Midterm Outcome, What Next?

Well, the midterms are mostly over. The Democrats appear to have gained a razor thin majority in the house; but, that is still enough to take over the speakership and determine who heads the committees. The Republicans appear to have a stronger majority in the house; but, not a supermajority. The Republicans also gained in governorships. We don't know about the local races because there are just too many to look at.

So what happens. Well, my guess is the Democrats will spend the next two years conducting non-stop investigations of Trump and will call for impeachment. They cannot win an impeachment trial (those are done by the Senate); but, we will hear nonstop rage and fury from them. As for getting things done, nothing will get done, we will return to gridlock.

It works out mostly good for Trump. He can blame his inability to get things done on the Democrats for the next two years and he will be able to consolidate his control over the Republican party. The fact is, the candidates he stumped for won and the Republicans who fought him lost to Democrats. This election has also further divided Democrats between the corporate Democrats and the liberal Democrats. That fight will determine who runs in 2020.

Midterm Predictions.

Polling is garbage as we have seen in the last election, so, I am going to discuss trends and people's thinking. Lets start with this, the Democratic strongholds on the coast are not going to change. Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle and Portland already have Democratic people in the House. The question is what the Midwest, southwest and south are going to do. My guess, they are going to vote in Republicans where they have Democrats or at least not turn Democrat. The simple fact is that unemployment is down for the first time in many of these areas. These areas had not had hope for 40 years and now believe they have some. If you want some allegorical evidence, look at Trump's rallies. He can fill a 20,000 person arena on any day, at anytime in these areas. These people are going to vote again because they finally believe their vote matters when it hasn't in a very long time. You can like it or dislike it; but, this is my guess and it is not based on party, I am still a socialist.

Now comes the fun stuff, what comes next if I am right? Well, a deep, deep depression within the Democratic establishment. There current plan, if they were to take the House, would be to spend the next two years trying to impeach Trump. Not to get rid of him; but, to explain the gridlock they intend to create. They don't have a backup plan. If they do not take the House or Senate, they will have to deal with the division within their own party between corporate Democrats and "progressives". As for the Republican party, they will all start to step in line behind Trump or face elimination. Trump has singlehandedly changed the whole party. Every Republican who keeps their office will support Trump more vocally out of fear of losing his voters support.

During the last election I wanted to see Bernie win; but, it did not influence by analysis of the race and I knew Trump was going to win and as much the media said he would not, it was obvious they were lying. When the Media and Hillary vilified the voters prior to the election, it was clear how it would end. Up and including on election night we were told it was over 90% that Hillary would win; but, her campaign new better. Weeks before the election, they cancelled the purchase of the fireworks for election night.

Now here is where it could get really weird. What happens if the Republican party gains even one seat in the House and Senate? You will see a complete and utter meltdown of the media and the Democratic party. Firstly, Trump would get his wall. Now, if he denuclearize North Korea, he gains even more Democratic support and international support. He would also be perfectly positioned in Arabia to negotiate peace with Israel. The midterms are being hotly watched all over the world for the first time. The midterms will prove whether or not populism, majority rule, can effect elections more than wealthy donors and the elites.

I am going to use a strange analogy. The establishment and the wealthy live in a state of constant fear that they may lose what they have. They focus on issues they believe will emotionally impact the rest of us. The last thing they want is to discuss economics or privilege of the wealthy. The social issues are what motivate the well off because economic ones have only benefitted them. The analogy, Roseanne was the number one show on television. She was crushing the ratings. The media hated her for being a Trump supporter. She screwed up and was publicly lynched. The show was way to successful to be forgot, so they killed her off and brought the show back without her. In it's second week it lost half of it's viewership. It has since lost another 25%. The trend is obvious and the media has polled on it, oddly enough everything gets polled. The network carrying her show has ordered just one more episode. That will be a finale. People at the network have said publicly that they may have acted too hastily in firing Roseanne. They thought they could succeed without her; but, they found out they couldn't. They figured they made a mistake only because of the loss in revenue. The media is a business. If Republicans keep the House and Senate, the media will begin acting differently about the Trump voters.

Many states allow early voting and the Republicans are coming out in droves. Biggest numbers in history for early voting. In the rust belt, the Democrats will not get back a single voter and they know it. Hillary continues to vilify people in the Midwest and the popularity of the Democrats is taking a major blow. You cannot insult people for two years and then ask them for their vote. Telling them you want to eliminate the electoral college doesn't make them want to vote for you either.

