COMER is the Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform (Canada)
http://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=37431
Decision on the application for leave to appeal.
The request for an oral hearing is dismissed.
The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A-76-16, 2016 FCA 312, dated December 7, 2016, is dismissed with costs.
Dismissed, with costs
Dear Members of the Committee,
You might appreciate this addition to your deliberations:
Popular belief in the U.S. is that the vaccine manufacturers cannot be sued for injuries caused by their products. As with vaccines in general: the belief is in the process of being disproven. Which has implications for you.
Bill 87 is coercive: it effectively removes the “choice” element of the vaccination schedule. Which then makes the Government of Ontario responsible for injuries.
Through Bill 87, the Legislature is, to me, clearly putting the foundation in place for: setting up the Government for very significant lawsuits, AND, very angry tax-payers who will be paying the bills for compensation.
One of the problems for you: you likely don’t have a clue about the amount of injury we are talking about. The media doesn’t talk about it. Big Pharma has a lot of money; its interests are served if you are uninformed.
The indemnity in the U.S. is through the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. More than $3 billion of American tax-payers’ money has been paid to injured parties, on behalf of the vaccine manufacturers (the Government pays). The Vaccines Injury Court makes the determinations and pay-outs. $3 billion is the tip of an iceberg. It doesn’t cover all the parents who were not able to access, or did not know about the Court (intentionally not publicized). It only includes parents who found the Court AND who could afford to hire a lawyer. In many cases, the awards received were decimated by the legal bills. Families and the injured, sometimes dead, child face a lifetime of trying to cope with the aftermath of the “injury”.
Some astute people realized: Adult vaccines are not part of the 1986 federal law. The law shielding vaccine companies only applies to childhood vaccines.
Right now, in process, lawyers and their clients are suing Merck, the manufacturer, for injuries incurred from Merck’s shingles vaccine, Zostavax. Among the claimed injuries: contracting shingles; blindness in one eye; partial paralysis; brain damage; death. The Merck shingles vaccine is only for adults.
I recently talked to a friend: she and her husband got the pneumonia vaccination. They both then came down with pneumonia. That is not an uncommon occurrence with vaccines. In some cases, live viruses are used. This woman was extremely angry and said, “Never again.”
I phoned the Ontario Legislature Library and offered to send a copy of current literature coming out of the U.S., along with on-line access – – MPPs or staff could access it through the Library. The offer was forwarded to the Acquisitions Committee, as I understand.
(UPDATE: May 25. It has been arranged – I will mail the Vaccine information to the Legislature Library.)
Best wishes in your deliberations.
Sandra Finley
Vancouver Island
APPENDED:
Forced injections (vaccinations) are not only an issue of
Victims of vaccine damage can sue manufacturers in the US
It’s happening now…
by Jon Rappoport
May 7, 2017
(Note to our loyal readers: We’re working to restore NoMoreFakeNews.com. Meanwhile, this blog is fully operating. Posting continues. To join our email list, click here.)
Major media aren’t giving this story the coverage it deserves. I certainly am.
Short question: Can a person sue a US vaccine manufacturer?
Short answer: Under certain conditions, yes.
Note: I’m not framing this article as professional legal advice. I’m reporting what I’ve been able to dig up on a very explosive issue so far. I’ve communicated with two lawyers and a law professor. I’ve been pointed to an important passage on a federal web page.
Right now, lawyers and their clients are suing Merck, the manufacturer, for injuries incurred from Merck’s shingles vaccine, Zostavax.
Among the claimed injuries: contracting shingles; blindness in one eye; partial paralysis; brain damage; death.
One of the plaintiffs’ attorneys told me he has already filed two cases in California. Each case has 50 plaintiffs. He states he has 5000 clients waiting in the wings. There are other attorneys with other plaintiffs.
But wait. Isn’t there a federal law that bars people from suing vaccine manufacturers?
Isn’t that law the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act? Doesn’t it demand that people go to a special federal “vaccine tribunal/court” and plead for compensation from the government?
Aren’t vaccine manufacturers shielded from liability for causing injury?
Well, it turns out there are exceptions to the rule.
Adult vaccines are not part of the 1986 federal law.
The law shielding vaccine companies only applies to childhood vaccines.
The Merck shingles vaccine is only for adults.
The special federal “vaccine tribunal/court” is established as part of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). This is where parents who claim their children were injured by vaccines must go, to ask for compensation from the government—not from vaccine manufacturers.
But on a web page of the US Dept. of Health and Human Services, under “Health Resources and Services Administration,” we see “Frequently Asked Questions.” And we read this rather opaque statement:
“In order for a category of vaccines to be covered, the category of vaccines must be recommended for routine administration to children by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention…” [Note: On this clumsy FAQ web page, you have to click on “View Answer” under the following question to see it: “If a new vaccine product is licensed, what needs to occur before the vaccine will be covered by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP)?”]
What does “covered” mean? It means “covered exclusively by the federal compensation program.” It means a parent who believes her child has been injured by a vaccine goes to the special federal “court.” The vaccine must be FOR CHILDREN. However, an adult seeking compensation for vaccine injury, FROM AN ADULT VACCCINE, would, with a lawyer, argue his case in ordinary state or federal court. That adult would sue the vaccine manufacturer.
This message from the federal government is clear. The ban against suing vaccine manufacturers only applies to vaccines recommended for children (and pregnant women). The ban does not apply to adult vaccines.
Naturally, adults are going to be interested in seeing a list of adult vaccines, because in the case of vaccine-injury, these people can and must go to ordinary state or federal courts and sue the vaccine manufacturer. And they can sue for punitive damages. This is what scares vaccine manufacturers. Punitive-damage money can soar into the stratosphere.
Here, from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is the list of adult vaccines: Influenza; Td/Tdap; MMR; VAR; HZV (shingles); HPV Female; HPV male; PCV13; PPSV23; HepA; HepB; MENACWY/MPSV4; MenB; Hib.
However, some of the vaccines on this list are recommended for both adults and children. When a vaccine is recommended by the CDC for both adults and children, adults seeking compensation for vaccine-injury would not be permitted to argue their cases in ordinary courts and sue the manufacturer. Instead, they would have to go to the special federal vaccine “court” and try to obtain compensation from the government.
