Outbackjack: By Maude Barlow, July 2, 2010, www.democracynow.org

As world leaders gathered in Toronto for the G20 summit last week, leading activists from around the world joined thousands in Toronto's Massey Hall to oppose the G20 agenda. Maude Barlow was one of the key speakers at the event. She heads the Council of Canadians, Canada's largest public advocacy organization, and is a founder of the Blue Planet Project.

MAUDE BARLOW: On the eve of this G-20 gathering, let's look at a few facts.

Fact, the world has divided into rich and poor as at no time in our history.

* The richest 2% own more than half the household wealth in the world.
* The richest 10% hold 85% of total global assets and the bottom half of humanity owns less than 1% of the wealth in the world.
* The three richest men in the world have more money than the poorest 48 countries.

Fact, while those responsible for the 2008 global financial crisis were bailed out and even rewarded by the G-20 government's gathering here, the International Labor Organization tells us that in 2009, 34 million people were added to the global unemployed, swelling those ranks to 239 million, the highest ever recorded.

Another 200 million are at risk in precarious jobs and the World Bank tells us that at the end of 2010, another 64 million will have lost their jobs.

By 2030, more than half the population of the megacities of the Global South will be slumdwellers with no access to education, health care, water, or sanitation.

Fact, global climate change is rapidly advancing, claiming at least 300,000 lives and $125 billion in damages every year. Called the silent crisis, climate change is melting glaciers, eroding soil, causing freak and increasingly wild storms, displacing untold millions from rural communities to live in desperate poverty in peri-urban centers.

Almost every victim lives in the Global South in communities not responsible for greenhouse gas emissions and not represented here at the summit.

The atmosphere has already warmed up a full degree in the last several decades and is on course to warm up another two degrees by 2100. In fact, half the tropical forests in the world, the lungs of our ecosystem, are gone. By 2030, at the present rate of extraction or so-called harvest, only 10% will be left standing.

90% of the big fish in the sea are gone, victim to wanton predatory fishing practice. Says a prominent scientist studying their demise, there is no blue frontier left. Half the world's wetlands, the kidneys of our ecosystem, have been destroyed in the 20th century.

Species extinction is taking place at a rate 1,000 times greater than before humans existed.

Outbackjack: According to a Smithsonian science, we are headed toward of biodiversity deficit in which species and ecosystems will be destroyed at a rate faster than nature can replace them with new ones.

Fact, we are polluting our lakes, rivers and streams to death. Every day, two million tons of sewage and industrial agricultural waste are discharged into the world's water. That's the equivalent of the entire human population of 6.8 billion people. The amount of waste water produced annually is about six times more water than exists in all the rivers of the world. We are mining our ground water faster than we can replenish it, sucking it to grow water guzzling chemical-fed crops in deserts or to water thirsty cities who dump an astounding 700 trillion liters of land-based water into oceans every year as waste.

The global mining industry sucks up another 800 trillion liters which it also leaves behind as poison and fully one-third of global water withdrawals are now used to produce biofuels, enough water to feed the world.

Nearly three billion people on our planet do not have running water within a kilometer of their home and every eight seconds, somewhere in our world, a child is dying of waterborne disease.

The global water crisis is getting steadily worse with reports of countries from India to Pakistan to Yemen facing depletion. The World Bank says that by 2030, demand for water will outstrip supply by 40%. This may sound just like a statistic, but the suffering behind that is absolutely unspeakable.

Fact, knowing there will not be enough food and water for all in the near future, wealthy countries and global investment pension and hedge funds are buying up land and water, fields and forests in the Global South, creating a new wave of invasive colonialism that will have huge geopolitical ramifications. Rich countries faced by food shortages have already bought up an area in Africa alone more than twice the size of the United kingdom.

Now I don't think I exaggerate if I say that our world has never faced a greater set of threats and issues that it does today. So what are the twenty leaders who have gathered here, some already here and the others coming in tonight, what are they going to talk about over the next two days?

By the way, their summit costs $1 million a minute. By the way, we figure it's going to be closer to $2 billion when it's finished and the annual budget to run the United Nations is $1.9 billion. I assure you, they are not going to tackle the above issues in any serious way.

The declarations have already been drafted, the failures already spun. Instead, this global royalty who have more in common with one another than they do with their own citizens and are here really to advance the issues and interest of their class are also here just to advance the status quo that serves the interest of the elite in their own countries and the business community or the B-20, the new term, a community that will get private and privileged access to advance their free market solutions to these eager leaders.