I am going to watch this election like it was any other action film. I don't really care who wins, in fact I have absolutely no intention to vote. My predictions are not because of my biases, they are because of what I have seen over the last two years. The media and the Democratic party have demonized the Midwest for the past two years nonstop. They now know what the Democratic party thinks of them and why they have not been helped in the last 40 years.

UPDATE:

I finished writing this and posted it then I saw this skit from tonight's Saturday Night Live.

The comments made on YouTube are hilarious. The skit is of people saying they are positive the Democrats will win and showing just how little they actually believe it. The comments to the video are a bunch of Democrats saying that is exactly how they feel. Just imagine what these people will be like if the Republicans gain seats. One of the reasons Democrats are not confident is that they no longer believe the media either. They know the media is biased against Trump and support it for that reason; but, they don't trust them to be honest. These people were told there was a 97% chance Hillary would win the day before the election. They have been freaking out since Trump got elected. They have been going through the stages of grief, literally. First came denial (remember "not my president"). Next came anger, lots and lots of anger. Next comes bargaining, the endless stream of if only's that we have heard. If only for the Russians, white women, green party, misogynists, racists, whatever, we would have won. The next stage is depression. That is what we are seeing now. It starts with a loss of hope and leads to the final step, acceptance.

The Democratic party has had two years to come up with a platform that benefits workers and they haven't. They have a joke platform that starts with Trump bad. There number one issue is healthcare. That is a joke. There most discussed issue is wanting to bring in more immigrants. Wow. Talk about tone deaf. After that they want to talk about trans rights. How is this meant to bring back workers votes?

I am going to tell a little story now. It is meant to help you understand why the Kavanaugh hearings increased Republican support. Most of the people that worked for me were female. I was thought fairly highly by them, they came to me with their personal issues sometimes. I was the safe married guy who was all business for myself and gentle with my employees. In the decades these people worked with me, they never see me flirt with anyone. Not even after my divorce. After the divorce, a few asked me what happened and I told them my wife left me for a family friend and I now had to pay her a very large alimony. The women I knew were outraged that I had to pay her alimony at all. Men on the other hand said, yeah that is what happens. The thing people seem to forget in the media is that women aren't stupid and know other women and they know women who would lie about such a thing. I don't know of a single woman who believes all women. I will further say this, when I got divorced not a single person asked me if I had cheated on my wife. I cannot tell you how many asked if my wife had cheated on me.

The question that remains is, if my prediction is correct, will the Democratic establishment learn a lesson. The answer is probably no. In Texas No Limit Poker (my favorite pastime in life that I can no longer play online) there is a point where you can become what we call "pot committed". You have overcommitted to a hand and cannot afford to pull out. Only the best professionals can walk away from that hand and that happens rarely even for professionals. The  Democratic party is pot committed to their donors for the 2020 Presidential election. Big tech and the banks have committed well over a billion to defeating Trump; but, if after the midterms the Democrats attempt to go more progressive, they will not get that money.

A final note, something most people missed. Trump is travelling the nation talking at Republican events. You can watch the videos. You know what he isn't doing, he isn't saying that you need to send in money for the Republican candidates. He is not fundraising, in fact, I don't believe he even charges an admission fee for the rally's. You are a fool if you think the people attending the rally's would not pay ten or twenty bucks to be there and support Trump. They are willing to wait hours in line and even stand outside and never get in, just to be there. You know what else you haven't heard, you haven't heard of Trump attending endless fundraisers because he hasn't. Why not? His appearance and support for a candidate brings all his voters to the candidate. It is worth more than money. He says to his voters, if this candidate loses, we lose because I will not be able to get anything done. A lot of Trump voters hate Ted Cruz; but, they will vote for him because Trump has asked them to in support of him and they believe him. You are watching history be made.

UPDATE 2:

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver did a episode tonight on "family separation". It was about how about 6 months ago, when a family of illegal immigrants would arrive they would separate the children from the parents. His conclusion is that the Democrats should make this election about it. Don't make the election about how your representatives should be looking out for your best interests, make it about how your representatives should be looking out for people that aren't even in the country. This is why the Democratic party is doomed on Tuesday. The media and the corporate Democrats don't give a damn about the millions of kids in Foster care and they don't give a damn about the homeless. The corporate Republicans don't give a damn about them either; but, the Republicans are running on helping Americans. The Democrats are running on this rather that universal healthcare or breaking up the banks. Stupid.