It will be very important to see what happens as these lawsuits against Merck and their shingles vaccine move forward. Many tactics will be deployed. Right now, in one suit filed in Philadelphia, Merck is arguing for a change of venue. Change of venue often signals an attempt to find a more friendly court.
We’re in the beginning stages of a struggle.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys have high hurdles to climb. Among them: causation. How do you prove a vaccine “caused” an injury? I’m not talking about truth, common sense, or even conventional medical standards. I’m talking about legal proofs, and what is admissible in court. That territory is a Twilight Zone of complexity.
Stay tuned.
Lawsuits for vaccine injury, against one of the biggest pharmaceutical companies in the world (Merck), are sprouting like weeds. Will judges find a reason to cut them off, or will they proceed to trial? Will these lawsuits inspire other attorneys and their clients to sue vaccine manufacturers for injury from other adult vaccines?
Is this going to build to a tsunami?
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)
Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
Many thanks to Janet M:
There is a new source of info on the vaccination schedule in Ontario, on the VCC Web site, http://vaccinechoicecanada.com/?s=ontario+schedule.
Our schedule is not quite as aggressive as that in the U.S. (e.g. we do not do the Hep B on the date of birth (well, they do in New Brunswick, but not in Ontario) but it’s plenty bad enough.
I won’t say any more than that.
Just wanted to be sure you all get to see this revised list of vaccinations according to the Ontario schedule.
Janet
p.s. I learned recently about a Vitamin K shot babies are given at birth. Contents are nasty. I just didn’t hear about it until very very recently. http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/skip-that-newborn-vitamin-k-shot/
As Lili Tomlin said, no matter how cynical you are, you can’t keep up…………..
I am hopeful that a read of excerpts (scroll down) from the book will impel more people to the book.
It is well written, well laid out, an easy read – – 148 pages. The sources are foot-noted through the Endnotes. It is highly important. You will learn a lot. Many thanks to Joyce Nelson for her efforts on behalf of all Canadians.
How to obtain the book?
I checked my local bookstore. None of their distributors carries “Beyond Banksters”.
I called the Library. And have been advised to submit an online form to request the addition of this “item” to the Library’s collection. From their supplier, the book will arrive “shelf ready”. The Library is able to order directly from the publisher, too. (Update: my local library now has copies, and a waiting list to read Banksters.)
To order the book ($20 plus shipping), go to: https://watershedsentinel.ca/beyond-banksters/
Joyce Nelson drives home the significance to Canadians of the lawsuit over the Bank of Canada. If we understand it, in the context of things explained by John Perkins (New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, 2016), you will know why the Liberal Government’s construction of the CIB (Canadian Infrastructure Bank) needs to be stopped.
The Bank of Canada is publicly owned. Its mandate, by law, is to lend money to the Federal and other Governments in Canada at close to zero interest rates, for the construction of infrastructure. For 35 years it operated that way (beginning in 1938), beneficially for Canadians. Canadians are not the only country in which citizens are fighting to keep and maintain control of their central bank, information in Beyond Banksters.
The CIB will (intentionally) accelerate the flow of tax money into the hands of the international cartel. The last thing they want is for public money to finance infrastructure – – we are scheduled to purchase more than $180 billion dollars’ worth, according to Government of Canada website. I have to keep reminding myself: that is 180 with 9 zeros behind it.
How will it work? How will we pay? . . . excerpt from cover letter sent with a copy of Banksters to some attendees, FCM (Federation of Cdn Municipalities) Conference, June 1 to 4, in Ottawa.
How do we obtain the $180 billion?
I placed INSERTS in the copies of Banksters I distributed. We lived in Halifax-Dartmouth, N.S., arriving 2 years after the “new bridge” over the Harbour opened. See the INSERT. Two bridges over the Harbour, construction costs of $42 million. The amount of money owed by citizens reached almost 3 times that amount in 20 some years. Citizens never stop paying; tolls go up. It’s a bad deal. Now imagine $180 billion in construction costs.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Nelson uses the Canada Summit 2014: Confronting the Big Questions, as the entry point to Beyond Banksters. She was curious.
From the Introduction to “Beyond Banksters: Resisting the New Feudalism“:
EXCERPTS
Page 1:
The panel that really caught my eye was one called “The Global Banking Picture,” because it was addressing questions like this:
“What should be the role of the Bank of Canada going forward in the post-Mark Carney era?”
(INSERT: Carney is former head of the Bank of Canada, currently the Governor of the Bank of England, one-time employee of Goldman Sachs, respected in spite of the latter)
I knew that the Bank of Canada is our central bank and it is publicly owned, so it struck me as odd that the four panelists scheduled to discuss this question were from the Desjardins Group, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Bank of Tokyo Canada, and JP Morgan Chase Canada.
The simple questions that crossed my mind at the time were:
Why are private investment bankers and the IMF discussing the future of the Bank of Canada?
Isn’t that something that should be addressed by Members of Parliament and all Canadians, rather than the banksters?
I also noticed that the promotional material for the 2014 Summit was telling people that “Canada’s stable macroeconomic environment and sound monetary policy allowed it to emerge from the global financial crisis barely scathed.”
But economist David Macdonald had revealed in 2012 that there had been “secret bank bailouts” of Canada’s top six banks amounting to at least $108 billion and likely as much as $114 billion between September 2008 and July 2010.
Page 2:
Macdonald’s report, published by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, disproved “the repeated claims that Canadian banks did not receive massive government support during the recent financial meltdown. Nothing could be further from the truth, he wrote.
Macdonald delivered some shocking figures: for example, while TD Bank was receiving $26 billion dollars in taxpayer money, “Ed Clark of TD had his overall compensation raised from $11.1 million to $15.2 million” per year. But as one reporter noted at the time, “To some extent the report and the rebuttal to it are a matter of how the facts are interpreted. Where Macdonald says ‘bailout’, a finance ministry official says ‘liquidity support’.
(INSERT: Nelson names her favourite economists – – likes people who explain things without jargon. . . and names others who can cut through bafflegarb terms like “liquidity support.”)
What some of those writers and others are now warning about is neofeudalism and the rise of an elite class of multi-millionaire financiers and billionaires.
Page 3: Neofeudalism
. . . notes that income inequality in Canada is not yet as extreme as elsewhere, but we are relentlessly moving in the same direction.