The agenda is more of the bad medicine that made the world sick in the first place. Environmental deregulation, unbridled financial speculation, unlimited growth, unregulated free trade, relentless resource exploitation, tax cuts for the wealthy, cuts to Social Security and a war on working people. In other words, savage capitalism.

chronology: Mr Outback. A curious trend is the trend of Privatisation of Public Services, People seem to think it was Great Britain who led the world down this road. But it was Adolf Hitler who began the selling off of Public Services in the 1930s, although it is not clear why. Germany, which has long enjoyed the worlds finest and highest standards of Public Services has said to have returned to a policy of Privatisation. Nothing to do with Nazi's just a return to a former economic plan. In Great Britain, Privatization was successful in some sectors, a failure in others.

LiptonCambell: >>>* The richest 2% own more than half the household wealth in the world.

"half the household wealth in the world"? Whats "household wealth"? Do you mean GNP? Thats deceiptively vague

>>>bottom half of humanity owns less than 1% of the wealth in the world.

Again, not quite clear- do you mean 50% of the population has only 1% of the worlds wealth?

And, of course, this begs the question; what solution are you proposing for this? Its easy to list the ecconmic problems of the world- what do you propose we do, if anything? Would these global problems disappear if wealth was redistributed equally?

davidk14: Outback...Democracy Now is a socialist organization so nothing you have provided is earth shattering or even remotely representative or truthful of what most reasonable people believe. You bitche and complain when people use Fox as a reference, so perhaps next time you could provide a few sources that are neutral which supports your political views, other than left wing, socialist, and progressive websites, that is if you can find any.

Outbackjack: McLipton,come on I thought you were smarter than that.The whole thing is self explanatory.

Solutions?

Well for starters we could stop exploiting whole continents like Africa and financially empower people in their own communities.Instead of all the money going overseas to Western corporations,the money could stay in the country and have more of a flow on effect.This would raise the standard of living substantially.

More McCarthyite crap from you David
You can shoot the messenger all you like David but that still doesnt take away the alarming statistics.

Democracy Now! is an independent syndicated program of news, analysis, and opinion aired by more than 700 radio, television, satellite and cable TV networks in North America. The one hour "War and Peace Report" can also be viewed or downloaded as a podcast every weekday online, free of charge, on the official website. Democracy Now! serves as the flagship program for the progressive-themed Pacifica Radio network.

Democracy Now! and its staff have received several journalism awards, including the Pinnacle Award for American Women in Radio & Television; the George Polk Award for its 1998 radio documentary Drilling and Killing: Chevron and Nigeria's Oil Dictatorship, on the Chevron Corporation and the deaths of two Nigerian villagers protesting an oil spill; and Goodman with Allan Nairn won Robert F. Kennedy Memorial's First Prize in International Radio for their 1993 report, Massacre: The Story of East Timor which involved first-hand coverage of genocide during the Indonesian occupation of East Timor.

On October 1, 2008, Goodman was named as a recipient of the 2008 Right Livelihood Award, often referred to as the "Alternative Nobel Prize", in connection with her years of work establishing Democracy Now!.

LiptonCambell: >>>we could stop exploiting whole continents like Africa

Haha- I know its a serious comment, but it always makes me laugh when people use the term "we" to mean "they" and "you"- you're not offering any change on your part Outback- you're instead being generous with other peoples property and business's. And why should you be expected to sacrafice for a cause you don't believe in, when you could force others to follow a cause they don't believe in?

As it seems to be a theme in this topic, you are being deceptively vague. Who is being exploited? How? How do you propose to stop the exploitation? What if the people who are "exploiting" these countries don't wish to follow your political idealogy? What if the people who are being "exploited" are benefitting from it?

The devil is in the details- and all these details could be the difference between utopia and genocide.

>>>financially empower people in their own communities

Again- vague. Who "empowers" these people? At whose cost?

>>>This would raise the standard of living substantially.

Equally, Western investments in foriegn nations could prevent the people of this country from being forced into such careers as substainance farming and child prostituation. Its the whole "teach a man to fish" issue again- we can pull out business's from Africa and allow them to run their own affairs- but then again, why couldn't they do that before? Were these countries keeping them down by offering jobs?

And David made an excellent point- why are you using slanted sources? Aren't such things below you?

chronology: @ Mr David. 'Socialism' 'Socialism' 'Socialism' don't you think about anything els? Democracy Now is more 'Left of Centre' than Left Wing. Amy Goodman sounds more like a B.B.C. World Service Reporter than a Radio Havana Reporter.