Why Trump Will Be Re-Elected.

In January of 1989 George Bush Sr became president. In April of that year the Chinese killed their own people in Tiananmen square. The United States increased jobs being outsourced there. In 1993, Bill Clinton became president. Bill signed the law that made it easier to outsource to China upon getting in office and then worked to get Nafta. Let us not forget 1996 and the Chinagate scandal. That was when China sent money to the DNC under Clinton. The Bushes and the Clintons created the Rust Belt, not Trump, not blacks, not Jews, not Muslims, not Jesuits, not gays or Neo-Nazis. The Midwest waited patiently and voted for Obama rejecting Hillary in the primaries, they knew what her husband had done. Obama promised a better future, HOPE was his slogan and they did. NOPE was his answer once he got in office and a Democratic congress. He didn't get them universal healthcare, he got them the Republican Romneycare, which they could not afford on $8 an hour and taxed them for NOT buying insurance. What did Hillary offer them in 2015? She didn't even visit Wisconsin and called them deplorables who were afraid of change. In 40 years what changes have helped them and what promises were made and not fulfilled?

What can they say now to these people? They can say they will strengthen the power of unions; but, that is meaningless when the jobs have already been outsourced. They can promise them a free college education, it means little to a 35 year old working 2 jobs just to survive. What is the Democratic platform. Trump bad, illegal immigrants without high school educations good, transgender bathrooms should be mandatory, people in the Midwest are lazy, xenophobes, homophobes, racists, anti-semites, was what they were told. The same people that destroyed the rust belt told them that manufacturing will not come back and that it's all their fault.

When the working class started the Tea Party the were told the same thing. So they elected Trump who said he would stop illegal immigration and bring back jobs. For the first time in a long time they have any improvement rather than just more downhill sliding. They are not impressed when you tell them Trump is a liar, they have been lied to by Democrats for 40 years.

The real reason that the Democratic party wants to eliminate the Electoral College is so that they don't have to listen the people whose lives they have destroyed in the Midwest and can just listen to the people who have benefitted from gutting this nation and their lives. Why didn't they vote for Jeb Bush, because the Bushes sent their kids to war and further outsourced jobs.

After the housing crash two new groups emerged, the Tea Party and the Occupy movement and both were anti-globalist and anti-establishment. The Tea Party believed the system could work to their advantage if they insisted their politicians work for them. They were allowed into the Republican party and co-opted out of existence. The Occupy movement was violently removed and splintered into groups which were directed to focus on social issues like gay marriage. I wrote about this at the time and said what would happen. I said that these people were still upset and would seek a President who would do something for them. They got President Obama and he only made things worse for them. Trump came along and said "F the establishment, we going to keep out illegals and bring back manufacturing.

If you think Trump won in a large victory, he did. One of his first actions was to try and keep out immigrants from the middle east. That is not surprising, its the people in the Midwest and south who are most likely to join the military and have fought in those countries only to return home to no jobs.

Whether you know it or not, the people who work for the establishment know it. The think tanks know it. People like me who did contingency planning know it. Trump has screwed up a timeline, a timeline that has been agreed to in private by powerful people. That is why they have called for his impeachment prior to his even getting in office. The media wants to say this is a cultural divide, it is not, it is an economic one.

After the death of the tea party and occupy, I said what would happen. I said they would elect someone on the left or right who would be more extreme, we got a Socialist and Trump. Bernie let himself be cheated and didn't complain. If he runs again he will be completely crushed for that reason. Hillary would flame out in the first couple of primaries even quicker than Sanders. I also said that if that person were kept from office or removed, people will get violent. The establishment expects it. They thought it might come sooner, they thought Hillary or Jeb would win, they openly cheated and stopped Bernie. Trump proved you could beat the establishment on the right and left. Even a Roosevelt Progressive socialist like me can see that.

Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party. I wrote that in 2011.

Trump will get more votes in the Black and Hispanic communities in 2020.

Conspiracy Theories Versus Real Conspiracies

A real tragedy happened today; but, I wont get into the specifics of today. Suffice it to say that the shooter appeared to believe Jews are taking over the world. The media on the left blamed Trump, of course, and the media on the right blamed the media on the left. Neither is accurate.

