Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Ready yourself for a world government.

World Health Organization Moving Ahead on Billions in Internet and Other Taxes

Also see: It is all about money

The World Health Organization is moving full speed ahead with a controversial plan to impose billions of dollars in global consumer taxes on such things as Internet activity and everyday financial transactions like paying bills online — while its spending soars and its own financial house is in disarray.

The World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations' public health arm, is moving full speed ahead with a controversial plan to impose global consumer taxes on such things as Internet activity and everyday financial transactions like paying bills online — while its spending soars and its own financial house is in disarray.

The aim of its taxing plans is to raise "tens of billions" of dollars for WHO that would be used to radically reorganize the research, development, production and distribution of medicines around the world, with greater emphasis on drugs for communicable diseases in poor countries.

The irony is that the WHO push to take a huge bite out of global consumers comes as the organization is having a management crisis of its own, juggling finances, failing to use its current resources efficiently, or keep its costs under control — and it doesn't expect to show positive results in managing those challenges until a year from now, at the earliest.

Fox News initially reported last January on the "suite of proposals" for "new and innovative sources of funding," prepared by a 25-member panel of medical experts, academics and health care bureaucrats, when it was presented of a meeting of WHO's 34-member Executive Board in Geneva.

Now the proposals are headed for the four-day annual meeting of the 193-member World Health Assembly, WHO's chief legislative organ, which begins in Geneva on May 17.

The Health Assembly, a medical version of the United Nations General Assembly, will be invited to "take note" of the experts' report. It will then head back with that passive endorsement to another Executive Board meeting, which begins May 22, for further action. It is the Executive Board that will "give effect" to the Assembly's decisions.

What it all means is that a major lobbying effort could soon be underway to convince rich governments in particular to begin taxing citizens or industries to finance a drastic restructuring of medical research and development on behalf of poorer ones.

The scheme would leave WHO in the middle, helping to manage a "global health research and innovation coordination and funding mechanism," as the experts' report calls it.

In effect, the plan amounts to a pharmaceutical version of the U.N.-sponsored climate-change deal that failed to win global approval at Copenhagen last December. If implemented as the experts suggest, it could easily involve the same kind of wealth transfers as the failed Copenhagen summit, which will send $30 billion a year to poor nations, starting this year.

The WHO strategy involves a wide variety of actions to transfer "pharmaceutical-related technology," and its production, along with intellectual property rights, to developing countries, according to a condensed "global strategy and plan of action" also being presented to the World Health Assembly.

Regional "networks for innovation" would be cultivated across the developing world, and some regions, such as Africa, would be encouraged to develop technology to exploit "traditional medicines."

According to the condensed plan of action being presented to the Assembly, a number of those initiatives are already well under way.

The rationale for the drastic restructuring of medical R and D, as outlined in the group of experts' report, is the skewed nature of medical research in the developed world, which concentrates largely on non-communicable diseases, notably cancer, and scants research on malaria, tuberculosis and other communicable scourges of poor countries. It cites a 1986 study that claimed that only 5 percent of global health research and development was applied to the health problems of developing countries.

(In dissecting contemporary medical R and D, however, the expert report glosses over the historical fact that many drugs for fighting communicable diseases in developing countries are already discovered; the issue in many cases is the abysmal living and hygienic conditions that make them easily transmitted killers.)

What truly concerns the experts, however, is how to get the wealth transfers that will make the R and D transfers possible — on a permanent basis. The panel offers up a specific number of possibilities.

Chief among them:

a "digital" or "bit" tax on Internet activity, which could raise "tens of billions of U.S. dollars";
a 10 percent tax on international arms deals, "worth about $5 billion per annum";
• a financial transaction tax, citing a Brazilian levy that was raising some $20 billion per year until it was canceled (for unspecified reasons);
• an airline tax that already exists in 13 countries and has raised some $1 billion.

Almost casually, the panel's report notes that the fundraising effort would involve global changes in legal structures — and policing. As the report puts it: "Introducing a new tax or expanding an existing tax may require legal changes, nationally and internationally and ongoing regulation to ensure compliance."

As a backup, the panel offers some less costly, voluntary alternatives, including "solidarity contributions" via mobile telephone usage, or set-asides on income taxes.

Yet another alternative: new health care contributions from countries such as China, India or Venezuela, or higher contributions from rich countries — neither idea looking likely in the current climate of international financial crisis. In the report's words: "channeling these resources in this way can only be achieved if there is political will to do so and a convincing case is made."

