This presentation is essential reading in understanding what is to come

(If some of the slides are blank either zoom in one level or fullscreen the presentation)

The End Game

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

UPDATE-1: Dear journalists (Part 2)

I had never intended to make the first part an ongoing "series" and was really just the result of my angry ranting, yet again I feel a need to ask journalists why they are not doing their job.

Today's article of interest: Alison Redford 'advancing Alberta's interests' at elite gathering.

Yesterday you'll remember the Herald referred to the Bilderberg meeting as a "financial conference", and now today it is an "elite gathering". Eventually they will work their way up to including the meeting's name in the headlines I'm sure (sic).

Within this latest piece of pro-Bilderberg propaganda are plenty of mentions of "advancing Alberta's interests", how they will be advanced beyond networking with the world's elite of course isn't mentioned. All Alberta news articles "covering" this issue seem to be making the same assumption, that this meeting must be good. None of these media outlets however can tell you why it's good.

These media outlets have never sent a reporter to cover the event - so how would they know it's a good event for Alison Redford to be attending? You'll notice that should you imply that these meetings are not as they appear to be to a "journalist", you will be labeled a conspiracy theorist even though they can not tell you with certainty what actually is discussed, they seem to be able to tell you with certainty what isn't discussed. Again I ask, how would they know?

There are plenty of non-answers coming out of our "media" about what occurs at the Bilderberg group but few answers as to what does occur. Is no one finding it odd that we are simply taking a government official at their word regarding a meeting with no oversight to prove otherwise? Does no one find it interesting that this event is far more prestigious than meetings such as the G20 yet the contents of such a meeting are of no interest to the journalist community?

Sure, their approach might work in a world where politicians don't lie and can be trusted, but we don't live in that world. Government credibility is at an all time low. Canada has been plagued by scandals and warnings of foreign espionage and yet here we (Albertans) are supporting zero-transparency politics all because Mulcair is doing some stupid dog and pony show?

My reason for opposing Redford's attendance at Bilderberg has nothing to do with Mulcair's visit. I've already written a rebuttal to his dutch disease assertion. I am opposing her visit because attendees are sworn to secrecy (yes, I'm aware she says she'll be revealing what was discussed, she either doesn't know she can't or is plain and simply lying to you) and the usage of public money entitles the Albertan citizen to answers. I know answers can not and will not be given and even if they were, they can not be confirmed or verified and are not credible, and so in my mind she has no business using public funds for this trip. I also object to the trip itself but right now let's focus on the public funding of it. As I pointed out yesterday her reasoning is contrary to Bilderberg's own mission statement.

What Bilderberg represents is undemocratic in nature. The media would have you believe this is the world's intellectuals, that what they discuss is just too important and high level for your ears. The media would have you believe they have answers about this group when in reality all they present are calming questions. You can look at the people attending Bilderberg in another way, during this weekend the prime suspects of the global economic collapse are all under one roof. In 4 years they have held numerous expensive summits, meetings, all under the guise of solving the worlds problems and yet what has been solved? What is better today than 4 years ago? Not much.

The media telling you what to think about this event are not even sending a reporter to cover it, so why would you believe them? You shouldn't, plain and simple.

There is an inner logic, and we're taught to stay far from it...

Update-1

Well ask and you shall receive. Here is the best coverage mainstream media can put together. You see, the mainstream media isn't allowed to actually go and report, but they have to pretend as though they are still important so their great big idea? Well they'll make up a funny story and include lots of details about lizards etc. This way, even though they are not providing any real information they can work to discredit anyone who has serious concerns.

So there you go, Albertans. These are the people telling you what to think, these are the people telling you Bilderberg is just a "financial conference". These are the people destroying their own industry, but more importantly destroying their own democracy and national sovereignty. Laugh it up journalists, I'm sure you'll find the results of these meetings hilarious as well.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

When our leaders talk about austerity remind yourself of this

Released by Anonymous Quebec. From the description:

Identification (n'hésitez pas à nous envoyer vos requête d'identification par MP)
Lucien Bouchard @ 13:50, 16:15, 18:13, 1:40:05, 1:40:36, 1:40:54
Brian Mulroney @ 14:10, 15:29, 19:25, 1:36:25, 1:38:49, 1:41:13, 1:42:50
Jean Charest, semi caché @ 14:29, 15:52, 19:35, 20:07, 43:48
Jean Chrétien @ 15:00, 43:15, 43:35, 1:40:19, 1:40:36, 1:40:41
George H. W. Bush @ vers 19:32
Liza Frulla a 14:55
Marc Hervieux à 35:30
Yannick Nezet-Seguin à 41:30 (chef d'orchestre)
Adrienne Clarkson @ 16:15, 18:20, 1:40:38
Couple Desmarais @ 16:23, 38:54, 43:07, 43:58, 44:18, 44:25, 44:50, 42:20, 1:38:58
Jean Charest et sa femme @ 18:00
Desmarais @ 18:35, 19:08, 19:25, 19:55, 43:50, 1:40:09, 1:40:30, 1:40:46, 1:40:51
Robert Charlebois @ 19:20, 1:38:46, 1:39:11, 1:40:00, 1:41:16, 1:44:30, 1:44:40, 1:45:08
Luc Plamondon @ 42:59, 43:35, 1:35:58, 1:37:05, 1:38:58, 1:39:14

br />

Red carpet summits, red carpet meetings, red carpet parties. It's all red carpet all the time for this bunch while they continue telling the peasants to buckle up for hard times.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

While Alison Redford meets with David Rockefeller @EzraLevant remains silent

Ezra Levant's allegations of "foreign influence" funded by the Rockefeller foundation should be raising a few eyebrows in light of Alison Redford's trip to Bilderberg 2012. If you're not aware, David Rockefeller himself attends every Bilderberg meeting. So where is the voice of Ezra Levant now?

The Premier of Alberta is meeting secretly with the head honcho of the Rockefeller Foundation but because the reason for this trip is about Alberta's oil markets and not political activism the influence peddled at this meeting must not be irking Ezra as much as the Tides Foundation does.

One would think that a secretive meeting with the world's most powerful and influential people in which the Premier can not report on what was discussed and can not bring staff with her even would be a candidate for "foreign influence", but no this is just business as usual.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

UPDATE-2: Alison Redford heads to Bilderberg conference on public dime

It seems to be becoming more accepted, that public politicians who are supposed to be representing their constituents and reporting to them can freely attend secretive meetings with foreign dignitaries on the public dime without revealing what was discussed.

In 2010 it was Premier Campbell and now this year it is Alison Redford. Of course the Calgary Herald puts the story under the dull headline "Alison Redford heads to Virginia financial conference". The Bilderberg conferences don't take place in Virginia, they take place in different locations every year. Describing a conference that's over 50 years old and meets yearly as "a Virginia financial conference" is suspicious and I believe deliberate. Bilderberg, which is the name of the conference only gets a brief mention.

In fact the Herald hardly does it justice at all by calling it a financial conference, from their website here is a sample "financial conference" agenda:

31 May-3 June 2007 Istanbul, Turkey

• The New World Order: Uni-Polar or Non-Polar?
• Turkey and its Neighbours
• Europe and the US: Common and Conflicting Interests
• The Mood of the US
• Democracy and Populism
• Democracy in the Middle East
• Turkey's Long-Term Development in Comparative Perspective
• Leadership Changes in Key European Countries [France-UK]
• Information Technology: Globalising or Tribalising Force?
• Nuclear Non-Proliferation
• The US: Cutting Issues in State-Federal Relations
• Climate Change
• Current Affairs: Capital Markets: Risks and Opportunities of Private Equity and Hedge Funds

I imagine these topics come up all the time at the dinner table right? Surely a little discussion couldn't possibly influence global events in any way.

