenda and found that site.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
Your research involved reading up on doomsday scare sites?
I needed a refresher on what the agenda items were. I wanted the perspective of an inquiring mind who doesn't just take things at face value, but questions them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by calculator
Originally Posted by calculator
Does that mean you're for or against the new world agenda?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teilhard
I favor finding as many ways as possible to live more gently on the Earth, respecting the other living things upon whom we depend
Ok, I say you're for it. And you had a nice way of saying it. But, how far are you willing to go with that? I'm hearing life will change a lot for all of us, as a result of these new plans. And I don't mean in a good way, for our way of life.
I did a search on the 2030 agenda and found that site.
Michael Snyder from the Economic Collapse Blog writes,
“Those that accuse me and others like me of “spreading fear” have got it completely backwards.
We are not “spreading fear” at all. We are spreading hope. There is hope in understanding what is happening and there is hope in getting prepared.
The preparations that are being made right now all over the nation are going to save countless numbers of lives. Those that are mocking preppers and that are telling everyone that everything is going to be just fine are going to deeply regret doing so someday.”
If we collectively do not act intentionally to reduce the global human population, the global human family population will be reduced by default -- by famines, wars, plagues, and general eco catastrophes ...
Nonsense.
The total world population is about 7.4 billion people.
Broward County, Florida, is 1320 square miles.
This means you could fit all 7.4 billion people into Broward County and each person would have about 5 square feet of space.
The jury's still out on that one for me. I specialize in Environmental Medicine and molecular biochemistry -- I'm not a virologist so I don't have the expertise in this area that some others do. I vaccinated my own kids for polio and MMR decades ago because I didn't know any better. I wouldn't give them those vaccines today. I also avoid flu shots like the plague. (I've only had the flu once in the past 22 years.) I get enough antibodies from treating others, as do most other healthcare professionals.
I had polio when I was 5 before there was a vaccine and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
The total world population is about 7.4 billion people. Broward County, Florida, is 1320 square miles. This means you could fit all 7.4 billion people into Broward County and each person would have about 5 square feet of space. We are nowhere near over population.
Well, maybe, if you could spread all the water resources and food supplies around the world evenly, and if you could then move people around to share those water and food resources equally (or pretty much so). It will interest me to see how the current water crisis in California is resolved if the drought does not end soon and the water reservoirs, in whatever form, are not refilled.
And as far as your five square feet per person example, I would personally not like to live in skyscraper teeny tiny apartments or live without trees, parks, etc. I also would not like to live on the ocean, in the desert, or on frozen ground 365 days a year. Also, don't forget that space is needed for at least some factories, stores, storage facilities -- and also quite a lot of space is needed to grow enough food to feed billions of people.
Personally, I would much rather have the population reduced and increase my current standard of living instead of vice versa. (And by increasing my standard of living, I am talking about having more open spaces and clean air and water.)
David Rockefeller, in a speech given sometime back, told the world of his dream of a "better governance" being a thing he and his upper class fellows were working on in behalf of everyone on the planet. David, like most of those in the power circles of world political leadership assume that our lot as citizens is one of deprivation, yes, he thinks we are being systematically deprived of the wisdom spelled out in edicts such as the Agenda 2030.
The Council on Foreign Relations, The Bilderberg group, the UN, the Project for A New American Century (PNAC), The Trilateral Commision, and a host of other quasi governmental/business groups have managed to circumvent the many aspects of sovereignty that had at one time impeded their agenda. Various study groups, think tanks, PAC's, and many research projects have sprung up since WWll with the goal of spreading the gospel of monopoly capitalism across the globe, and the likes of Rockefeller and others in that elite group of Americans are now the overlords of most of what passes for International good deeds.. David simply loves all of humanity.
Agenda 2030 is only one of many directives for this eventual evolvement of world wide control through the implementation of western trade policies by the biggest moneyed interests in America, the EU, Japan, and now China. We as citizens of these nations no longer will have much say in how our economic future shapes up. Many of these nations have terrible labor relations at present and some have a brutish disdain for their own citizens. David would be proud of most of those nations, for he and others have chosen to lead us all to the promised land, a place where promises are in abundance, but never kept.
Here's David at his best trying to explain his feelings with regard to his empire building:
"Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure---one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
--David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 405
"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The super-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
---David Rockefeller, at a 1991 Bilderberger meeting
So there you have it, David telling us about "the plan", and I'm certain that 2030 is nothing more than an extension of this kind of paternal capitalism, for the good of us all.....
Ok, I say you're for it. And you had a nice way of saying it. But, how far are you willing to go with that? I'm hearing life will change a lot for all of us, as a result of these new plans. And I don't mean in a good way, for our way of life.
Indeed, if the human family is going to survive the coming global eco-catastrophes, our ways of life will require thorough revision …
Of course, there are always plenty of folks who would rather die than change, and they will get their wish … but unfortunately so will their children and grandchildren, out to the *teenth* generation ...
Well, maybe, if you could spread all the water resources and food supplies around the world evenly, and if you could then move people around to share those water and food resources equally (or pretty much so). It will interest me to see how the current water crisis in California is resolved if the drought does not end soon and the water reservoirs, in whatever form, are not refilled.
And as far as your five square feet per person example, I would personally not like to live in skyscraper teeny tiny apartments or live without trees, parks, etc. I also would not like to live on the ocean, in the desert, or on frozen ground 365 days a year. Also, don't forget that space is needed for at least some factories, stores, storage facilities -- and also quite a lot of space is needed to grow enough food to feed billions of people.
Personally, I would much rather have the population reduced and increase my current standard of living instead of vice versa. (And by increasing my standard of living, I am talking about having more open spaces and clean air and water.)
I'm not saying people should live in 5 square feet of space, but we have plenty of room on the planet.
The availability of resources, especially water, is a different question.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