As follow-up, the experts suggest that WHO promote each and every suggested approach for new financing, along with "regulatory harmonization and integration" in the developing world, "research and development platforms in the developing world," and new "product development partnerships" to kick-start the global medicines program.

Just as big an issue for WHO, however, may be whether it can adequately manage the money it is already getting — or trying to get — for its current planned needs.

Other budget documents intended for the World Health Assembly, and obtained by Fox News, paint a picture of an organization where:

• spiraling financial demands are beginning to outstrip the ability of member-nations to pay;
• outsized headquarters budgets, in contrast to the regional and country networks where WHO's public health work is largely done, are rising even faster than the overall budget; and
• efforts to control onerous staff costs are just getting underway.

Those challenges are laid out in WHO's proposed biennial budget for 2010-2011, which calls for a combination of mandatory and voluntary contributions from the world's nations — meaning, overwhelmingly, the three dozen richest ones — of $5.4 billion — a whopping 27 percent increase over the same initial draft figure for 2008-2009.

But that increase, large as it is, will likely be far less than WHO needs before the latest biennium ends. In 2008-2009, the initial $4.23 billion draft budget was "revised" to a final $4.95 billion during the two-year period, a 17 percent increase.

Using the same inflationary measure, WHO's spending could well climb to $6.3 billion before the end of 2011.

One of the biggest jumps would come in the spending centered on WHO's headquarters in pricey Geneva — a 44 percent climb in its share of program budgets, from $1.18 billion to $1.7 billion, even before any future "revisions."

WHO planners point to the shrinking value of the U.S. dollar, its budgeted currency, against the Swiss franc as a major factor, which they say has increased costs by 15 percent. But other factors include more meetings for WHO's governing bodies and salary provisions for the top officers of the WHO Secretariat.

According to documents presented to the program, budget and administration committee of WHO's Executive Board, headquarters costs for the organization have remained proportionately steady for years at almost 38 percent of WHO's spending, however much that spending has grown. The ratio is striking, since WHO devotes most of its efforts to improving health care conditions in the developing world.

The organization's stated goal is to spend only 30 percent of its program funding in Geneva, but the same planners think it is "unrealistic" to think WHO will reach that objective, even by 2013.

In foggy bureaucratic language, they declare that "a change that is too swift and radical will be disruptive to the entire function of the Organization or fail because of an insurmountable accumulation of practical problems of execution."

Translation: the WHO bureaucracy won't easily cooperate.

In a bid to get the head-to-tail ratio under better control, WHO's top managers have set ceilings for headquarters hiring, but these only went into effect this year. The hiring limits will not cut the Geneva head-count but limit its further growth — "an acknowledgement," the document says, "that staff numbers are the main driver of WHO's expenditures."

That combination of WHO's sharp hikes in costs and a grim economic climate have led to another major management problem: "continued disparities between the approved budgets and the available resources."

In other words, WHO's member states and donors are not paying up as fast as the organization is spending the money across its many and varied priorities, leading to budgetary juggling and behind the scenes efforts to get major donor countries to ante up future contributions in advance, and cough up more voluntary funds in the future.

In its planning committee documents, the WHO bureaucracy promises to get a better grip on its finances in the near future.

Among the cost management efforts will be higher levies on voluntary donations to cover WHO staff costs — higher administrative fees, in short — along with more voluntary and "fully flexible" donations that can be used at the management's discretion, rather than being earmarked for specific programs.

It will be another year, however, before WHO's overseers will be able to see if its management juggling will bear adequate fruit.

All in all, that is not a confidence-building credential for an organization that is simultaneously trying to reorganize the world's medical research, development, production and distribution system — and make the world's consumers and taxpayers pick up most of the multibillion-dollar tab.

26 Opinion(s):

Anonymous said...

Aha it lives!
Seriously though, good to see everyone coming around!

Anonymous said...

Couldn´t wade through that lot, but I think I got the gist of it from the first paragraph. They want to steal more money from the haves and give it to themselves, err......no sorry, to the poor people.
It´s not hard to see that the majority of the united nation/WHO members are kaffirs.
OK, move along, nothing new here. LOL.

Anonymous said...

Actually this isn't a Robin Hood fairy tale. In this sordid story, the super rich steal from the middle class for the sole purpose of enslaving them.

What I find fascinating is that the "conspirators" are being vindicated.
Almost like the accusation of racism that the liberal "verligtes" gave the 'verkrampte' right wingers during the apartheid years. These "conspirators" like the "verkramptes" also turned out to be the realists.

Anonymous said...

Eh Anon 4h48, I think you meant "conspiracy theorists"(as they like to call us realists here on 'I love SA') instead of "conspirators"!