Whether you believe any of the many conspiracy theories about these Bilderberg meetings or not isn't important. Every citizen should be concerned when our elected representatives attend conferences with foreign leaders, businesses, and other global movers and shakers without being able to discuss the goings on at said meetings. Bilderberg's excuse as to the secrecy (ever since denying the conferences exist altogether stopped working) has been to say that the participants can speak candidly and freely without controversy reaching the media. So they admit that they are dealing with controversal issues, that they hold controversal opinions, but feel the public should be left out of these issues. At the end of the meetings they don't even make a statement, nothing.

In a world where global security is the top priority isn't it strange that the security concerns of international political leaders and top business meeting privately is dismissed? With all of the Chinese espionage, etc, how is Canada's national interest not at risk here? In the old days countries would call these sorts of meetings treasonous as it is generally accepted that a democratic country's business should not be done in secret and meeting foreign leaders could be considered a significant intelligence breach, especially with no accountability or oversight to say otherwise. Attendees are not even required to report to the governing bodies they serve in as to the contents of these meetings. The meeting's contents just sit in the heads of the attendees, and that's it.

I suspect her visit has to do with the growing focus on Alberta's oilsands and is timely with the "national energy strategy" (which reads to me more like a national energy fire sale - notice that Canadian energy security isn't a concern of the national energy strategy, only new markets are). The oilsands have now become a national campaign and ethical oil is their brand name. You can bet a lot of this conference will be telling Redford what to do with our oil.

On her return the Alberta legislature should be demanding full disclosure of what was discussed. She is being sent to this conference on our tax dollar, the public has every right to know what this money is being used to discuss. Anything less than full disclosure is an insult to Canadian interests, democracy, and the free market.

Update-1

Alison Redford today defended her attendance:

Redford told the legislature that she will be advancing Alberta's interests by meeting and talking with global leaders.

This is her second mistake, on top of using public money for her trip. The Bilderberg website itself states:

Invitations to Bilderberg conferences are extended by the Chairman following consultation with the Steering Committee members. Participants are chosen for their experience, their knowledge, their standing and their contribution to the selected agenda.
There usually are about 120 participants of whom about two-thirds come from Europe and the balance from North America. About one-third is from government and politics, and two-thirds from finance, industry, labour, education and communications. Participants attend Bilderberg in a private and not an official capacity.

So contrary to her statement:

1. "participants are chosen for their experience, their knowledge, their standing, and their contribution to the selected agenda."
2. "Participants attend Bilderberg in a private and not an official capacity."

So according to her she is going to this meeting in a non-official capacity on public funds to push Alberta's agenda? That somehow she has been selected to tell them her agenda, not because she has "contributed to the selected agenda"? Right, the lies are bursting through the seams.

Daniel Estulin testifies in front of EU parliament on the Bilderberg meetings:

Update-2

The 2012 Bilderberg participant list:

Final List of Participants

Chairman
FRA Castries, Henri de Chairman and CEO, AXA Group

DEU Ackermann, Josef Chairman of the Management Board and the Group Executive Committee, Deutsche Bank AG
GBR Agius, Marcus Chairman, Barclays plc
USA Ajami, Fouad Senior Fellow, The Hoover Institution, Stanford University
USA Alexander, Keith B. Commander, US Cyber Command; Director, National Security Agency
INT Almunia, Joaquín Vice-President - Commissioner for Competition, European Commission
USA Altman, Roger C. Chairman, Evercore Partners
PRT Amado, Luís Chairman, Banco Internacional do Funchal (BANIF)
NOR Andresen, Johan H. Owner and CEO, FERD
FIN Apunen, Matti Director, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA
TUR Babacan, Ali Deputy Prime Minister for Economic and Financial Affairs
PRT Balsemão, Francisco Pinto President and CEO, Impresa; Former Prime Minister
FRA Baverez, Nicolas Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
FRA Béchu, Christophe Senator, and Chairman, General Council of Maine-et-Loire
BEL Belgium, H.R.H. Prince Philippe of 
TUR Berberoğlu, Enis Editor-in-Chief, Hürriyet Newspaper
ITA Bernabè, Franco Chairman and CEO, Telecom Italia
GBR Boles, Nick Member of Parliament
SWE Bonnier, Jonas President and CEO, Bonnier AB
NOR Brandtzæg, Svein Richard President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA
AUT Bronner, Oscar Publisher, Der Standard Medienwelt
SWE Carlsson, Gunilla Minister for International Development Cooperation
CAN Carney, Mark J. Governor, Bank of Canada
ESP Cebrián, Juan Luis CEO, PRISA; Chairman, El País
AUT Cernko, Willibald CEO, UniCredit Bank Austria AG
FRA Chalendar, Pierre André de Chairman and CEO, Saint-Gobain
DNK Christiansen, Jeppe CEO, Maj Invest
RUS Chubais, Anatoly B. CEO, OJSC RUSNANO
CAN Clark, W. Edmund Group President and CEO, TD Bank Group
GBR Clarke, Kenneth Member of Parliament, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of Justice
USA Collins, Timothy C. CEO and Senior Managing Director, Ripplewood Holdings, LLC
ITA Conti, Fulvio CEO and General Manager, Enel S.p.A.
USA Daniels, Jr., Mitchell E. Governor of Indiana
USA DeMuth, Christopher Distinguished Fellow, Hudson Institute
USA Donilon, Thomas E. National Security Advisor, The White House
GBR Dudley, Robert Group Chief Executive, BP plc
ITA Elkann, John Chairman, Fiat S.p.A.
DEU Enders, Thomas CEO, Airbus
USA Evans, J. Michael Vice Chairman, Global Head of Growth Markets, Goldman Sachs & Co.
AUT Faymann, Werner Federal Chancellor
DNK Federspiel, Ulrik Executive Vice President, Haldor Topsøe A/S
USA Ferguson, Niall Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History, Harvard University
GBR Flint, Douglas J. Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
CHN Fu, Ying Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs
IRL Gallagher, Paul Former Attorney General; Senior Counsel
USA Gephardt, Richard A. President and CEO, Gephardt Group
GRC Giannitsis, Anastasios Former Minister of Interior; Professor of Development and International Economics, University of Athens
USA Goolsbee, Austan D. Professor of Economics, University of Chicago Booth School of Business
USA Graham, Donald E. Chairman and CEO, The Washington Post Company
ITA Gruber, Lilli Journalist - Anchorwoman, La 7 TV
INT Gucht, Karel de Commissioner for Trade, European Commission
NLD Halberstadt, Victor Professor of Economics, Leiden University; Former Honorary Secretary  General of Bilderberg Meetings
USA Harris, Britt CIO, Teacher Retirement System of Texas
USA Hoffman, Reid Co-founder and Executive Chairman, LinkedIn
CHN Huang, Yiping Professor of Economics, China Center for Economic Research, Peking University
USA Huntsman, Jr., Jon M. Chairman, Huntsman Cancer Foundation
DEU Ischinger, Wolfgang Chairman, Munich Security Conference; Global Head Government Relations, Allianz SE
RUS Ivanov, Igor S. Associate member, Russian Academy of Science; President, Russian International Affairs Council
FRA Izraelewicz, Erik CEO, Le Monde
USA Jacobs, Kenneth M. Chairman and CEO, Lazard
USA Johnson, James A. Vice Chairman, Perseus, LLC
USA Jordan, Jr., Vernon E. Senior Managing Director, Lazard
USA Karp, Alexander CEO, Palantir Technologies
USA Karsner, Alexander Executive Chairman, Manifest Energy, Inc
FRA Karvar, Anousheh Inspector, Inter-ministerial Audit and Evaluation Office for Social, Health, Employment and Labor Policies  
RUS Kasparov, Garry Chairman, United Civil Front (of Russia)
GBR Kerr, John Independent Member, House of Lords
USA Kerry, John Senator for Massachusetts
TUR Keyman, E. Fuat Director, Istanbul Policy Center and Professor of International Relations, Sabanci University
USA Kissinger, Henry A. Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
USA Kleinfeld, Klaus Chairman and CEO, Alcoa
TUR Koç, Mustafa Chairman, Koç Holding A.Ş.
DEU Koch, Roland CEO, Bilfinger Berger SE
INT Kodmani, Bassma Member of the Executive Bureau and Head of Foreign Affairs, Syrian National Council
USA Kravis, Henry R. Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
USA Kravis, Marie-Josée Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
INT Kroes, Neelie Vice President, European Commission; Commissioner for Digital Agenda
USA Krupp, Fred President, Environmental Defense Fund
INT Lamy, Pascal Director-General, World Trade Organization
ITA Letta, Enrico Deputy Leader, Democratic Party (PD)
ISR Levite, Ariel E. Nonresident Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
USA Li, Cheng Director of Research and Senior Fellow, John L. Thornton China Center, Brookings Institution
USA Lipsky, John Distinguished Visiting Scholar, Johns Hopkins University
USA Liveris, Andrew N. President, Chairman and CEO, The Dow Chemical Company
DEU Löscher, Peter President and CEO, Siemens AG
USA Lynn, William J. Chairman and CEO, DRS Technologies, Inc.
GBR Mandelson, Peter Member, House of Lords; Chairman, Global Counsel
USA Mathews, Jessica T. President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
DEN Mchangama, Jacob Director of Legal Affairs, Center for Political Studies (CEPOS)
CAN McKenna, Frank Deputy Chair, TD Bank Group
USA Mehlman, Kenneth B. Partner, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
GBR Micklethwait, John Editor-in-Chief, The Economist
FRA Montbrial, Thierry de President, French Institute for International Relations
PRT Moreira da Silva, Jorge First Vice-President, Partido Social Democrata (PSD)
USA Mundie, Craig J. Chief Research and Strategy Officer, Microsoft Corporation
DEU Nass, Matthias Chief International Correspondent, Die Zeit
NLD Netherlands, H.M. the Queen of the
ESP Nin Génova, Juan María Deputy Chairman and CEO, Caixabank
IRL Noonan, Michael Minister for Finance
USA Noonan, Peggy Author, Columnist, The Wall Street Journal
FIN Ollila, Jorma Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell, plc
USA Orszag, Peter R. Vice Chairman, Citigroup
GRC Papalexopoulos, Dimitri Managing Director, Titan Cement Co.
NLD Pechtold, Alexander Parliamentary Leader, Democrats '66 (D66)
USA Perle, Richard N. Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
NLD Polman, Paul CEO, Unilever PLC
CAN Prichard, J. Robert S. Chair, Torys LLP
ISR Rabinovich, Itamar Global Distinguished Professor, New York University
GBR Rachman, Gideon Chief Foreign Affairs Commentator, The Financial Times
USA Rattner, Steven Chairman, Willett Advisors LLC
CAN Redford, Alison M. Premier of Alberta
CAN Reisman, Heather M. CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.
DEU Reitzle, Wolfgang CEO & President, Linde AG
USA Rogoff, Kenneth S. Professor of Economics, Harvard University
USA Rose, Charlie Executive Editor and Anchor, Charlie Rose
USA Ross, Dennis B. Counselor, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
POL Rostowski, Jacek Minister of Finance
USA Rubin, Robert E. Co-Chair, Council on Foreign Relations; Former Secretary of the Treasury
NLD Rutte, Mark Prime Minister
ESP Sáenz de Santamaría Antón, Soraya Vice President and Minister for the Presidency
NLD Scheffer, Paul Professor of European Studies, Tilburg University
USA Schmidt, Eric E. Executive Chairman, Google Inc.
AUT Scholten, Rudolf Member of the Board of Executive Directors, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG
FRA Senard, Jean-Dominique CEO, Michelin Group
USA Shambaugh, David Director, China Policy Program, George Washington University
INT Sheeran, Josette Vice Chairman, World Economic Forum
FIN Siilasmaa, Risto Chairman of the Board of Directors, Nokia Corporation
USA Speyer, Jerry I.  Chairman and Co-CEO, Tishman Speyer
CHE Supino, Pietro Chairman and Publisher, Tamedia AG
IRL Sutherland, Peter D. Chairman, Goldman Sachs International
USA Thiel, Peter A. President, Clarium Capital / Thiel Capital
TUR Timuray, Serpil CEO, Vodafone Turkey
DEU Trittin, Jürgen Parliamentary Leader, Alliance 90/The Greens
GRC Tsoukalis, Loukas President, Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy
FIN Urpilainen, Jutta Minister of Finance
CHE Vasella, Daniel L. Chairman, Novartis AG
INT Vimont, Pierre Executive Secretary General, European External Action Service
GBR Voser, Peter CEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
SWE Wallenberg, Jacob Chairman, Investor AB
USA Warsh, Kevin Distinguished Visiting Fellow, The Hoover Institution, Stanford University
GBR Wolf, Martin H. Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial Times
USA Wolfensohn, James D. Chairman and CEO, Wolfensohn and Company
CAN Wright, Nigel S. Chief of Staff, Office of the Prime Minister
USA Yergin, Daniel Chairman, IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates
INT Zoellick, Robert B. President, The World Bank Group
 Rapporteurs

GBR Bredow, Vendeline von Business Correspondent, The Economist
GBR Wooldridge, Adrian D. Foreign Correspondent, The Economist

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

Guest Post: And there will be jobs

This was submitted to me by a reliable source within the oil industry.

I work for one of the many oil and gas companies in Alberta and lately there have been a lot of rumors going around that we would be seeing upwards of 300 temporary foreign workers (TFWs). In the last few days these rumors have been confirmed.

Today everyone was swiftly sent off to "diversity training". "Diversity training" is corporate lingo for saying "here's the situation, don't be a dick about it." I didn't get much out of the experience which I was more or less expecting, until we got to the portion of the numbers.

It's not my job to make fact sheets, data tables, or projections but the numbers I heard at this meeting blew my mind. According to the statistics provided at this meeting, in 2012 there were not enough Canadian trades workers to fill 18,000 jobs. The projections went on to say that by 2021 the number was expected to grow to 250,000 and that at this time 100% of the new job market will be filled by TFWs; my skin crawled.

The good news (as far as I will know anyway) is that the TFWs, as per strict legislation, will be paid on the same scale as Canadian workers and we were assured that should the projects go bust that the TFWs would be the first to see pink slips regardless of their term contract.

I'd like to make my position clear: I have no issues with immigrants, I do however have issues with TFWs in this scenario as I do not for one second believe that 18,000 trades jobs could not be filled. I would be hard pressed to believe that there were any recruitment campaigns being held on the East Coast of Canada, where many trades workers have a difficult time finding work. Somehow it is easier to find workers abroad?

Canada, if you thought Keystone would deliver jobs then you were correct. Unfortunately, they just weren't intended for you.

- A Canadian Oilsands Worker

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

Splitting Economic Hairs

Well it looks like you can all relax. It would appear that I had it all wrong. Apparently Canada doesn't have a debt problem:

The agency said a 40 per cent drop in prices or rising interest rates would put pressure on Canadian households, but not have a large impact on mortgage defaults.

The astute credit agency has instead pointed to this as the problem:

"However, a combination of higher interest rates, lower property values and a drastic increase in unemployment would be of great concern as mortgage defaults are closely related to employment and individual family situations," DBRS said in a report.

