UN Pushes for a Global Tax to Finance its Global Socialist System

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 6, 2012

All attempts to officially create a world government have failed so far, but the United Nations and its accomplice founders and funders do not stop on their efforts to institute such a monstrosity. After the so-called environmental movement -a group led by powerful oligarchs- failed to impose a global environmental authority, which would get financing from a global tax on carbon emissions, the UN has now changed its discourse to  ’solving poverty’  instead of  ’saving the planet’  from a doomsday scenario of generalized anthropogenic warming.

A new initiative presented by the UN’s President of the Economic and Social Council, Milos Koterec, calls for the imposition of a global tax to finance the living standards of those who find themselves in precarious conditions. The attempt to globally institutionalize socialism as a way to solve every single problem there is, was presented at a forum whose main focus was the non-existent right of people to have ”universal access to basic social protection and social services.”

The United Nations has tried the same trick on other issues such as Human Rights, Global Warming, Climate Change, Peace, War and so on. This time, however, the organization created by globalists in 1945 is using a rather humane hook to attract more supporters in its quest for the global socialization of everything. ”Everyone should be able to access at least basic health services, primary education, housing, water, sanitation and other essential services.” If you think about it carefully, no one could possibly oppose helping people who are in a dire situation due to the lack of anything cited by Mr. Koterec. That is why it is remarkably strange that the governments of those nations where people live in deplorable conditions do not work hard to provide the services and opportunities mentioned by the President of the UN’s Council on Economic and Social affairs.

The idea to tax some people to help others is not significant if one considers the amount being proposed -.005 percent. What should alarm us is the fact that once a global taxing system is officially accepted by a group of nations, the precedent will exist, and every new problem will be seen as an opportunity to tax someone else to solve such a problem. ”We will need a modest but long-term way to finance this transformation,” said the Deputy Director of the UN’s Development Program, Jens Wandel. A .005 percent tax would give the United Nations a total of $40 billion to fund anything the organization deems to be within the realm of  ’helping the poor’. Of course, the UN is known for financing eugenics programs all over the world with the monies it already receives from developed nations from across the planet as well as fake philanthropists of the likes of John D. Rockefeller, Henry Ford, Edward Harriman, Andrew Carnegie, William Gates, George Soros, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey, Prince Charles and many others. Most of these globalists have publicly expressed their wish to cut the world’s population for the sake of saving …  well … themselves and their traditionally inbred families.

“First we got population. The world today has 6.8 billion  people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on  new vaccines, health care, reproductive health  services, we lower that by perhaps 10 or 15  percent.”  - Bill Gates at California TED2010 Conference.

“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”  – Ted Turner

Mr. Turner has made sure his wishes find a place to start as he has heavily invested in eugenics programs in third world countries, contributing billions to population reduction, mainly through United Nations programs.

“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”  – Prince Philipe quote from Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.

Philip also helped start the World Wildlife Fund in 1961 with former Nazi SS Officer Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, who is closely affiliated with the founders of the Bilderberg international power group, and Sir Julian Huxley, Aldous Huxley’s brother, who was also the President of the British Eugenics Society, reports PrisonPlanet.com

“Investigations by EIR have uncovered a planning apparatus operating outside the control of the White House whose sole purpose is to cut the world’s population by 2 billion people through war, famine, disease and any other means necessary. This apparatus, which includes various levels of the government is determining U.S. foreign policy. In every political hotspot — El Salvador, the so-called arc of crisis in the Persian Gulf, Latin America, Southeast Asia and in Africa- the goal of U.S. foreign policy is population reduction. The targeting agency for the operation is the National Security Council’s Ad Hoc Group on Population Policy. Its policy-planning group is in the U.S.State Department’s Office of Population Affairs, established in 1975 by Henry Kissinger. This group drafted the Carter administration’s Global 2000 document, which calls for global population reduction, and the same apparatus is conducting the civil war in El Salvador as a conscious depopulation project,” explains Lonnie Wolfe in his article The Haig-Kissinger depopulation policy.

“There is a single theme behind all our work-we must reduce population levels.”  – Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American case officer for the State Department’s Office of Population Affairs (OPA).

To the previous quotes we can add the well-known White House memorandum 200, where the United States government laid out a clear strategy to aggressively promote population control in developing nations so it would be easier to get a hold of their natural resources. According to Human Life International, the memorandum named 13 countries that ”would be primary targets of U.S.-funded population control efforts.” Some of the policies implemented include the legalization of abortion, financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates, indoctrination of children and mandatory population control, and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless nations implemented population control programs.