Well pointed out though!
Common Sense

Anonymous said...

Wonder where all those pathetic bunch of denialists are roaming now. Probably sticking their heads in the sand like ostriches. Funny how everybody suddenly become conspiracy realists when the shit hits the fan.

Anonymous said...

Ah now I get it. Internet usage has got severe health ramifications for its users. This explains why the WHO is getting involved with the internet.

I wish these arseholes would stop being so deceitful and just come our and say what they want to do. They want to tax the internet, because if you tax something you eventually will have total control over it. The reason for this is that taxation calls for enforcement.

They are desperate to have control over the internet, because if their is one thing these arseholes hate, it's freedom of expression and information availability.

FishEagle said...

Thanks for posting this article. It was was a string of bad decisions like these that got Greece to the situation where it is now. The financial crisis in Greece is far from over and its impact is still going to be felt in Europe and the world. Hier kom nog groot kak.

It's the every day guy in the street, with their aspirations of living a peaceful and happy life, that is enabling the movement towards a world government. The left has benefitted in that regard by abusing people's faith, knowing that world peace could never be possible unless people no longer have to compete with the earth's resources. Already there are too many people inhabiting this earth and yet they still enable a further increase of population numbers with a health programme like this.

Until the conspiracy theorists acknowledges people's basic desire for peace, nobody is going to them seriously.

Anonymous said...

Oh I think that you would be surprised to find out that the conspiracy theorists are taken seriously by the majority of people. The only people that make fun of them are the controlled mass media and they would, considering that they are part of the conspirators.

FishEagle said...

@ Anon. The enemy is not any person/s, it is an ideology. When you decided to put your belief in the theory that identifies individuals (such as Jews) as culprits for the political disasters that have been developing in our times, you gave up the choice to fight for political ideologies. So from now on, all you get to do is sit on the side lines and point your finger at the 'culprits.' That guy....yes that one...not that one...ok that one...no he's innocent... yes he's guilty... Do you have any idea how stupid you are? Rather don't answer that. Just continue to sit on the side lines and let the more intelligent people try to find real solutions. Carry on then....

Anonymous said...

@Fish Eagle. What happens when an ideology you oppose is the brainchild of a group of people who all just happen to belong to the same racial group? Would it be a conspiracy theory to accuse these people of a hidden agenda? Would it be stupid to suggest they are pursuing a policy of self interest at the expense of the rest of us?

Anonymous said...

Well said Anon! What Fish Eagle doesn't realise, is that the population growth IS indeed encouraged by the very same group of Capitalists who she claims merely "want peace" just like the rest of us! In fact, "peace" is far below "profit" and "power" in their wishlist, which is why you will NEVER see the mass media propagating limited family size, which we all agree is the only way to even begin to bring about "peace"!

It's Common Sense really!

FishEagle said...

@ Anon. What if the policy is a brainchild of one group of people! The whole world's buying into the idea of world government and world peace. That makes the whole world accountable. Do you really believe that if you rid this earth of a handful of people that you regard as culprits, that everything would go back to the way it's supposed to be?? Ask your neighbour whether he likes the idea of world peace and tell us what he said about it.

Unknown said...

Fish Eagle. You aren´t doing yourself any favours you know. You are coming across like a naive 18 year old flower child high on an utopian ideal.
Man is doomed to eternal struggle and strife. It´s part and parcel of what we are. You can no more introduce a policy of peace, than you can a policy of non racial multiculturalism without opening a pandora's box.
Peace is a wonderful concept, but it has nothing to do with reality. Sorry to burst your bubble, but that´s just the way things are for so many reasons no one can or will ever change.

FishEagle said...

@Common sense. In some countries with negative birth rates, like European countries, population growth has been encouraged temporarily because there are simply too many old people for younger generations to support financially. But that is not an outright support for population growth. Find me one single mass media publication that states that it encourages population growth in the absolute sense.

FishEagle said...

@ bigbillybanger. Maybe you should have asked about my viewpoints regarding world peace first, before drawing premature conclusions. I said the left is abusing people's desire for world peace. Can you read? I didn't say the left is abusing my desire for world peace.

The false leap in logic is no less in conspiracy theories than it is in the liberals' theories. Just like providing aid to developing countries won't raise the standards of living (and reduce the inversely correlated birth rates), there won't be any change in people's sentiments towards world peace if they wiped out every Jew off the face of the earth.

I guess the worst case scenario is the conspiracy theorists and the liberals wipe each other out.

FishEagle said...