Outbackjack: "Haha- I know its a serious comment, but it always makes me laugh when people use the term "we" to mean "they" and "you"- you're not offering any change on your part Outback- you're instead being generous with other peoples property and business's. And why should you be expected to sacrafice for a cause you don't believe in, when you could force others to follow a cause they don't believe in?

As it seems to be a theme in this topic, you are being deceptively vague. Who is being exploited? How? How do you propose to stop the exploitation? What if the people who are "exploiting" these countries don't wish to follow your political idealogy? What if the people who are being "exploited" are benefitting from it?"

Generous with other peoples money???
Are you serious???

Our whole standard of living is based on the exploitation of others.WE would all need to make a sacrifice in this.You can sit there and laugh whilst sipping a latte with your tosser mates but think about the South American farmer who got paid peanuts for those coffee beans.All so you can enjoy your standard of living.

I agree with you when it comes to teaching a man to catch a fish.This is what I mean by empowerment.A good way to encourage African farmers/workers is through cooperatives.This already been done by a number of aid organisations.

Other peoples money and business's???

Other peoples money that was made from stealing others land and resources.

"And why should you be expected to sacrafice for a cause you don't believe in"

What the hell are you bleating on about?
Making things up more like.

"What if the people who are being "exploited" are benefitting from it?"

HA HA HA!!!!

Example please?

Outbackjack: "And David made an excellent point- why are you using slanted sources? Aren't such things below you?"

If you pulled your head out of the Wall Street Journal for one second McLipton and took a look at democracy now,then you would see its not a "slanted" source.

chronology: @ Mr Outback, 'pull his head out of The Wall Street Journal'? More like pull his head out of Wall Streets ars, which he kisses so much on this Site he must use toilet paper for Kleenex.

LiptonCambell: >>>Generous with other peoples money??? Are you serious???

Yes. Whether you agree with their methods or not, you believe you are so wise as to dictate who "deserves" money, and who does not. That, somehow, you should hold greater sway of where money goes above the billions of people who trade on the basis of mutual trade and mutual benefit.

You hold such a belief- your own superiority over all- as self-evident, and get snarky with me if I dare challenge you and say that both I and everyone else in the world should be free to spend money they earned as they see fit, for better or worse.

What is so evil about individual rights? What is so wrong with allowing people to make their own decisions with their own money? I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but this topic is about the redistribution of wealth- that you believe people don't know how to spend their money, and you do- and you intend to force them, violently if necessary, for your ideals to finally be accepted.

>>>This already been done by a number of aid organisations.

And do these aid organsations reach a profit for their actions? If not, why do you expect business's to invest in these foriegn nations? Why are you calling for business's to act as if they are a charity? Don't these countries stand to lose if profitable companys refuse to do business with them?

>>>Other peoples money that was made from stealing others land and resources.

Which is percisely what you are intending on doing- stealing the money from companys you do not feel is "deserving" of the money, and giving it to ones you feel are.

Why is it outragious when a company goes to another country and "exploits" the people, but when you exploit companys based on your own personal preferences, its moral and noble?

>>>What the hell are you bleating on about?

If people wanted more expense goods that agree with their moral stances, it is completely in their power to refuse to purchase products made in Veitnam, China, ect ect- many people do this already. However, you are calling for the government to force the rest of us to follow your beliefs. Why? Why are you so unwilling to allow people to make their own decisions? Why do you insist on playing big brother?

>>>If you pulled your head out of the Wall Street Journal for one second McLipton and took a look at democracy now,then you would see its not a "slanted" source.

I'm not the only one who thinks its slanted- even people who agree with your stances such as chron believe it is leftist.

Outbackjack: "Yes. Whether you agree with their methods or not, you believe you are so wise as to dictate who "deserves" money, and who does not. That, somehow, you should hold greater sway of where money goes above the billions of people who trade on the basis of mutual trade and mutual benefit.

You hold such a belief- your own superiority over all- as self-evident, and get snarky with me if I dare challenge you and say that both I and everyone else in the world should be free to spend money they earned as they see fit, for better or worse."

Yes I am wise.Wiser than the Government stooges and Corporate lackeys who gave trillions of OUR taxpayer dollars to you Friedman thieves who tell us how great free trade is and then expect governments to hand over OUR money to you parasites!

"What is so evil about individual rights? What is so wrong with allowing people to make their own decisions with their own money? I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but this topic is about the redistribution of wealth- that you believe people don't know how to spend their money, and you do- and you intend to force them, violently if necessary, for your ideals to finally be accepted."