 Yes, so the high amount of personal debt isn't the problem. The problem is that increasing unemployment (probably due to the global economic crisis) will cause people to not afford to pay their debts. Good thing that we have credit agencies like this to tell us up from down, or we'd never figure it all out huh? Of course, I am being facetious. This report is simply splitting hairs.

It's a good thing though that Canadian personal debt isn't an issue, as home prices continue to climb despite Flaherty's mortgage lending rules being "tightened". Don't worry though, unlike other countries Canada couldn't possibly have a severe housing bubble on it's hands - because - because - we're Canada! We survived the recession! We're the model for the world! Yadda Yadda.

The three major world economies continue to get worse, I don't care what it says about them on paper. Here is the real Japan. Here is the real Europe. Here is the real United States. What are the leaders doing to address the problem? Well they are holding numerous expensive summits which never result in solutions all in hope that they can find a way out which leaves them and their financial fraud on top. All citizens are expendible. Worldwide it's being made clear that the obligation of governments is to save the economy. Of course they are not talking about the real economy, the one that feeds you and me, or produces actual product. They are actually talking about the fraudulent leveraging system in place and how to keep the ponzi scheme running. If you can't eat, can't afford gas, or can't find a decent job well that's the price all of the citizens must pay so that these governments can continue to "tighten their belts".

Now why would "unemployment" be more of concern than personal debt in this hair splitting excercise? Well maybe this is why.

"A disorderly exit of Greece from the eurozone represents the No. 1 risk to Canada's economic outlook."
But Canada's real exposure is via world commodity markets, upon which the value of Canada's dollar is largely based and which make up an increasing proportion of Canada's GDP.

The results are already being witnessed due to continued downward revisions of global growth:

Opposition Leader Danielle Smith of the Wildrose Party expressed concern Wednesday with the price of oil dipping below the $90 a barrel mark, about $10 less than Alberta’s 2012 budget estimate.

Oil price usually rises with good outlooks for global growth as demand rises. Of course Canada's concern is not just oil but all commodities. Lower demand and prices of commodities in Canada of course will have a major impact on jobs. This is why "unemployment" is the concern, not personal debt. In reality they are two sides of the same coin.

There is an increased risk of a Greek bank run currently which many suspect will lead to a European bank run. The outlook for "Growth" is dismal, and anyone who claims otherwise is either lying to you, or is so lost in our money printing system they can't see the forest for the trees.

As I've been telling you, unrest also can have severe economic impacts which compound on to the already ever-growing list of problems. In the end though the core problem is our debt based economy, and the unprecedented amount of growth needed to pay it all off and no amount of economic hair splitting can change that fact.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

Repression is in the eye of the beholder

When is a person officially "repressed"? Everyone seems to have a different idea of when repression warrants retaliation and revolt. For some, it seems that nothing less of 20 years of dictatorship can do. Unless there are daily disappearances, secret police, and killings - there is no repression. Others see forced financial hardship as repression or the small steps as repression.

When it comes to the worst examples in history (IE: Nazi Germany), often we ask: "How did the people let it get so bad?" Yet here at home we take the opposite perception: "We're not anything remotely close to Nazi Germany, what are these people doing?". The latter point-of-view answers the former question.

It must be understood also that not all forms of repression are political, often they are financial. If you look at the IMF riots which have occured in other parts of the world (IE: Brazil), the people were not really fighting their government, they were fighting foreign financial policies being dictated to them. They were angry because the IMF was lending their government money at interest while allowing IMF corporate partners access to privatize and increase the cost of everything. In Greece as well the people see the source of repression as foreign and financial in nature.

The financial repression here in Canada isn't hard to see if you look beyond the tuition hikes. From the EI reforms, to OAS, to tuition, and all of the other service cuts this generation has had to deal with over the years.People need to keep in mind this is the first generation in a very long time which is expected to have less wealth than their parents. It's being made clear to this generation that while their parents competed for higher wages, they will be competing against foreign workers for lower wages. The conditions being added to EI that you will eventually have to find a job that pays less should put this all in to perspective. The economic rules this generation must play by are certainly a lot more economically repressive than those their parents had the luxury of enjoying. Start adding it all up, plus the sky-high cost of goods, and it's not hard to see where the idea of repression comes from.

Almost every avenue for financial success has been roadblocked for this generation unless you happen to Zuckerberg yourself to the top. Add to this record low interest rates and of course saving is now off the table too. Think back over the last 20 years at all of the services and support that has been taken from this generation, and replaced with what? Military spending, bank bailouts, etc. Each individual item seems insignificant, but compound them all together and it's fairly obvious this generation is at a significant disadvantage and is significantly poorer than the previous one and many boomer's don't plan on leaving their children an inheritance.

Our political system can be repressive too.

He explains, however, that his vote — like that of the entire Conservative caucus — is subject to a “three-line whip.” That means, says Wilks, he would likely be evicted from caucus for dissenting from the budget decisions already made by the prime minister and cabinet.

He adds Conservative MPs during their first year of majority government have not been allowed one free vote. “I haven’t seen one in a year yet.”

“It’s been done like that since 1867,” Wilks says.

What does it say about our "representative democracy" if the politicians can not represent you? What good is voicing your concern to your representative if they will simply be voting along party lines anyway? All political parties these days seem to have no problem billing the youth for their expenses and in the same breath tell them they are too entitled. It seems to me that the only thing they are entitled to is debt & risk, and lots of it. Those in politics across the board have made it clear this generation will be paying for their mistaken decisions in one form or another.

For an older generation who grew up playing by a different set of economic rules there is no repression, well at least until you have a complaint of your own. But for a generation which already has expectations of a much lower standard of living, the repression is everywhere. Tuitions are just the straw that broke the camel's back. We have a clear multi-tiered economy forming. The youth are being asked to foot the bill for irresponsible spending which was none of their doing and yes, that is most certainly repressive.

I don't support the student violence, and as always it's questionable how many of the "black bloc" really are students. As G20 2010 has shown, there is nothing stopping the government from instigating violence to allow them to declare a protest illegal and this tactic is never investigated after the fact. Journalists ignore it as conspiracy. However, even if it is actually the students being violent, I can't really blame them for it. For years numerous fees and cost increases have hit this generation while wages continue to stagnate. They are being backed in to a corner, face a bleak future, and unlike the previous generation - don't have respect for a repressive financial system. Many see a life of debt servitude ahead of them and as Gerald Celente says: "When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it.".

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

Ideas have a habit of spreading like wildfire

Well, it would appear the real battles have begun - this I was anticipating as the obvious response to Charest's new law. What I didn't anticipate was an international day of solidarity with them. Wow! That came as a pleasant surprise! Also nationally across Canada several cities joined in.

Personally I don't believe the intention behind the law was to "calm" the situation. Globally and nationally the economic situation continues to look worse. By suspending classes, all they have done is given the rest of the students nothing else to do but join those on strike. This law is now provoking unions and teachers into joining. One has to wonder after the outrage of the G20 secret law, exactly why any politician would believe this law would get public support, especially in Quebec of all places.

For many people in Canada, Charest's law represents something far worse than broken windows or lost business or even personal injury. People volunteer to fight and die to protect what we have today. Plenty of people in the past have died and suffered protecting what we have here today. The idea that there might be some economic losses is no comparison to losing that which citizens we should be honoring by honoring that freedom died to protect.

Look at the riots in Greece, Spain, Italy, etc. Is it worth it? Sure on paper they are figuring out there monetary problems while their assets burn in constant riots. By the time any solution is made what will be left? In the riots in London I watched many ancient historical buildings go up in flames. These places are all rioting because their governments are not willing to be cooperative to their economic demands, and they've simply had enough.