I miss blogging on this site. But I certainly don't miss the conspiracy theorists. You stifled debates about ideas because you'd rather just have somebody to finger as a culprit, get rid of the person and continue as before without any thorough understanding of people or their political ideologies. Come to think of it, I remember a couple of school bullies that operated like that.

Anonymous said...

The only time I heard the media actively call for birth control was in Germany during the late seventies and early eighties, when the government of the day called on Germans to limit their families to a maximum of 2 children as, according to the press, the population was reaching critical proportions. Being the good law abiding citizens that they are, they complied with the governments wishes.
Twenty years later, almost to the day, the German public were informed that the Government needed to allow a couple of million Turks and assorted wotnots into Germany because of the dwindling population numbers, and the need to boost the labour market. When I cried foul, people looked at me with blank stares. No one could even remember that far back.
Talk about stabbing you own in the back.

Anonymous said...

Yes Anon 23h52, that is precisely what I've been talking about: white nations are told not to have kids while black nations are encouraged to breed like flies... that's the whole plan! It does two things: removes the questioning population who understand who's running the show and try to spread the truth and secondly provides an endless supply of cheap labour, happy to live on the smell of an oil rag!

That is precisely why we havn't seen ANY attempts at encouraging small families in SA since '94. Remember the hyeana and lion adverts that ran from the late 80's to early 90's: Mother Hyena with five cubs in tow "I have a big family", Mother Lion's response "yes, but my children are lions"!

The old SABC was free, but now you'll have to go to Iran or Venezuala to find a "free" broadcaster! I watch RT, it still provides some truth!

Common Sense

FishEagle said...

@ Anon. Exactly. Nobody is making any deliberate attempts to encourage population growth. When the left didn't factor into the equation the differences in genetics between the races they failed, and continue to fail, to uplift undeveloped races (including immigration assimilation into European countries) and curb population growth. Now we just have conflict within nations instead of between nations and there will certainly be no world peace as the growing human population continues to exert pressure on the natural environment.

FishEagle said...

@ Common sense. Black nations were not deliberately encouraged to breed like flies. They were encouraged to develope to the same standard of living as whites, through aid. They were deliberately encouraged to stop breeding like flies. For a conspiracy theorist that claims to be so adept at reading between the lines, you sure missed that. But at least you haven't missed the fact that the strategy flopped utterly and completely. We need to get liberals to admit they failed if we want things to change.

Anonymous said...

Fisheagle @ 4.12
Sorry FE, I must disagree.
Example. If someone is eating all the wrong foods and getting fatter by the day, and, although you know exactly what his problem is and you say nothing, you are actively encouraging his approaching obesity.
By not even trying to alter the traditional breeding habits of the black masses, the powers that are become guilty of complicity through silence.
It´s that simple.

FishEagle said...

@ Anon 5.38. Most people still think that colonialism still has an impact on Africans' living standards to this day. People have absolutely no sense of the true situation and that's why they are making such gross errors in judgment. They are expecting the perceived impacts of colonialism to disappear with time. In the meantime it looks like they are just keeping quiet and doing nothing. The only question is how much pressure they can face while they wait, because Africans (or any other race in developing countries) will never show change in their standards of living. Well, not in our or the next few generations' life times. It's a genetic disadvantage and not a social one (IQ is correlated with the Human Development Index). People will only be pressured by attacks on Jews OR whites.

Anonymous said...

Fact is: Western Powers (I live in the West) encourage breeding in Black Nations, even a fool can see that in the press, official (government)stance, thousands of neo-governmental charities encouraging feeding and schooling of kids in Black Countries, official emergency aid to Haiti versus emergency aid to Chile, Peru, China, Kazakstan and Pakistan (where recent earthquakes have been far more devastating)...

It's a plan and if you still can't see it after all my lessons, well, sometimes it's the student and not the teacher at fault!

Common Sense (shame so few people have it)
BTW, hundreds of new converts after I told them there'd be a Liberal-Conservative Government in the UK this year... so many mates actually laughed initially and asked me "show me one option for Lib-Con when asked for your political view"... who's laughing now? Ha ha ha ha

FishEagle said...

@ Common Sense. Western powers unintentionally encourage black nations to breed. It's NOT their goal. There is no master plan or evil at work here. Sometimes people are just plain stupid and it shows. Deal with it.

Also, yes, it is a shame that so few people have common sense. Being sincere now.

Anonymous said...

Fisheagle said........
It's NOT their goal. There is no master plan or evil at work here.

LOL. Do you also believe in fairies?

FishEagle said...

@ Anon 07.01. You should be asking yourself that question.