I grew up in a well to do area that had many Jews. I went to school with them and played with them and worked with them on theater projects. Few of the Jews I knew were devout and many celebrated Christmas because it was a fun holiday. I didn't really know any anti-Semites, if I did, they didn't talk about it. I knew a couple of people who disliked blacks because we were one of the first schools to accept bussing from the inner city. We pretty much squashed those opinions. At that time there was the beginning of radical extremist white nationalists, primarily in the Midwest. Because my father  worked in law enforcement, I knew that most of those groups were monitored and infiltrated. Groups are easier to deal with than are lone fanatics.

As my readers know I read as much as I can on the left and the right; but, I don't really read the extremists on either side very much. Still, it is hard to avoid seeing it if you read enough. Up until I was 13, I was raised as a good Irish Catholic; but, I became an agnostic and remained so for another 12 years or so and then became a Protestant, no denomination. When I became a Protestant I found many Christians who believed the Catholics had all sorts of crazy beliefs, beliefs that were never taught in the Catholic churches that I attended.

When the internet came out the fringe could be seen. I found that there are people who believe the Jesuits rule the world in secret or that the Jews rule the world in secret. On the left I discovered many who believe that Israel should be abolished and many on the right who believe the same. For my part, I have always defended Israel's right to exist. I have never understood why people like to blame the Jews for everything other than the fact that they probably don't know many Jews. The fact is no religion rules the world and the vast majority of people who identify as Muslim, Jew or Christian are so in name and tradition only. Most people just want to have a decent job, come home to their family and relax.

There are real conspiracies. The rigging of markets such as LIBOR was real and it was done by the banks, not by Jews; but, by banks. The rigging of the elections is done by the wealthy, not by Jews, by the establishment. As I have said before, it wasn't the Muslims, illegal aliens, Jews, Jesuits, gays, blacks, racists, Communists, the homeless that caused the housing crisis or the market crashes, they were caused by the "establishment". The simple fact is that the people who own the world and have power want to consolidate power and not be subject to democratic control or the will of the majority. The reason banks rig markets is simple, it is for power and money. Greedy and selfish people gravitate to where the money is, what a shock. Pedophiles try to get jobs working with kids. Same logic.

I am anti-globalism for good reasons. Globalism means that companies are not tied to any one country and as a consequence they are allowed to avoid taxes to nations and avoid environmental and other laws. I am for controlled borders because open borders drive down wages for the working and middle class. While many seek to focus on Hispanic illegal immigration, if you follow the news you will find that the big tech firms are more focused on taking the best in tech from other countries and driving down the cost of programmers and others. There are real conspiracies and those are ignored while random extremists are used to prop up the narrative that distrust of globalism is racist or xenophobic. I should point out that it was young people on the left who protested globalism in Seattle that I first noticed raising these issues.

After my divorce, the first woman I dated was a Ukrainian Jew, she was a professional, very pretty and very intelligent. One day after a date she asked me if I believed America had a free market economy. I laughed and told her that I could not comprehend how the biggest economy in the world would not have the wealthy trying to control it. If you had a few billion dollars, wouldn't you try and influence the laws? Have people forgotten why the original Progressive movement was created? In the late 1800s the industrial revolution brought amazing wealth to a few and left workers living in ghettos while working at the factories for pennies. Sort of sounds like China and India today.

Today we are told that the biggest threat to humans is "climate change". In fact, the latest United Nations report says if we don't begin reducing CO2 emissions in the west by 2020, we will be guaranteed to begin dying off by 2030. That sounds pretty serious. Each year a group known as Bilderberg meets in one of the western countries where they say, "The meeting is a forum for informal discussions about megatrends and major issues facing the world". The attendees are from business, academia, the media and politicians. The meetings are held in private and attendees are not allowed to discuss what was said. This year the agenda was:

Populism in Europe
The Inequality Challenge
The future of work
Artificial Intelligence
The US before midterms
Free trade
US world leadership
Russia
Quantum computing
Saudi Arabia and Iran
The "post truth" world
Current events.

Not one mention of climate change. In fact, they haven't had climate change on their agenda in over a decade and then it was the last item. If you wish you can follow the link provided and see their agendas and a list of attendees.

Another group called the Trilateral Commission has members from Europe, Asia and the United States. Their website says, "The Commission offers a global platform for open dialogue, reaching out to those with different views and engaging with decision makers from around the world with the aim of finding solutions to the great geopolitical, economic and social challenges of our time. A copy of their agenda for this year. Agenda. You know what was not on the agenda, you guessed it, climate change. In fact, they spent most of their time talking about how power and money are shifting to the east.