In fact, a 2005 report by banking giant Citigroup had already identified Canada as a “plutonomy” – a country with “massive income and wealth inequality,” where “the rich are likely to keep getting even richer.”
A massive part of the problem is what’s called “sovereign debt,” the debt that national governments owe because of their borrowing from private lenders – even though they have the power to issue the national money supply themselves. Mystified by the bank lobbyists and right-wing economists, misinformed legislators (or outright collaborators) have saddled their nations with so much needless debt that their people are enslaved by it.
As Ellen Brown explains, sovereign debt around the globe “has ballooned from $89 trillion to $100 trillion just since 2008. Squeezed governments have been driven to radical austerity measures, privatizing public assets, slashing public services, and downsizing work forces in a futile attempt to balance national budgets. But the debt overhang just continues to grow.”
Judy Kennedy has observed, “When people are held hostage financially they can be easily controlled. Public programs can be eliminated, services cut, and the economy downgraded while billions are siphoned through the banks to the 1%.” That kind of financial hostage-taking also induces governments to ruin the environment, sacrificing whole regions mainly to benefit the oligarchs. George Monbiot states that the many environmental crises we face “cannot be won without a wider political fight: a democratic mobilisation against plutocracy.”
Page 4:
. . . (. . . Brexit). “A government oppressed by ‘sovereign debt’ is not really sovereign. A sovereign government has the power to issue money and need not go into debt at all. But EU member governments have lost that sovereign power. They are unable to issue their own money or borrow money issued by their own central banks.” Thus, EU members are forced to borrow from private investment banks and increase their ever-ballooning sovereign debt.
As a result, almost without anyone noticing, banks have become far, far more than banks. By using all that compound interest paid to them by governments, they are literally buying up everything that can return a profit. Matt Taibbi wrote in 2014, “Today banks like Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs own oil tankers, run airports and control huge quantities of coal, natural gas, heating oil, electric power and precious metals. They likewise can now be found exerting direct control over the supply of a whole galaxy of raw materials crucial to world industry and to society in general, including everything from food products to metals like zinc, copper, tin, nickel, and…aluminum.” . . .
(INSERT: what the banks don’t own, other transnational corporations own. It is folly to turn water into a commodity like oil, like other “resources”, to be owned and sold by corporations. In 2014 Canadian exports of bottled water were more than $168 million. The title of this short article understates the situation. Ag Canada isn’t just “promoting”. You might look at the Comments on the posting: 2017-04-30 Agriculture Canada promotes bottled water exports to China.
Back to Beyond Banksters:)
“Break up the banks,” said Bernie Sanders, and millions agreed. The need to scale back the power of the banks has become obvious.
That’s where Canada is in a unique position: we still have a publicly-owned central bank, the Bank of Canada (BOC), which has the power to issue money and near-zero interest loans to our federal and provincial governments without incurring debt to private lenders. Indeed, the BOC did that successfully for 35 years, from 1938 to 1974 – within the memory of living Canadians – while transforming the country in positive ways.
The Bank of Canada Lawsuit
In part, this book is about the ongoing lawsuit launched by the Toronto-based Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform (COMER) seeking to require the BOC to return to its original mandate.
Page 5:
COMER’s Herb Wiseman calls the BOC “part of the Civil Commons” which has been “appropriated by the financial elite” to run up huge “sovereign debt and deficits since 1974”. . . .
. . . the undermining and appropriation of the Bank of Canada “far and away the biggest, most outrageous fraud ever perpetrated on the Canadian people.”
Beyond Banksters explores how that appropriation happened, and how the BOC lawsuit is now being undermined by Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government. That government is planning to greatly increase Canada’s sovereign debt through $120 billion in infrastructure spending, with the money borrowed from investors by a new Canada Infrastructure Bank.
. . . (more details)
also explores . . . various ways in which people resist the “postmodern serfdom” being imposed on societies everywhere. COMER and its lawsuit are inspiring many around the world to take back their governments’ monetary powers.
Pages 9 – 12:
Chapter 1, “The Bank of Canada Lawsuit”
(Sandra speaking: You can read Ch. 1 online. The article by Nelson is the first chapter of the book. A straight- forward, important, short and informative read:
link https://watershedsentinel.ca/articles/bank-of-canada-lawsuit/
Over the nine months up to September 2016, the online article “was read by more than 151,000 people” – “suggesting that there may be interest out there in learning more about these issues.”)
Chapter 2, The Rise of the Overlords
(Sandra speaking: I am not going to type all this chapter (8 pages)! not that it isn’t important. It is.)
Page 15:
. . . economists such as Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman … believed that “free markets” are efficient, rational and fair and should be self-regulating with no government interference. This neoliberal economic policy aimed for unregulated (liberalized) “free markets,” reduced …regulation, cutbacks to social programs, … mass privatization of state assets, and free trade.
Naomi Klein’s … The Shock Doctrine … provides the best history of the “Chicago Boys” in action, starting with the 1973 overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile and Pinochet’s adoption of Friedman’s economic model, which spread (along with corporate and state terror) to Argentina in 1976 and then throughout Latin America’s Southern Cone.
Before he was killed by the Argentina junta, journalist Rodolfo Walsh called the economic model imposed on his country “planned misery,” throwing tens of millions of people into extreme poverty virtually overnight. Economist Michel Chossudovsky, who was teaching in Chile in 1973 has written, “From one day to the next, an entire country was precipitated into abysmal poverty,” and in less than a year, “eighty-five per cent of the Chilean population had been driven below the poverty line. Chossudovsky saw the same “Chicago School” model imposed “in country after country.” His 1997 book, The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order, was one of the first to expose the workings of Friedman’s economic model.
Page 19: The Debt Trap
John Perkins’ book
INSERT: Nelson writes about the original book published in 2004. Important companion to Beyond Banksters, developments in the decade since 2004 – – Excerpts from The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, 2016. Perkins spells out: the strategies aimed at developing countries in aid of corporate America are now wheeled and aimed back at the developed countries.
Ch. 34, New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins, 2016.
By clicking on the small grey words “John Perkins” (category) at the top of this posting, you generate a summary list of postings about Perkins. There are at two or three videos.