I see a lot of people asking what Charest can do to quell the situation. I'll make it simple, he can't. Quebec (as are all provinces) is a middle-man between the monetary policy driving events and the distribution of the left overs to needed services. That is really all they can do. There is really only 2 ways a provincial government can get required funds: increase revenue or borrow at compound interest. Increasing revenue is what is currently being proposed. Borrowing would simply put them further in debt. All provinces are stuck in this situation, it's not just Quebec, cities too. It is federal monetary policy which provides the means to distribute the national currency.

From my point-of-view this cannot be truly resolved for all parties until the right questions start being asked. The question isn't why are tuitions going up? The question to ask is, why are we paying private banks all of the interest on our national, provincial, and municiple debts to a tune of $160,000,000 / day nationally combined. The solution seems to be one no one wants to talk about, borrowing money directly from the Bank of Canada. This way all interest on our debt is repaid to the government instead of private corporations.

The danger of ideas is that they must be interpreted by others. When told that Quebec has the lowest tuition in the country some will probably say "Well they should be paying what I pay", and others "Why aren't we paying what they pay?". Media largely has supported the former view I believe in hopes students nationwide see the Quebec students as whiners instead of workers, while a danger exists that instead students might begin getting more angry and vocal in other areas about how they are already being ripped off. It's probably likely that many students in Alberta or Saskatchewan had no idea up until now that Quebec's tuitions were the lowest.

This could very well be the beginning of more strikes depending how the situation turns out. Quebec has now attracted international attention, all eyes are on Quebec. If Charest continues on his hard-line law-and-order course he may very well start sustained protests in other cities who are insulted at the violation of rights. These protestors then begin talking, start getting angry about their own issues, and the cause expands and spreads as you have just witnessed in the case of Quebec. Journalists are now slowly catching on that the tuition is just one of many issues and that the people are angry, very angry. Originally they couldn't figure out what all the fuss was about.

On the flip side, if Charest backtracks from his current course, he risks alienating his supporters. It's very risky politically as he really has no hope in pleasing the students without angering others, he has no way out of the debt situation. He could be left with no support if he flip-flops on his stance. If he does flip-flop he will also be setting an example for all of the eyes watching that the students won. Student unions across the nation if they're smart would begin launching similar campaigns with precedent set.

In either case, this isn't going away. Canada has finally found it's "cause" I believe. Occupy while started by Canadians wasn't really Canada's cause, it was Americans who mostly identified with Occupy. That's why it still thrives there and is all but non-existent here. Canada has it's own issues, our own flashpoints, and I think we just found it. It's not really the cause that matters, it's the unity around the cause, the solidarity. The problems are all symptoms of the real problem. Canada must address it's monetary policy before we can address issues reliant on monetary policy and before it's too late. The U.S. and Europe are examples of where these policies can take you. From police-state lite, to a side-helping of police state, to full out police state, to technocrat, and eventually as we'll probably discover complete economic dictatorship when the global deleveraging finally takes hold.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

The G20 resolution: Another insult to Canadians for your brain to ponder

So, this is it? The great resolution? This is the result that it has taken two years to come up with? This is an insult, and for other reasons than the last one I just wrote about to boot!

Just a side-note here, To government: I'm sort of finding it difficult to keep up with all the bullshit and also write about the stuff I want to (IE: budget 2012, part 5) so if you could just like, make a monthly bullshit announcement and summarize it since most of it is fluff words like "tighten" anyway, that would be great. Thanks
- Richard

Anyway, that really needed to be said. Moving on. The money paragraph:

Fenton's order to keep the group of protesters, bystanders and even some journalists boxed in at Queen Street West and Spadina Avenue "in a severe rain storm that included thunder and lightning was unreasonable, unnecessary and unlawful," according to the document. It violated the detainees' constitutional right against arbitrary detention and was negligent, the 276-page report says.

Read the reason closely, arbitrary detention. This is the reason they are citing for the criminal charges but not against Blair, for the G20 commander, 4 other seniors, and 47 officers. Outside police forces under the Toronto police's authority were not investigated. This means the York police officers shown in my last piece on the G20 weren't included.

Now, the reason this is interesting is that it is the same theme throughout Andre Marin's report on the G20 "secret law".

This is of course the law Blair publicly defended and implemented and recomended they use, and still to this day defends. Of course also please do keep in mind the context of my last post on this subject. "This isn't Canada right now". Remember?

So Blair is now directed to charge this Fenton character. What about Blair? It seems to me Fenton was following the directive's laid out for him. How can the kettling be arbitrary detention, while the rest of the G20 is not? You can not admit one but deny the other. There were not 1000 people in that kettled crowd. If 47 officers can be charged in the kettling event alone, then what does that say for the rest of them?

All of these officers from all of these forces, from high to low seem to have had one core idea in their heads, and that is "what amounted to martial law in the streets of Toronto".

I can tell you, if it wasn't for the hundreds of youtube videos documenting this event we probably wouldn't even get this much. There was a blatant disregard for the people, and carefully placed propaganda was in full effect. The burning police cars repeating on every news station were certainly no accident. For awhile they had most of Canada convinced that the "riot" (which only lasted an hour and they were somehow not prepared for with 10,000 officers being there primarily to defend against the black bloc tactics) lasted all weekend. If it wasn't for the online videos, and great documentaries made afterward you would have mostly only seen footage of burning cars across Canada.

Blair has had to admit several times in public he was "wrong" in his statements about G20 evidence after the fact. He has repeatedly rejected any notion that there was something wrong at the G20. His moral character is in question, his ethics are in question, and he has no credibility or trust with the public concerned on this matter. It is Bill Blair which should be the target of investigation, not because he ran it, but because he is the gateway to those that actually did.

The tactics that should be ceased in the recomendations are being used as we debate this right now in Quebec. This result is unacceptable. I want a real investigation, I want to know in certainty where a police officer would get the idea that "this isn't Canada right now". The answer certainly isn't in their report, and certainly isn't in their resolution. These sorts of directives come from the top, I have to believe they came from the top, for the alternative would mean that some police now feel empowered to denounce their own country and how many of those are there actually serving the force? I have to believe there is enough dignity and respect for our freedom and country that they would only believe it's ok if a superior told them. Since this mentality crosses police districts and still to this day only limited reports have been conducted (which are themselves pretty fucking damning) then I must again say that those concerned on this issue not accept this weak peace offering. Keep on them, don't give up. We're definitely getting somewhere, slowly, if surely.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

The inevitable result of increased complexity and profit

Chinese fake parts 'used in U.S. military equipment'

As real profit margins sink and the full effect of peak oil kicks in, these are the sorts of stories there will be an increasing amount of. The only way to maintain the illusion of growth is constant "cost cutting", and fake parts, cheap parts, malfunctioning parts, etc are a big part of this cost-cutting endeavor. It is this convergence of cost-cutting and increasing energy complexity which is never mentioned in the context of what's possible to address the world's many problems.

Namely this applies to those who subscribe to the "Daniel Yergin" school of thought. Yergin refers to our energy predicament not as an "energy crisis" but rather as an "energy opportuntiy". He neglects that for every major discovery due to human ingenuity there is an equal or greater fuck-up due to human error. Major catastrophe doesn't come out of simple processes however, it comes from highly complex processes of which a great many people rely.

It can take years of painstakingly expensive research to come up with a true solution, on the contrary it only takes a few seconds of relative absent-mindedness to blow that solution up. It gets worse when reviews such as quality-control are first on the chopping block.

The number one argument I get most often to the sort of issues I write about and the point-of-view I take is that there are possible solutions, if only society would do them. I'm often told that peak oil isn't really a problem because there is plenty of alternatives to oil. Let's for the moment nevermind that most oil alternatives are in fact derivatives, let's focus on the solution touted itself in the context of increased complexity, cost-cutting, and geo-political instability.