While many have heard about the "Bohemian Grove", it really is just a collection of the rich and powerful getting drunk and partying. Their motto is, "Weaving spiders come not hear". In other words, this is for fun not business. While their rituals may seem slightly creepy, it is not a deliberative body. It is a social bonding party for the rich and powerful.

If the greatest threat to humanity is climate change then why are our leaders in business and politics more concerned over populism? Because they are afraid of losing power. It is that simple. If they are so concerned about climate change caused by CO2 then why did the Paris Climate Accord call for the west to cap the CO2 emissions and allow China (already the biggest producer of CO2) to double the number of coal burning plants and not have any restrictions until after 2030?

Bad Science and Really Bad Solutions.

Media manipulation has risen to an all time high. Propaganda and advertising began using the science of psychiatry to manipulate the population in the 1920s as the result of theories presented by Edward Bernays. Bernays had a more famous relative, Sigmund Freud, who created psychiatry. The use of media to manipulate people increased in the 1950s as reported by Vance Packard in his book, "The Hidden Persuaders", which outlined the use of subliminal motivators. The best book on subliminal manipulation was written in 1974 by Wilson Bryan Key and is called "Subliminal Seduction". It is out of print, what a surprise. I have an original printing which I bought at the time of publishing. I spent a decade researching it which led to me studying hypnosis and mind control which led me to research MK Ultra. In fact I read much about the Church Commission that uncovered the CIA's work on mind control. You can read what the Church Committee said in their reports. To read the actual MK Ultra documents that were released by the CIA, I would direct you to The Black Vault, a website that is the leader in getting government documents using the Freedom of Information Act. I also would like to tip my hat, once again, for John Greenwald Jr, for creating the site and collecting millions of documents allowing us access to source materials.

My starting point in researching anything is that you cannot trust summaries or hearsay, that is why I always publish links to the actual documents when available and have since I began this blog. The reality is that opinions that are not backed up by source documentation or fail to follow the scientific method are almost completely useless to me. When I read the source documents I always look for bias and bullshit. In fact, if you yourself have not read the source documents you cannot hold a valid supportable opinion.

Now I am going to talk about climate science, again. Firstly, science requires experiments and testing to validate a theory, not mathematical models. Models do not prove cause and effect, experiments do and they must be reproducible. I do not believe in manmade global warming because they cannot show me the experiments and you can do anything you want with statistics. The true science deniers refuse to use the scientific method and use mathematical models that have not been proven to not have predictive power. That is a fact. Another maxim in science is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

When I cannot find proof for an assumption, I assume that I am being lied to for a reason. I presume that Hegelian dialectic, which is short for create a problem, have people demand a solution and then implement the solution you wanted in the first place. It is the essence of leading the public to do things that do not benefit them. It is how we got into the Iraq war. Tell people that Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, convince people we must act immediately to protect them from the weapons and then invade the country. Afterwards, it didn't matter that no such weapons were found because that was not the real reason we went in.

We are told that the solution to global warming is to cease all man made CO2 emissions by 2050. We are supposed to achieve this by eating 90% less meat, converting to wind and solar and living on less, smaller living spaces and smaller lives. We are told to achieve these things by making international law pre-eminent over national sovereignty and extreme restrictions on all areas of your life. We are also told that we cannot ask China or India to restrict their emissions because it would be unfair until they have polluted as much as the United States and the west did since the 1940s. Huh?

Let us say that I believed that CO2 was bad and that manmade CO2 was going to kill us all by 2050, I can think of much better solutions to the problem. Firstly, stop the deforestation of the Amazon. Buy the land. Increasing forests reduces CO2 by scrubbing it and turning it into Oxygen. That would reduce CO2 and cause less problems for how people live. Secondly, convert to Hydrogen as our primary energy source. The burning of hydrogen creates Oxygen, not CO2. In fact Toyota makes a car that runs on hydrogen cell technology and power plants can be converted to it with very little changes to technology. Unlike wind and solar, hydrogen production can be increased to meet what the energy industry calls "peek demand". Sounds good right? In fact the fact that I don't believe in manmade global warming does not make me adverse to decreasing carbon emissions and converting to hydrogen power and it would cost less. An easy and relatively inexpensive solution is ignored in favor of very draconian and expensive solutions, why? It is ignored in favor of an international carbon tax.