John Perkins’ book shocked readers into realizing just how finance capital had indebted and terrorized the Third World since the late 1960s. Perkins described a system by which consultants like himself were sent to Third World governments to convince their leaders to take on huge debts for building massive infrastructure projects. While the loans came from the World Bank, the IMF, US Agency for International Development (USAID) and other lending institutions overseen by the BIS (Bank of International Settlements), the money went directly to the big engineering, construction and consulting companies . . . Perkins admits that he and other economic hit men cheated countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars in order to enrich U.S. corporations.
Chillingly, Perkins revealed . . . (INSERT: recorded in other postings on this blog) …
This was the “big project paradigm” for development, aligned with Milton Friedman’s economic model, that took hold in the 1970s and was virtually forced onto poor countries, preventing their governments from devoting funds to poverty reduction, land reform, social services, import substitution (i.e. local production and manufacturing), and other measures that would benefit their own population.
(INSERT: “Globalization” was sold as beneficial and inevitable. In the New Confessions, Perkins describes how that system is now turned back on itself, on the developed countries (the U.S.). Nelson says the resources of the world privatized. I add we, the serfs, provide the labor and ha! ha! we pay the taxes to pay the bills submitted to “our” government, by the corporate owners. Nice racket they have going!)
Chapter 3. A 21st Century Trojan Horse
Page 23 end – 24:
(Sigh . . . I need to reach the end of typing . . .
Meanwhile, the powers-that-be seem intent on confusing Canadians. (about the COMER lawsuit, and about the Bank of Canada with statements to erode the belief (true) that it is a central bank, publicly owned by Canadians, with the mandate to lend to governments in Canada at near-zero interest rates; compounding interest is not a factor.)
Serendipity! (Sandra speaking) On the Sunday Edition, April 23rd, CBC Radio, I heard the interview of Dominic Barton, appointed by Finance Minister Morneau to head the Advisory Committee on Economic Growth to the Government. I had never heard of the guy, or his business. But was alarmed and disturbed by what he was saying. Well I was actually kind of freaked out and alerted a few people to the interview.
I had come across and bought this book, “Beyond Banksters”, a few weeks earlier.
This same Sunday of the Barton interview, evening reading, I started Beyond Banksters: Resisting the New Feudalism. There, in Chapters 4 and 5 – – all about Dominic Barton. I had more reason than I had known to be alarmed and disturbed!
Subsequently sent an email to the Sunday Edition, suggesting that they have Joyce Nelson and/or John Perkins on to rebut Barton.
I tuned in on the April 30th Sunday Edition. Host Michael Enright read responses to the Barton interview. Normally there is input representing oppositional points-of-view. Not this time. Bless Canadians! Every one of the viewpoints was different and well stated; ALL challenged Barton’s viewpoint. I wonder whether he will be back, as was promised in the first (April 23rd) interview!
Page 25:
Excerpts in a separate listing. Introduce you to names Canadians should know. If you think the CIB is in trustworthy hands, you are very wrong! Click on
Chapter 4. The “New Economy Czar”, page 37
Maybe I will have time later to type more excerpts. I hope the preceding will lead to the sale of more copies of Joyce’s book. It is extremely valuable to Canadians (and to others).
Chapter 5, The Turn-Around Specialist, page 45
NOTE: We have shared information on the Bank of Canada (COMER) Lawsuit earlier. In the Index to Banksters and Fraudsters, find them under “COMER”. (Or enter “Galati” (the lawyer who argued the case) in the search button on top right of this blog.)
NOTE: Canada exported over CA$168.8 million worth of bottled water products to the world in 2014.
. . . most (76.1%) of Canada’s bottled water products were shipped to the United States.
. . . three corporations currently dominate foreign exports to China: Nestlé SA, Coca-Cola Co. and Danone Groupe
Related to “Ag Canada promotes bottled water exports . . .”, as I related to a friend:
In 1995 I started a little business to promote the addition of bulghur wheat to our diets. It didn’t make sense to me that we import mountains of rice, when we are a major grower of wheat. “Bulghur” wheat has a wonderful cuisine developed over 3 or 4 thousand years in the Mediterranean countries. Wheat (some varieties are preferred) is cooked, dried and cracked. It can be stored for long periods. And preparation is fast, basically takes 15 minutes to re-hydrate. With family help, I packaged and promoted, along with a cookbook, the use of bulghur wheat.
I attended one of those workshops put on by the Govt to help entrepreneurs.
I don’t forget how flabbergasted I was: the Government employee listed the sectors for economic growth that had been identified through their strategic planning.
It was verbal, but also in the written presentation.
Water was an identified lucrative export item back then (would have been middle 1990s).
Business people were encouraged: the Govt gurus/machinery have identified the market. Now you get in there and develop it! – – you will be guaranteed to make $$$$$$.
I lodged complaint, but lone voice in the wilderness of that circle!
Guess who “got in there”, with Govt support.
It was almost 30 years ago.
The bitch of it – – in spite of all the work on water to educate, inform and stop water from becoming polluted and a commodity like oil, to be exploited by the already-rich through their shareholder status in companies like Nestle, Coca-Cola and Danone, their agenda is pretty well accomplished.
Canada exported over CA$168.8 million worth of bottled water products to the world in 2014. How many Canadians would know? And certainly in spite of valiant efforts: Have to say, God Bless Maude Barlow and her dedication to Water.
The constant, largest problem we have: Big Government working with Big Business.
Blacklock’s reports, “The Department of Agriculture is urging that Canada sell more fresh water to China – by the bottle.” (INSERT: By the tanker will follow.) ..The agriculture department in a report Sector Trend Analysis: Bottled Water In China noted three corporations currently dominate foreign exports to China: Nestlé SA, Coca-Cola Co. and Danone Groupe. …The agriculture department’s Analysis urged water exporters to contact Canada trade commissioners for ‘on-the-ground expertise’ in boosting sales to China.”
The whole thing is so incredibly a sell-out. Who are the Deputy Minister of Agriculture and the top minions?
Once again, the University/Universities are part of the sell-out.
Remember Feb 23, 2012 University of Alberta vs. Nestle: Controversy and honorary degrees Rabble: The University of Alberta is embroiled in controversy over its decision to award an honorary degree to Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, the Chair of Nestlé, the largest multinational food and water corporation in the world and one of the most unpopular.
And 2014-04-17 Monsanto and Big Food Losing the GMO and ‘Natural’ Food Fight: about the fight in California that almost succeeded in getting labelling of GMO foodstuffs. One of the big funders of the effort to stop it was Nestle.