“One idea which we could consider is a minimal financial transaction tax”. This is not the first time a global transaction tax is suggested. The very same bankers who caused the current financial crisis suggested a fee on international transactions to help rescue their risky bets. As it turns out that money was not needed, because countries like the United States and Germany decided to put the burden of illegally acquired debts on the shoulders of the tax payers in their respective nations. Financial bailouts abounded in 2011 to supposedly pay off the debts that were sinking countries like Greece, Italy, Spain and the very same United States of America. American tax payers alone swallowed some $29 trillion that the private Federal Reserve wired to banks in Europe and others on American soil.

So, what does the United Nations have to show for to suddenly request billions of dollars in aid to help the poor? As many may already know, none of the issues the UN intervened in changed for the better or were solved once and for all. Not once in over half a century has the United Nations come close to alleviating a country’s despair. After being created under the premise that a new organization was needed to bring countries together, the UN has either failed to act, or by its actions caused real harm to populations around the planet. The UN has stood by while dictators murdered their own citizens for the past 50 years, just as it stood by while corporate-controlled governments invaded and destroyed countries “for the sake of peace”. According to author Theresa Bell, the UN’s agenda is as deceptive as the names it uses to commit more people to its causes. “The body of evidence in print and action emanating from the U.N. system lately suggests a global agenda to eliminate the poor themselves through population control programs. This deceptive agenda is confused further by the use of other innocuous and seemingly harmless U.N. terms such as “sustainable development” or “environmental sustainability”—and here’s a bold one: “environmentally sustainable economic development.” It’s important to understand what “sustainability” means in the heart and soul of the U.N. and its agencies. Where does the term sustainable development come from? As I have previously written, sustainability has its roots in the environmental movement that arose previous to the Nazi domination of Europe and that Hitler would later adopt as a tool for eugenics.

Today, the UN has an operating budget of about $5 billion, which according to management is not enough to carry out its goals. That happens in any good old bureaucracy, doesn’t it? Instead of actually dedicating its efforts to ending poverty and bringing health and services to the neediest, the UN has used its budget to push for a socialist agenda which includes taking possession of government-owned lands as well as privately kept properties all around the world. Through its proposed Agenda 21 initiative, the UN intends to socialize land ownership, but not to give it to the poorest. The UN is also a promoter of government-controlled access to health and medicine, pushing a global set of rules to manage what people eat and don’t eat. This initiative is known as Codex Alimentarius, a set of policies that let’s the UN govern over nutrition and access to traditional or alternative medical treatments and food. Codex Alimentarius has been quietly adopted by many countries without previous consultation or review in Congresses or a simple popular referendum.

No one could expect, however, that the plan to tax international transactions was really about helping the poor. Anything that comes out of the United Nations is another push for controlling how people live and spend their money. The UN has even proposed itself as the governing body on how the internet should be used. ”It is absolutely essential to establish controls on capital movements and financial speculation,” said Jorge Valero. Mr. Valero is the current United Nations Chairman of the Commission on Social Development. And then he confirmed the suspicions raised by many alternative media outlets that the call to help end poverty and misery is nothing more than another attempt to control the global financial system. He added that there was a need for “progressive policies of taxation”  that required “those who earn more to pay more taxes.” That is an old and worn out example of figurative speech which really means tightening the strings on any transaction that the average Joe performs, while the richest of the rich are allowed to use the current banking system to launder drug money, as HSBC, Wachovia, Wells Fargo and other banks have been caught doing. This is all about using a noble cause – just as they tried to do with the global warming issue – to push for tighter controls on what you and I decide to do with the fruit of our labor while the real criminals are left alone.

When looking for reasons why the UN has failed to achieve the goals it originally proposed, Capitalism was the first in line. There is undoubtedly a concerted effort by corporate leaders, – many of whom fund the UN – to blame Capitalism for all evils. Ironically, the UN is one of the largest beneficiaries of Capitalism, since all the money it receives to fund its programs comes mainly from openly Capitalist nations. Expect the United Nations to change its role as a prominent carbon tax pusher to “save us all”, especially after the Met Office and the University of East Anglia confirmed that global warming ceased to exist at least 15 years ago. It will now try to solve the next greatest problem, the same one it has tried to solve for over half a century, the same one it has miserably failed at solving.