First, I will say - yes, there are "alternatives" - or at least a means to responsibly use the remaining oil for the foreseeable future. To make use of these alternatives quickly the remaining oil reserves would pretty well need to be completely invested in to the alternatives with no real promise of a return. If the world's only problem was energy, all countries were "friends" and energy wasn't as secretive an industry as it is then maybe we could look at this as an energy opportunity. If there were not 7 billion people whose daily lives are affected by the current cost of energy, then yes, also, it would be an energy opportunity. If there was nothing to lose, it would be an opportunity, but we have everything to lose and that's why it's a crisis.

This is I think where most energy-economics analysts go awry. They forget that people depend on energy in their every day lives. Well, not really forget, they will point to statistics about how many people can still afford energy, showing no significant drop. But there is a drop, that's what is important here. We're on a long-term downward spiral. As things deteriorate, the bar of what is "acceptable poverty" continues to lower and the number of people which meet this bar continues to increase. The long-term trend is that slowly, fewer and fewer people can afford their daily lives. At the same time the real profit margin in businesses is getting smaller due to the increase in energy costs, causing increasing externalization of costs.

If you look at energy solutions touted for the future, they are all extremely complex, involving many processes and parts. Whether it's deepsea drilling, fracking, oilsands, or even solar and wind - these energy solutions all require a complex and organized supply chain, pipelines, upgraders, metallurgy, etc. It's why the U.S. is providing drones to Iraq to defend the oil supplies there. With increased complexity, strained supply chains, comes increased cost. For instance, the Globe and Mail had an appropriately titled article "The age of extreme oil":

Alberta's oil sands are the obvious example: Here, on average, two tonnes of earth must be strip-mined and seven barrels of water heated to steam in order to produce a barrel of oil. It takes a barrel's worth of energy to produce just three barrels of oil; 30 years ago it would have been 100.



Extreme energy (Source: circleofblue.org)



That is a cost increase of 3:1 from 100:1. When looking at energy, the dollar value doesn't mean a whole lot, this is why Alberta is now chasing $140 / barrel oil. Alberta has attached a meaning to the dollar value of oil instead of looking at the ratio of input cost versus surplus energy produced. This means that if in the future we are going to look to oilsand or other "extreme" forms of energy, what used to cost 1cent on the dollar, will now cost about 33.3cents. It doesn't take a geologist or an economist to figure out that profit margins are significantly slimmer today.




Back in the day (Source: fineartamerica.com)



Getting back to the complexity issue, what used to be a simple process that anyone could do with an ancient wooden contraption, it now takes vast campanies with billions in risk to accomplish.



You can see the energy input requirments for energy have changed drastically, and keep in mind that today's society is still running of the fumes of the cheap energy era. It's only recently that the true cost of energy is starting to impact people and the results are not very promising nor bold well for future prosperity (in terms of what we've come to know as prosperity).

On top of this huge increase in input costs, comes the huge increase in complexity as well. Extreme energy relies on a global supply chain, components and drill bits manufactured in pieces all over the world, then shipped (using a lot of energy) to the remote locations they're needed. The old derricks you could essentially build out of the trees in your backyard, literally. This is how oil discovery in the U.S. started in the first place.

So what happens if the Strait of Hormuz is cut off? What happens if the complex supply chain that keeps our energy production moving is interrupted? Gone are the days of backyard energy production, what do we do then? We've been very close already, from Fukushima to diesel shortages. One of our major problems is the increasing complexity of which requires more drastic measures touted as a solution each time. To truly address the problems we are going to have to lower our expectations and adjust accordingly.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

The monster in motion is one we've all created

In Quebec 300+ have been arrested, fascist laws passed, and the anger builds. At the NATO summit journalists are again being attacked as hundreds of thousands protest the "war on terror". The anger builds, the violence erupts, and it's all going to happen again, and again, and again.

Today I saw Elizabeth May mention on Twitter that when those who oppose stop speaking out, democracy is lost. I disagree, democracy is already lost and has been for a long time. Up until the banking collapse, everyone seemed pretty ok with that fact. It was working in our favour. Ever secretive meetings of world powers seemed to be providing growth and prosperity, jobs, and pretty well everything you could ever want, except freedom. However, now that prosperity bubble has popped and wide-eyed more and more people everyday see what is actually left of our once great society.

The reality is still hidden behind a "freedom of choice" (in what brand name you can buy) for many. I still see plenty of people arguing that "we're not [insert brutal dictatorship here]". Not yet anyway, but should we be willing to wait for gas chambers or mass murders before we recognize something is going wrong? Are the armies of militarized "police" flooding the streets on a world-wide scale not enough for some? At different levels, at different times we have all helped to shape what this system has become. We're all guilty.

What I find particularly angering however, is how most people are living in glass houses and throwing stones. I've seen multiple calls from supposed "Canadians" for Quebec to bring out the army. Are you people on fucking crack? Do you not understand the slippery slope we're already sliding down as an avalanche of financial fraud follows closely in our wake? Do you believe for one moment that setting that precedent will be a one-time event? How about you, citizens? How about when the government does something you don't like? Maybe they raise your taxes too much, or cut back on other services you require? Or maybe they fully support foreign takeovers of that company you gave 40 years to only to have your job shipped to China. How would you feel if people called for the army to put you in your pathetic entitled place? Oh there wouldn't be any violence at your protest you say? Sure, until a small group of anonymous black-clad "protestors" who seem to never get caught by "police" ruin all of your protest fun. Then it's open-season on those whiny protestors, who cares why they're there - they shouldn't be right?

It's now to the point where people are calling for meetings like the G20 to be held in secure and private locations. Oh great! an undemocractic institution and world-governing body will become even more undemocratic, all so your precious city-life doesn't get interrupted. At the G20 in Toronto press had to sit in a "press room" while the G20 sent them video feeds of whatever they wanted them to see. We really have no idea what discussions actually took place, and you, citizens, would have them become 100% undemocratic.

Citizens against citizens, peasants against peasants, slaves against slaves. This is the premise our leaders operate on. This includes the police, this includes the "rich", this includes the poor, this even includes some of the politicians. It's easy to game someone into supporting something or not supporting something else. In the end though, by focusing on each other we ignore the real problem source, the real criminals, the real crimes.

Quebec and Ontario have a serious debt situation on their hands, and this will be spreading to the other provinces as the federal govrnment externalizes costs to appear as if they are saving money. While we all debate a few hundred dollars of tuition fee hikes, millions are given away daily to private banks in "interest payments". At the city, provincial, and federal levels this is true. I've seen many people saying "well costs go up". Yes, in an inherently inflationary and fraudulent monetary system of which most reading this post probably grew up, costs "go up". This is the devaluation of the dollar at work. Costs are going up, but wealth isn't. The costs the entitled and asset ridden generation are pointing to, they are demanding being paid by an assetless generation with little or any wealth or means to pay. Sure there are "provisions" for the poor so they can still attend, but this just highlights the erronous system as a whole. We shouldn't need "provisions", this is an indirect admittance that wealth isn't going up - only costs are. This is an admittance that has occured a lot in the recent past, such as with the discontinuation of the penny. These provisions will just be added to the debt of the taxpayer anyway. Full circle.

Maybe you are a student, begging the government for chump change. You allow this system to perpetuate by demanding more fraudulent gifts instead of addressing the core problems. Tuition hikes, like most visible problems, are all symptoms of the fuedalist monetary system we all find ourselves in. By demanding lower tuition hikes, you are being selfish - and are simply perpetuating the fraud on to those younger than you.