It is impossible to have democracy when there is such concentration of wealth. Previous generations knew that AND WERE WILLING TO FIGHT TO BREAK UP THE CARTELS.
/Sandra
P.S. Don’t let me get into the diversion of water to the U.S.! Free Trade with the U.S., the sell-out by Canada’s Chief Negotiator, Simon Reisman. . . .
Back to Bottled Water to China (Council of Canadians):
https://canadians.org/blog/agriculture-canada-promotes-bottled-water-exports-china
. . . This Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada report dated February 2017 notes, “Even though Canada exported over CA$168.8 million worth of bottled water products to the world in 2014, it had a large export gap with China, as most (76.1%) of Canada’s bottled water products were shipped to the United States.” [ http://www5.agr.gc.ca/eng/industry-markets-and-trade/statistics-and-market-information/agriculture-and-food-market-information-by-region/asia/market-intelligence/sector-trend-analysis-bottled-water-in-china/?id=1486580447145&wbdisable=true ]
It adds, “China’s demand for bottled water will continue to increase over the coming years, and their bottled water market is forecasted to almost double through 2019. Canadian bottled water exports to China have grown significantly over the last five years, although the supply gap is also growing. As such, there are significant opportunities for Canadian bottled water producers to expand in the Chinese market.”
In September 2016, this media release noted, “On the occasion of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s visit to China for the G20 meeting, Whistler Water Inc. signed a substantial investment agreement to promote, market and sell Whistler Water branded products in China and other overseas markets.” [ http://www.watertoday.ca/ts-bottling-water-in-canada-for-china.asp ]
Furthermore, in this article published in March 2015 about mineral water and bottled water, Water Canada reported, “In recent weeks, two Chinese businessmen have purchased two water sources in the province. Another Chinese man reportedly bought a water source in Chilliwack, B.C. for $17 million.” [ http://watercanada.net/2015/chinese-business-owners-could-spend-more-than-20-million-on-canadian-water-sources/ ]
The rapid industrialization of China has consumed massive amounts of water and has contributed to a terrible water crisis there. It has been estimated that 90 percent of groundwater in their cities and 75 percent of their rivers and lakes are polluted and as such some 700 million people drink contaminated water every day.
Because of that water pollution, China sees Tibet as a source of bottled water. The Globe and Mail has reported, “Using tax breaks and other forms of government encouragement, the country wants its companies to bottle five million tonnes a year of Tibet water by 2020 and double that by 2025.”
It’s likely that Chinese investors might increasingly see Canada as a source for bottled water, especially given Agriculture Canada is promoting the idea.
Now that bottled water exports to China have begun, they could be difficult to stop under the ‘investment protection’ provisions in the Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA) or a Canada-China Free Trade Agreement (FTA) now the subject of exploratory talks between the Trudeau and Chinese governments.
The email I sent to everyone, to tie together Barton.
With a prefacing note:
Hi Lou,
I think too many Canadians are unaware.
If they take the 29 minutes to listen to the interview of Barton, and time to skim what Perkins explains (links below), they may change their mind about remaining dis-engaged.
If we will just talk with each other, have the conversations, we can “stand on guard for thee” (or, as my pre-school daughter sang, we “stand on guard for thieves”!)
/Sandra
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Don’t you love how we love to “tut, tut” OTHERS.
The billionaires appointed by Trump to run Government in the U.S.? How terrible! How can the Americans let this happen?!
Trump serves to divert our attention; we don’t see what is happening RIGHT HERE.
It’s not even being done in secret.
I can digest my breakfast better, if I know that you (and many others) know about Dominic Barton.
If you want to understand Justin Trudeau (Bill Morneau) decisions re trade agreements, industrial food and agriculture, corporate globalization, try this: Interview of Dominic Barton. CBC Radio, Sunday Edition, April 23, 2017.
29 important minutes.
THE CONTEXT for the appointment of Dominic Barton to head up the Government’s Advisory Committee on the Economy is critical.
Not everyone has the opportunity to read the source, to understand the context, so I typed up EXCERPTS:
Excellent primer #1:
The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, (EHM) John Perkins, 2016 paperback. Perkins covers recent developments.
From three chapters. If you are already familiar with Perkins’ work, skip the first one:
Excerpts
Chapter. 34, New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (EHM), John Perkins, 2016.
Excerpts
Ch. 38, Your Friendly Banker as EHM.
Excerpts
Ch. 40, Istanbul: Tools of Modern Empire
Excellent primer #2:
(Canadian) Beyond Banksters: Resisting the New Feudalism, by Joyce Nelson, 2016. Published by Watershed Sentinel Books, Comox, BC.
Excerpts at http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=18980.
Joyce provides tight documentation. Dominic Barton gets specific attention. If you don’t think Barton (McKinsey Co.) is part of the corporate coup d’etat, you would be mistaken.
I submitted to the Sunday Edition:
I, and other Canadians, needed to hear what Barton has to say. Now we need to hear what his company, McKinsey – – what the 25,000 employees of this “consulting” company do in the world.
A Canadian author, well-equipped to respond to Barton is JOYCE NELSON, reference her recent book, “Beyond Banksters”.
I have posted excerpts from JOHN PERKINS’ 2016 “The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man” for people who don’t have time to read it. And posted excerpts from Nelson’s book at http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=18980
The two books taken together tell you everything you need to know to assess Dominic Barton’s agenda. Please have Perkins and/or Nelson on your program. Thank-you for considering.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
UPDATE, ONTARIO BILL C-87 Omnibus bill that includes Vaccines.
Awaiting decision by “Collections” Committee of Legislature’s Library.
If yes, the package will go there post haste.
Any of the legislators, those making the decision on Bill C-87, and their staffers will have access.
Seems the best possible use of the free copy.
I made a written submission to the Committee.
Especially if you are in, or know people from Ontario – – I will bow at their feet if they will contact their MPP! C-87 passed second reading with a comfortable majority. Is now at Committee stage (there’s still time for public input). After Committee Report, it has to go through 3rd reading before it can be enacted. Please go to ONTARIO BILL C-87 if you have any doubts about the seriousness of this legislation. You simply do not allow this legislation in a democracy. Surely to God and Allah and all other deities, we don’t have to repeat everything that seems not to have been learned about how the Nazis took over.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
UPDATE, “BUILDING THE WALL”, the play by Robert Schenkkan
The play is taking off in the U.S. and in some other countries. Goal is to reach as many people as possible. Schenkkan is Pulitzer Prize playwright.