So, what is the system of a global carbon tax? Well, every country would be allotted a specific amount of CO2 and be regulated by an international body of unelected people. It is a zero sum gain solution and those always stink for the majority. So, if there are better solutions and the science is garbage, why should I believe the people peddling imminent global catastrophe who rely on statistics rather than science? If you haven't read the source documents, why would you be patinate about global warming? The answer is simple, because you are responding to fear mongering and propaganda.

My outlook for the future is bleak. I think the alarmists will win. I have no belief that my opinion will effect the outcome and on one level, I just don't care that much. I don't think I can really break through the programming of most people and am content providing my readers with understanding. Then again, I only need to reach one person who will look up what I say, evaluate it honestly and then have the strength to intelligently act on it.

News you must know

Reuters - U.S. plans to rewrite rules that impede self-driving cars.

The Seattle Times - Uber gets political, will spend $10M pushing for "congestion pricing" tolls in Seattle, elsewhere.

AFP - German urges global minimum tax for digital giants.

Fox - I've found the Democratic candidate who can defeat Trump in 2020.

Global Economic Inequality and Climate Policy

Sometime in the 1970s there began a growing movement for global economic redistribution. These discussions were primarily held in the fields of sociology and political science. Prior to the industrial revolution there was little national economic inequality which is to say that all countries were relatively poor. The industrial revolution changed this and shifted both national wealth and wealth within western and other industrial countries. After World War II, the United States became the manufacturer of the world and the wealth of the United States outstripped that of the rest of the world.

For a more in depth discussion of the issue, I recommend you read the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Global Justice. This philosophy was closely tied to the belief that wealth should be more evenly shared across the world and this means having international laws and treaties that would promote the shifting of wealth from wealthy nations to poor nations. In many ways this theory led to the philosophical belief in the importance of "Globalism".

Consider which countries have benefited the most from globalism and when it began and accelerated. After the fall of the Soviet Union manufacturing was primarily shifted from the west to China and India. What do China and India have in common, they had the highest populations in the world. What they also had in common was high poverty. By sending manufacturing to these counties, we effectively were involved in global economic redistribution. This shift had an economic advantage for the wealthy within the west which was that they were able to reduce labor costs, reduce the cost of providing employees with benefits, avoiding environmental requirements, avoiding taxes and reducing the wealth and influence of the middle class in the west. The stated justification for outsourcing jobs overseas was that labor costs were cheaper and the other issues were not addressed. If our leaders said in public what they say in private, the middle class would not have accepted these changes.

As manufacturing was moved to China and India, people in the Midwest who lost their jobs began to get upset. They began fighting against outsourcing and a new explanation emerged for why people in the west had to lower their standard of living, global warming and the need for people in the west to "lower their carbon footprint". The culprit we were told was the burning of fossil fuels and the problem was claimed to be so bad that we needed international agreements to solve it. Agreements that are not voted on by the citizens of the countries that were making these wealth transfers.

The solution we are told is that all countries commit to the Paris Climate Accord. Under the accord nations set their own limits and they are not legally bound to meet retaining the right to change them. Under the agreement China will continue to expand it use of coal burning power plants until 2030, doubling the number of coal burning plants in the meantime. You might ask if CO2 is such a threat then why is China increasing it's coal burning? The answer is that China is seen as an emerging economic power and that they are entitled to "Catch up" economically. Global justice. China is currently the largest producer of CO2 in the world and is looking at doubling its emissions until 2030 while the west is expected to cut their emissions even further. What is the result, this policy basically forces the west to shift even more manufacturing to China, India and other "emerging economies".

By the way, the Nobel Prize for Economics was given to two men for tying climate change to economics. The same two are in favor of an international carbon tax, what a surprise. If you don't believe there is a connection between economic policy and climate policy, you are sadly misinformed.

If you watch the video above on Global Justice, you will discover that they see one option for global justice involves the movement of poor people into wealthy countries. Basically the unfettered migration into Europe and the fight for open borders in the United States is from globalists. 

EliteTrader - UN IPCC Official Admits "We Redistribute World's Wealth By Climate Policy."

The IPCC official is OTTMAR EDENHOFER, who was a lead author of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report in 2007. You can finds quotes from him at AZ Quotes. I will leave you with two of his quotes. "First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."

"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the worlds resources will be negotiated."