Maybe you're a baby boomer with a pension. You perpetuate the fraud by believing the market is still legitimate. You are happy with high frequency trading or other fraudulent and manipulative practices as long as the returns are good. You perpetuate a culture of drugs by not understanding that the liquidity in the U.S. financial markets comes from drug lords and their laundering of drug money. This is an accepted practice in the U.S. and is one of the only items keeping their economy together. Know that every time you spend a credit card, you are spending drug money laundered thru the banking system. You are temporarily benefiting off a younger generation increasingly fed drugs.

Maybe you are a police officer, dutifully beating protestors at the behest of the system. You are perpetuating the fraud by aiding their divide and conquer mentality. Instead of standing with the citizens you stand against them. Instead of honoring democracy you honor fascism and praise fuedalism. I know it's just a job, and that you need the money to pay your overvalued mortgage. That's why these people are protesting, maybe you should be too instead of fighting an uphill battle against exponential growth, debt, and the misery that brings.

Maybe you're an environmentalist. You perpetuate the fraud by either not understanding or falsely interpreting the problems. This is done with promises of green growth. Growth is dead, period. The idea we can somehow produce things like "green cars" is already dead in the water. It's not the fuel they use, it's the requirments for construction of cars in the first place. The requirments for maintenance and construction of cement and asphalt roads. It's the built-in obsolesence and the requirment for growth that people re-buy their products at an ever faster rate. Our economy requires "returning customers" and if "green development", "efficient designs", etc were put in to place, growth would die instantly. While this is actually a good thing, as we certainly cannot sustain exponential growth, most environmentalists lie to encourage others already fooled by the fraud to support their cause. This approach solves nothing.

Maybe you're an honest executive, who sees what is happening and within the system is attempting to hedge against it. This is the essence of why the "too bigs" "can't fail". Most in the upper class have wealth and assets based on the fraudulent leveraging system in place. Attempting to save that wealth is a futile attempt to save the system itself. Most of that wealth doesn't actually exist, it is the fear of deleveraging which makes the "too bigs" too big. You perpetuate the fraud by savouring your wealth.

I could go on and on. We're all guilty, we've all participated to one degree or another. We all fear losing our standard of living, our wealth, and the life we've all known to be true. Let go, those things are all history now anyway.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

Dutch Disease?

Canada certainly has some serious economic problems, but I don't think dutch disease is one of them. Blaming the problems we're experiencing on dutch disease is over-simplistic to a fault. Canada is regionally quite vast with many geographical and political challenges. Simply picking a small portion of a large problem out of context I find leads some "economists" to strange conclusions.

Just to restate for the purposes of this post: I am not an economist, I don't plan to be an economist, and quite frankly I believe not being an economist leaves me with a fresh and unique view of the world. What I am is a programmer that specializes in custom analytics and I apply my analytical models to global events, this is sometimes called "game theory". This means you weigh all aspects of events, from political, to economical, you weigh events on a global scale. Out of this weighing of events, you create scenarios, and the most likely scenarios are the ones I write blog posts on.

From this perspective I find economic relationships to be multi-faceted. It's never a black and white scenario, it is never a matter of choice A or choice B; in this case manufacturing or resource production. To understand what is occuring politically and economically and make sense of what is seemingly chaotic political times you must step back and weigh different sorts of information.

Free trade and the policies around that should be weighed in the context of resources versus manufacturing. It is free trade which allows these Chinese (etc) goods to be shipped here to be sold for cheap in the first place. So is it "dutch disease" or globalization? It is the manufacturing companies which have seized upon the "advantages" cheap labour in third world countries provides. It's why your Samsung Galaxy retails for $600, not $1200. This is the illusion of growth I've been talking about on this blog. Your wealth is decreasing, it is only through imperialism, exploitation, and accounting tricks that global economic growth is even what it is. It's dismal even with planned obsolesence and the rest of it, which doesn't bold well over the coming years.

Dutch disease is a national pre free-trade condition, one which I think is too recent and rare to even say there must be a correlation there. The "global economic crisis" for instance was used by Alberta to justify a deficit. We're reminded often that things would be a lot better if it wasn't for that pesky "lumpy" global recovery. So it must be more than just globalization too.

Well, cost saving and other efficiencies usually occur when there is a shortage of growth in the company. Manufacturing has input costs of materials, and requires buyers of frequent and increasing numbers to maintain this profit growth otherwise. Aha! here is the dutch disease right? It's that whole dollar-value mumbo-jumbo. Not quite so fast...

First let's take a look at the largest consumer economic bodies, the U.S., Japan, and Europe. Well Europe's situation is pretty obvious I think; they're Über fucked. Japan? energy imports are through the roof, Fukushima news continues to get worse. The cost of Fukushima is an unknown, and so is the true damage and dangers. Not a good combination for growth. This leaves us with the U.S. whose financials are so corrupt and propagandized who knows what the shadow situation waiting to blow is really like. The top 3 consumer/manufacturing bodies are having a rough time. Canada's new focus? the BRICs. What are the BRICs demanding? energy. They have all the manufacturing already, all they need is the energy and their domestic economies are ready to roll.

So now it's a little bit of a "chicken-egg" situation. Was it dutch disease? or "reverse dutch disease"? Was it resources and the high dollar which pushed manufacturing out of the country? or is it in fact a case of after our politicians made it more appealing for companies to offshore manufacturing that this "cheap labour pool" is increasing foreign energy demand? Well maybe, but...

In another one of my posts on here about the penny I pointed out that the Canadian penny hasn't been copper since 1982 and yet "due to inflation" even the steel version is a "burden". There is also the interest rate aspect I've referred to in my posts on housing and debt in relation to the rate of money printing, easing, cheap credit, etc. The value of a currency due to inflation is largely associated with how much currency there is in existence. I've explained this many times, but since the USD is the reserve currency of the world, their money printing devalues global reserves. Nations like China are rightly hedging against the U.S. dollar in gold, oil, or other commodities or currencies that are not as closely tied to the USD. I previously pointed out that the BRIC nations have made public their claim to the reserve currency throne.

Industry profits, commodity or otherwise, don't make a dent in currency value when compared to the effect of global "quantatative easing". It can't compare to the effect of trillions in new money supply being added in a period of just 4 years. Under these "emergency" monetary terms, classic supply and demand models fail. Currencies are compared to other currencies. Compared to commodities, all currencies are at all time lows. Our currency is only "strong" because the U.S. is chasing a debt that's impossible to ever pay in to oblivion.

It won't just be manufacturing thats affected, it will be energy too, one day. Sooner or later all of these bills are going to come due and the major consumer nations will have to pay up. When this day comes energy will most certainly be on the chopping block as well.

Assets in euros 'must be protected'

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

UPDATE-1: "This isn't Canada right now": Toronto G20 officer says

A new report has been released today slamming G20 police for "excessive force". While damning, this report is a whitewash. It continues to play the "few bad apples" routine spewed after Bill Blair's "vast criminal conspiracy" ended up being full of holes.

This report makes ludicrous claims such as "the Toronto Police had trouble tracking the black bloc", even though there is plenty of video evidence showing walls of riot police looking on while the "black bloc" destroyed property without interruptions with police screaming "disengage disengage" in the background. At the bottom of this post I will link a documentary of the G20 and you can decide for yourselves how accurate this report really is.

The part you all should find most disturbing about the G20 however, is this little portion here:

"This isn't Canada right now". "There are no civil rights in this area". As you can see there is no riot in the vicinity, in fact this event occured before the riot even happened. Therefore all excuses of confusion due to the riot are not valid in this context. Further, where would a police officer get the idea that "this isn't Canada right now". Is that normal thinking when in service to your country and it's citizens? I don't think so. It's eerily similar to remarks made after the G20 by Stephen Harper: "I know some people don't like it, it's a loss of national sovereignty - but it's a simple reality".