The agent for the playwright responded. Community theatre groups can obtain license to perform through
http://www.dramatists.com/cgi-bin/db/single.asp?key=5625
Full Length, Political Drama
1 man, 1 woman Total Cast: 2
Flexible Set
ISBN: 978-0-8222-3714-3
FEE: $100 per performance.
At least two people have approached the local community theatre group where I live, to see whether arrangements can be made for them to perform the play. There is a donor for the performance cost, if the answer is “yes”.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
UPDATE, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century. 2017, by Timothy Snyder
The posting (On Tyranny) is related to “BUILDING THE WALL”, (a play I haven’t actually seen). Building the Wall uses an interview by a journalist of a former head of a prison, now a prisoner himself, to show the erosion of the integrity of the human being. I think immediately of Hannah Arendt’s “The Banality of Evil”, arising out of the trial of Adolph Eichmann, an executioner in the Nazi prisons (“death camps”).
The posting, “On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons”, is a conversation I had about the University. It is well-known that “the educated”, “the elites” in Germany, the ones who arguably should have protected the democracy, instead became (certainly not all) handmaids of the Nazis.
Regulars in the network will have skipped Item #1 on the posting (my experience of tyranny at the University. They’ve heard it before.)
Item #2 uses quotes from “On Tyranny” to make the case for activism at the University. (“Dr. Peterson” from the U of Toronto seems to have run afoul of his Administration.)
My Reply to the person (American) who brought the U of T incident to attention:
Your observation is cogent, in the context of lead-up to WW2. The observation
In light of your (Sandra’s) experience with the university tyrant, Peterson’s remark applies: “Yes, the world CAN kill you.” And the sad part is that the perpetrator may be the institution that you installed for protection.
Some people will not have access to the Tyranny handbook. They may appreciate the typed – up excerpts in the Posting (Item #2).
You may like to know:
I received a phone message from a neighbour who is originally from the U.S., married a Canadian.
I had given her a copy of Snyder’s little handbook (which is specifically directed at the tactics of your (American) president).
She was surprised that the book came to her through Cdn networks, not American ones.
Her message listed the number of her friends and relatives (Florida, Germany, Washington) who she contacted and now also have the handbook ($11 Cdn).
She has ordered more copies through our local bookstore (for give away).
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
C’est tout for today!
AS USUAL:
Click on “The Battles”, upper lefthand corner of any blog page, to see a summary list of the 10 most recent postings. To see the full text of any posting in the list, just click on its title.
Cheers!
Sandra
See also, excerpts:
Ch. 38, Your Friendly Banker as EHM
Ch. 40, Istanbul: Tools of Modern Empire
Click on the small grey text at the top of this posting, John Perkins (category) for videos with John Perkins.
“INSERTS” are mine, Sandra Finley. And I added emphasis on some text.
PART V: 2004 – TODAY
P. 215: . . . The facts were obvious. I and others like me had created an EHM (Economic Hit Man) system that supported the corporatocracy. Together, the EHMs, corporate magnates, Wall Street robber barons, governments and jackals, and all their networks around the world have created a global economy that fails everyone. It is based on war or the threat of war, debt, an extreme form of materialism that pillages the earth’s resources and is consuming itself into extinction. In the end, even the very rich will fall victim to this death economy.
Most of us have bought into it in a big way; we are collaborators – – often unconscious ones. Now it is time to change. I had hoped that exposing these facts (Perkins’ original book, 2004), making people conscious, would inspire a movement that, by 2016, would have resulted in a new vision, a new story.
People were in fact shaken awake. Activities in so many parts of the world, including localized ones such as . . . (many examples we know)
What I had not anticipated was the flexibility in the EHM system or its absolute determination to defend and promote the death economy. I had not anticipated the rise of an entirely new class of EHMs and jackals.
INSERT: similar to what happened after the “change” movements of the 1960s and 1970s – – with the difference that there has been little analysis and awareness of how that movement was brought to heel. The National Guard shot and killed four students at Ohio State University during the protests, the U.S. was forced out of Vietnam, they lost the war, but it did not stop them. There is a straight line to today. And the wars have never stopped. They have all been lost by the U.S. and its allies. They continue. From that you can figure out that they are not actually about war. They are about the creation of fear. And money. And ignorance.
P. 217: While I was an EHM, the goals of most conspiracies were to further U.S. and corporate interests in the economically developing countries – – to do whatever it took, including overthrowing or killing government leaders, to enable our companies to exploit resources. . . .
INSERT: In March 2005 Perkins suffered – plausible – severe poisoning on the day before he was scheduled to speak at the United Nations. He offers another plausible explanation that is also more helpful to his state-of-mind, later, in Chapter 36, Ecuador Rebels, p. 226. I had taken on a mind-set of paranoia and guilt, I needed to change it. As he lounged during recovery from the colon operation, reading reports . . .
It became obvious that the tools I had used in Indonesia, Panama, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other countries were now being applied in Europe and the United States. Fortified by the so-called threat of global terrorism after 9/11, these conspiracies have given excessive power to the very wealthy individuals who control global corporations. Among the most striking are conspiracies to implement ”free” trade agreements such as NAFTA and CAFTA, and the more recent Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP),
Cont. P. 218: which empower corporations to assume de facto sovereignty over governments in countries around the world; to convince politicians to pass laws that permit the rich to avoid paying taxes, to control the media, and to use media to influence politics; and to terrify US citizens into fighting endless wars.
INSERT 1: important, from elsewhere in Perkins’ writing: “I was initially recruited while I was in business school back in the late sixties by the National Security Agency (NSA), the nation’s largest and least understood spy organization; but ultimately I worked for private corporations.
INSERT 2: re the word “conspiracy”: Perkins does not believe there is a “grand conspiracy”. “There is no secret club of individuals who get together to plot illegal, world-dominating strategies.” He adds,
“However, I do know that part of the power of the EHM system is that it foments many small conspiracies. By “small”, I mean that they are focused on specific objectives. Such conspiracies – – secret actions to accomplish illegal goals – – happened when I was just beginning school, such as the CIA coup that replaced the democratically elected Iranian prime minister, Mossadegh, with the shah . . (more examples)
Cont. P. 218, Perkins: These and many other conspiracies took the EHM system far beyond where it had been in the 1970s. Despite all that I had written, I had to admit that I’d missed much of what had been going on beneath the surface. The old tools had been sharpened and new ones invented. The heart of this system remained the same: an economic and political ideology based on enslavement through debt and enforced by paralyzing people with fear. In my day, it had convinced the majority of Americans and much of the rest of the world that all actions were justified if they protected us from Communist subversives; the fear had now switched to Muslim terrorists, immigrants, and anyone threatening to rein in corporations. The dogma was similar but the impact was now much greater.
INSERT: Perkins makes the point elsewhere in his writings that he has never met a terrorist who wanted to be a terrorist. I, Sandra, understand it thus: they are desperate people whose land, homes, community, family, health and government are being, or have been for a long time, destroyed by resource exploitation, pollution, and war imposed by outsiders.
I asked myself why I had stayed in that job for ten long years. And then I realized how difficult it had been to escape. It wasn’t just the seduction of money, flying first class, staying in the best hotels, and all the other perks. Nor was it the pressure exerted by my bosses and fellow employees at MAIN. It was also the aura of the job, my title – – the very story of my culture. I was doing what I’d been schooled to do, what I’d been told was the right thing to do. I was educated as an American whose job it was to sell America and to believe and convince everyone else that Communist regimes were out to destroy us. . . .
P. 219: That photograph got me thinking about those most formative years in my life. After the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the first satellite, we all became convinced that nuclear warheads were on the way. The chilling scream of sirens sent us scampering under our desks in weekly drills, to hide from imagined Soviet missiles. . . . Red provocateurs, like the evil Bolshevik in the poster, lurked among us, ready to pounce.
By the time I entered the EHM ranks, it had become apparent that we were losing in Vietnam, a nation portrayed as a Sino-Soviet puppet. We were told that there would be a “domino effect” – – that Indonesia would go next, then Thailand, South Korea, the Philippines and on and on. It wouldn’t be long before the Red tide would sweep Europe and then engulf the United States. Democracy and capitalism were doomed – – unless we halt the onslaught. And that meant doing whatever it took to promote companies such as Scott, which portrayed themselves as bulwarks against communism.
Delving into my feelings of guilt helped me see the ease with which I had deceived myself in those years. It opened my mind to understanding that millions of people are in positions similar to mine. They are no longer taught to fear communism, but they still fear Russia, China, and North Korea, in addition to al-Qaeda and other terrorists. They may not travel to foreign lands and confront, face-to-face, the consequences of what their companies do. They may not personally stand beside oil spills in the Amazon or see the hovels where sweatshop workers sleep. Instead, they anesthetize themselves with TV. They succumb to assurances by their schools, banks, human relations experts, and government officials that they are contributing to progress. But in their hearts they know otherwise. Deep down, they – – we – – realize that the stories misrepresent. And now it is time to admit our complicity.
INSERT: Perkins tells of conversation with Howard Zinn.
P. 220: When I shared with him the guilt that so often threatened to overwhelm me, he urged me to keep opening to it.
“Don’t be afraid of it,” he said. “You are guilty. We’re all guilty. We have to admit that although the big corporations own the propaganda machine, we allow ourselves to be duped. You can set an example. Show people that the way out, redemption, comes from changing it.”
I told him that I often thought of middle-class Americans as being like the medieval bourgeoisie – – the majority of the people, who lived in the bourgs outside the castle walls. “We pay our taxes so soldiers and jackals will defend us from the knights in the neighboring castles.”
“Exactly,” he said, . . . “We will do anything to maintain a system that has failed us.”
I came to understand . . . that my most important lesson since the publication of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man was similar to the one I had learned as a Peace Corps volunteer working with Andean brick layers: the only reason the EHM system works is because the rest of us give it permission to work. At best, we look the other way; at worst we actively support it. One of the things that most bothered me was having to admit to myself that I not only had looked the other way but also had convinced many people to actively support that system. I made a commitment to myself that I’d be more diligent; I’d watch more closely what was going on in my own community, my country, and the world.
P. 230:
INSERT: Present day Ecuador. Rafael Correa, “a very different type of politician”, had emerged. Reminds Perkins of a former client, Jaime Roldos, who became President of Ecuador in 1979. From P. 152 “Roldos struck me as a man who walked the path blazed by Torrijos. (President of Panama, also a “client” of Perkins.) “Both stood up to the world’s strongest superpower. . . . Like Torrijos, Roldos was not a Communist but instead stood for the right of his country to determine its own destiny. And as they had with Torrijos, pundits predicted that big business and Washington would never tolerate Roldos as president – – that if elected he would meet a fate similar to that of Guatemala’s Arbenz or Chile’s Allende.
It seemed to me that the two men together might spearhead a new movement in Latin American politics and that this movement might form the foundation of changes that could affect every nation on the planet. These men were not Castros or Gadhafis. They were not associated with Russia or China or, as in Allende’s case, the international Socialist movement. They were popular, intelligent, charismatic leaders who were pragmatic rather than dogmatic. They were nationalistic but not anti-American. If corporatocracy was built by three sectorss – – major corporations, international banks, and colluding governments – – Roldos and Torrijos held out the possibility of removing the element of government collusion.
INSERT: Less than two years after his inauguration as president of Ecuador, Roldos “died in a fiery airplane crash.” Omar Torrijos (president, Panama) later “dropped from the sky in a gigantic fireball”. Both men assassinated in 1981. Roldos at the end of May, Torrijos less than three months later, with almost no reporting in the U.S.
Now, here was Correa, a candidate who openly invoked the memory of Jaime Roldos. . . . Correa said that he has been approached by EHMs and was very aware of the threat posed by jackals. . . .
In 1968, Texaco had only just discovered petroleum in Ecuador’s Amazon. Today, oil accounts for roughly half of the country’s export earnings. A trans-Andean pipeline, built shortly after my first visit, has since leaked more than half a million barrels of oil into the fragile rain forest – more than twice the amount spilled by the Exon Valdez. A $1.3 billion, three-hundred-mile pipeline constructed by an EHM-organized consortium had promised to make Ecuador one of the world’s top ten suppliers of oil to the United \States. Vast areas of rain forest had fallen, macaws and jaguars had all but vanished, three Ecuadorian indigenous cultures had been driven to the verge of collapse, and pristine rivers had been transformed into flaming cesspools.