Were the police under the impression that "this isn't Canada right now"? Where did they get that impression from if they were, and if they weren't then why isn't this fact mentioned in the report? It seems to me police were under the impression that there were no civil rights; not just around the fence, but everywhere. It seems to me police then after the riot acted on this impression with a mass violation of rights.

Bill Blair says a police tribunal will find any wrong doing. Way to be proactive, Blair. The video evidence that something definitely went wrong and was systemic is already very very public. There has already been a report from the Ombudsman where he concluded that the G20 is what amounted to "martial law" in Toronto. There isn't any question that something went severely wrong, there isn't any question the Toronto police lied and falsified evidence to fit their narrative.

Everything Bill Blair has said about the G20 has been proven to be a lie. This man should be under investigation, and he should not be the one leading an investigation which should have taken place 2 years ago but hasn't due to his lies and stories.

Into the Fire, Full Film:

Update-1

First a correction, The Star is reporting that this event occured on the Sunday and not on the Saturday or Friday before the riot as I had originally believed. I am going to try and contact the video recorder to confirm one or the other as this detail is important.

Next, 'Protester sues ‘This ain’t Canada’ cop after York police board refuses to charge him'.

From the article:

“I mean, (Figueiras is) going, ‘I have my rights, this is Canada,’ all this stuff. I’m just giving him gibber back, right?” Charlebois told investigators. “We do it all the time. Guys are talking nonsense and he got nonsense back.”

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

U.N. Observer: Canada needs to drop its "self-righteous" attitude about how great a country it is

I couldn't agree more. 'UN food envoy decries 'shocking' conditions in Canada'

There it is, our self-righteous attitude, and we're so self-righteous we can't even see that is the case. We still tell ourselves that we champion 'civil rights' even as more reports come out saying otherwise. We tout our "Wealth" over "poorer countries" without realizing it's our companies, our exploitation that keeps them poor. The first-world wealth comes from the externalization of risk on to the third world. We prop up and keep dictators in place to maintain access. We oppose "dictators" but recommend "technocrats". We oppose "terrorists" in some countries but cheer "rebels" in others. We cheer our banking system as stable while simultainuously admitting that it's 100% reliant on the fundamentally flawed U.S. banking system. We lament over how much money we donate to "children in Africa" (in reality the western "charities") while referring to our impovershed citizens as bums or hoodlums. We talk about a prosperous future of growth while letting people know the era of careers is finished. We constantly refer to problems like hunger, climate change, peak oil in the future tense so that we'll feel they are not affecting us and taking place now. We're a nation whose "peacekeeper" image replays in it's citizens heads while we help oust or asassinate foreign leaders.

We're self-righteous alright, no matter how much we kick and scream to the world that we are the ideal free society. We're not and to think we are is to only fool ourselves.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

Historical ideologues in the new era

The other day I was asked a question on twitter which for the life of me I could not fit an answer in to 140 characters. The question was in relation to the current and coming unrest.

Time waits for no one. But what will come first? True reform and return to democracy or Fascism?

Fascism already won. We've been living under fascist policies for decades. These policies however mostly thrust first world repression on to the third world. I don't really like the term fascist to describe this system though, as it really is beyond fascism. It's feudalism and it's global.

I don't like fascism because governments are not "merging" with corporations, they are being usurped by them. Take for instance, the infamous "credit ratings" which with European turmoil are becoming mainstream news. Why is a country's "credit rating" important? It determines how much it is going to cost them to borrow money (from the private banks) just as your own credit rating determines the availability of loans for your household. There is a large difference between a household's credit rating and a country's credit rating however, that difference is that your own credit rating is largely determined by your credit upkeep and payment history where as a country's credit rating more depends on the rating agency's perception of their ability to pay back a debt. It's forward looking, instead of historical.

In practice, credit ratings play out like this: Country X has a number of sweeping social policies they would like to pass. The IMF and global monetary powers don't like these policies, so they issue a bunch of "warnings". Credit rating agencies who work for the ratees pick up on these warnings and using the same economic lens as the IMF determine that perhaps these social policies will inhibit that country's ability to service it's debt (again, a debt which is privately brokered). If the country doesn't listen to the "warnings" and reverse course on their policies, downgrades will be issued and the country's borrowing costs will go up. Thus making it more expensive to implement those policies. If the unfavorable policies wouldn't have inhibited the private debt payment scheme before the downgrade, it certainly will after and thus the "warnings" and "downgrades" always prove to be true. It is through this mechanism that real policy is voted up or down, politicians simply implement policies that have been approved by the global banking system by anonymous, unelected, credit raters.

On the other side of this coin you have the lobby groups. Simply having a lobby isn't enough to peddle policy in your favor, your lobby's policies must have the go-ahead by the rating agencies too.

The complete circle works like this: corporate round tables fund lobbies which propose policies which are then backed by the rating agencies these round-table groups fund as well. Ever wonder why congress or parliament so rarely seem to know whats in a bill? Ever wonder how they can pass something without reading it? They can pass it because the rating system gives it the A'Ok, it's certified therefore who cares about the contents? Politicians are not there to make decisions on policies, they are there to implement the policies.

Does this sound like democracy to you?

"So where is the iron fist of fascism?" you might be asking. It was at the G20 in Toronto, it's in the U.S., it's in Spain, it's in Italy, it's now even Quebec.

The iron fist of fascism (Source: static.guim.co.uk)

For the last decade, slowly but surely the iron fist has been creeping up on us. It's appearing and noticeable now because it is only now that the fascist policies are being questioned. It is the implosion of the corrupt fascist system which has gotten people thinking "wait a minute here...".

It is the fascist policies which make the third world, third world. Do you think those people are like that simply because they can't manage to get a society together? No, those nations are kept in disarray by us so that our corporations can go in and take ownership of the resources there in exchange for IMF "loans". It is this imperialism (among with many other things such as currency devaluation) which has allowed the appearance of "economic growth" to continue. Real economic growth collapsed in the late 70s, the "Reagan Revolution" was the illusion of economic growth, and now that this illusion is collapsing countries appear to be clueless in their attempts to "restore growth". Even if we did restore growth however, there isn't enough resources left in the earth to grow ourselves out of this massive debt, service the interest, and pay future costs of maintenance and growth. The fascist illusion is collapsing, so this isn't the beginning of fascism, it's the end of the western fascist era. What comes next? Full out dictatorship.

Of course we won't be calling it a dictatorship, because in the west we "oppose dictatorships". Instead we have a fancier term for dictators: technocrats. Just as we didn't call our era of fascism, we called it "democracy".

Our idea of democracy is founded on two "ideologies": left and right. Neither however propose real changes to the system, both instead offer different ways that we can accomplish whatever within the system. Both within the U.S. and Canada, neither left or right challenges the fundamentals of globalization or our monetary system. Try proposing that the Bank of Canada meet it's charter obligations and be the sole issuer of currency to a politician and you will either be laughed at, ignored, or get a confused look as though they had never thought of that before. Neither the left, nor the right has any interest in fundamentally addressing the systemic problems and to be honest few people do as well.

To answer the twitter question: neither comes first. Democracy died long ago, fascism is dying now, what happens next is up to the people. Peaceful revolutions, violent revolutions, or worse. The result of this global economic implosion will play out differently in different places depending on the people's grasp of the situation. In the latest election Greece elected a number of neo-nazi's for instance. It's during these time of global economic turmoil and global power struggles where the "extremists" tend to come to power. A large number of the public is completely uninformed as to the nature of the global economic problem, it's this unawareness which allows leaders like Hitler to come to power on the promises of economic prosperity and a scapegoat enemy. I fear in 10 years time we will not recognize most of the western nations we thought as "democratic and free", what they will resemble though is anyone's guess.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.