INSERT: There was a fight back by indigenous nations. 2003 – American lawyers filed a lawsuit representing more than 30,000 Ecuadorians, …
P. 231 . . . a $1 billion lawsuit against Chevron Texaco asserting “that between 1971 and 1992 the oil giant dumped into open holes and rivers more than four million gallons per day of toxic wastewater contaminated with oil, heavy metals, and carcinogens, and that the company left behind nearly 350 uncovered waste pits that continue to kill both people and animals.” . . .
(A cement wall in the jungle) … This is the Agoyan hydroelectric project, which fuels the industries that make a handful of Ecuadorian families wealthy.
… Because of the way such projects were financed, by the time Correa decided to run for president, Ecuador was devoting a large share of its national budget to paying off its debts. The International Monetary Fund had assured Ecuador that the only way to end this cycle was by selling the vast sea of petroleum beneath its rain forests to the oil companies.
. . . Correa won with nearly 60% of the vote. . . . took office in 2007
. . . Correa refused to pay many of Ecuador’s debts, proclaiming that they had been signed by CIA-sponsored military dictators who had been bribed by EHMs (a fact I (i.e. Perkins) knew only too well was true). He closed the United States’ largest military base in Latin America, withdrew support for the CIA’s war on rebels in neighboring Columbia, ordered Ecuador’s central bank to divert to domestic funds that had been invested in the U.S., oversaw the rewriting of the constitution to make his country the first in the world to codify the inalienable rights of nature (a threat to the bottom lines of big business), and joined ALBA, an alternative to Washington’s plan to increase US hegemony through its Free Trade Area of the Americas.
But the most courageous of Correa’s actions was his renegotiation of oil contracts. He insisted that the companies could no longer base Ecuador’s share of oil revenues on “profits” – – an
P. 232: all-too-common arrangement between big oil and economically developing countries, which historically has cheated these countries through creative accounting. Instead, the oil would belong to Ecuador, and the companies could only collect a fee for each barrel they produced.
The EHMs were dispatched. They offered the president and his cronies bribes – – both legal and illegal – – if he’d just back off. He refused.
Then, Honduran president Manuel Zelaya fell to a jackal coup.
That coup had a huge impact on all of Latin America – and especially on President Correa.
INSERT: You will have to read the story of Zelaya in Honduras yourself! The role of the “School of the Americas” (School of the Assassins”) is discussed. And the misrepresentations of what happened, as written in mainstream American media.
“No matter how many toys we amass we leave them behind when we die, just as we leave a broken environment, an economy that only benefits the richest, and a legacy of . . .
See also, excerpts from Chapters 34 and 40:
Ch. 34, New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins, 2016.
Click on the small grey text at the top of this posting, John Perkins (category) for videos with John Perkins.
Now to Chapter 38, Excerpts.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Chapter 38, Your Friendly Banker as EHM
P. 238:
Perkins received an overture from an executive at a Chase Bank near his home. They met for dinner. The man follows Perkins’ writings.
. . . (The banker speaking) “I have to wonder why you didn’t expose the things we bankers do right here at home. We use the same tools as you EHMs – – on our own folks.” He proceeded to tell me that in recent years bankers had convinced clients to purchase houses that were beyond their means. “A young newlywed couple comes in,” he said, “and asks for a mortgage on a $300,000 home. We convince them to buy a $500,000 one.” . We say, “You may have to tighten your belt a little, but soon your house will be worth a million dollars.” He shook his head sadly. “They’ve been told to trust their banker. Used to be that people in my position would try to talk prospective debtors down, not up. We were supposed to do everything to prevent foreclosures. But all that changed.
“What changed it?”
INSERT: I didn’t type up the “he said” parts.
“. . . Not sure of the answer. It mostly happened in this millenium. Perhaps it had something to do with 9/11, rising oceans, melting glaciers, fear, our feelings of mortality. Make all the dough you can, as soon as you can, and screw everyone else.” “Drink, dance, consume, and be merry. For us bankers, it was money, money, money. We tried to instill in our clients that there was no tomorrow. Bin Laden will kill us all. So go into debt, buy that big house, fancy car, . . “ “When the bottom fell out of the market, the banks foreclosed, repackaged the loans, and ended up earning huge returns, while that young couple and thousands like them filed for bankruptcy.
. . . (Banker speaking): “You know, the whole system stinks. From inflated home mortgages to college loans, it’s all about servitude to debt. Not that homes or a college education are bad. Of course not. The problem is that we all believe we should do everything to achieve the ‘good life.’ Anything for the American dream. Including burying ourselves in debt.|
P. 240:
INSERT: the law student who wanted to defend homeless people and abused children. But she had amassed more than $200,000 in student loans. Had to get a job with a corporate law firm and devote years to paying off her debt. Then comes buying a home, children, and so on. Now she’s caught in the system, unlikely to ever get out.
(Banker speaking): “Look, I sympathize with everything you write about. Ecuador. I volunteered to clean up beaches hit by the BP oil spill. I’ve seen the damage. Please don’t get me wrong. I think Correa’s plan to sell the Amazon to oil companies is a huge mistake, a crime. My point is that it’s part of a disease that’s infected us here in America also. I just want you to include that in your writings.”
Perkins reminisces about his uncle, a banker.
P. 241: . . . For my uncle, it wasn’t just a matter of not wanting to foreclose. He believed that being a driving force behind the local economy was his job, his duty. It was also his joy in life.
. . . In Uncle Ernest’s view, debt was a means to an end, a partnership between creditor and debtor. For the modern banker, debt paves the road to windfall profits. It delivers people into the EHM system.
A chill ran through me as I thought about how I’d led the march of the modern banker. …
. . . the extent to which modern bankers are willing to go in order to profit off of everyone else, a huge scandal erupted. The 2012 revelations . . . (Libor) demonstrated that (international banks) were capable of ruthlessly betraying the public trust.
. . . it now was revealed that the Libor had been illegally manipulated by the banks from 1991 until 2012. As a result, the banks accumulated immeasurable sums of illicit profits. Once found guilty, the banks were fined more than $9 billion. As of this writing, only one UBS trader, and not a single bank officer, has been indicted.