You want to talk about redistribution of wealth?
Do you really want to open that can of worms.

Well explain to me why the wealth (OUR taxpayer dollars) is being redistributed to greedy incompetent Wall Street fatcats who created this recession?

You talk about individual rights?
Well how about some individual responsibility?

"And do these aid organsations reach a profit for their actions? If not, why do you expect business's to invest in these foriegn nations? Why are you calling for business's to act as if they are a charity? Don't these countries stand to lose if profitable companys refuse to do business with them?"

If a person keeps breaking into your house and stealing your possessions you call the police,right?

Who do the people of Africa have to call whilst the Western corporations continue their pillage and plunder?

"Which is percisely what you are intending on doing- stealing the money from companys you do not feel is "deserving" of the money, and giving it to ones you feel are."

They stole it in the first place.Its called returning the stolen goods to its rightful owners.

"Why is it outragious when a company goes to another country and "exploits" the people, but when you exploit companys based on your own personal preferences, its moral and noble?"

Wipe the foam off your chin and make more sense.I exploit companies???

"If people wanted more expense goods that agree with their moral stances, it is completely in their power to refuse to purchase products made in Veitnam, China, ect ect- many people do this already. However, you are calling for the government to force the rest of us to follow your beliefs. Why? Why are you so unwilling to allow people to make their own decisions? Why do you insist on playing big brother?"

You are twisting words again and not making any sense.
I am not calling for a boycott of goods in Vietnam or China???
Do you just make things up or something when you have such a crap argument?

You are a typical running dog for the Wall street stooges.
Free trade and all this so called freedom.

Its all the biggest load of bullshit and hypocritical crap.
The only freedom you want is the freedom of the parasite corporations to turn us into a world of slaves/serfs.

LiptonCambell: >>>Wiser than the Government stooges and Corporate lackeys who gave trillions of OUR taxpayer dollars to you Friedman thieves who tell us how great free trade is and then expect governments to hand over OUR money to you parasites!

What have I said to makes you think I support Government handouts? I support the free market- the government protecting obsolete and poorly managed businesses is not at all what I am promoting.

These governments are wrong- I agree completely with you there. Those business's should not have been given taxpayers money, and calling it "free market" or "free trade" is doublespeak.

>>>You want to talk about redistribution of wealth? Do you really want to open that can of worms.

Oh, I must be mistaken- you complaining that some people have too much, and that it should be spread more fairly- it seemed to me that the redistribution of wealth was your point.....

....what was your point then?

>>>Well explain to me why the wealth (OUR taxpayer dollars) is being redistributed to greedy incompetent Wall Street fatcats who created this recession?

Are you aware of the phrase "straw man argument"?

>>>You talk about individual rights? Well how about some individual responsibility?

For their actions? Absolutely. The problem comes in when people disagree with what should be punished. You, for example, seem to believe that some companies should be penalized, marginalized, or outright banned because they refuse to follow your politics.

>>>Who do the people of Africa have to call whilst the Western corporations continue their pillage and plunder?

Their political leaders. And if you don't like those corporations, you DON'T have to do business with them.

>>>They stole it in the first place.Its called returning the stolen goods to its rightful owners.

Ha! Its theft. How many bureaucrats take their share?

And, again, these corporations work there with agreements with these countries.

>>>I exploit companies???

Well, you certainly are calling for the government to, yes.

>>>I am not calling for a boycott of goods in Vietnam or China???

Then you are clearly not making your original point clear; what is the solution you are *specifically* suggesting?

Outbackjack: "What have I said to makes you think I support Government handouts? I support the free market- the government protecting obsolete and poorly managed businesses is not at all what I am promoting.

These governments are wrong- I agree completely with you there. Those business's should not have been given taxpayers money, and calling it "free market" or "free trade" is doublespeak."

You agree that the philosophy of the Free market is dead in the water and doesnt work?

"Oh, I must be mistaken- you complaining that some people have too much, and that it should be spread more fairly- it seemed to me that the redistribution of wealth was your point.....

....what was your point then?"

Dont get cute with me.Before we talk about any distribution of wealth we need to ask why the richest corporations in the world are redistributing OUR wealth.
Why do they need the money ahead of a billion people on the planet who are starving?


">>>Well explain to me why the wealth (OUR taxpayer dollars) is being redistributed to greedy incompetent Wall Street fatcats who created this recession?

Are you aware of the phrase "straw man argument"?"

Are you aware of the phrase "too scared to answer the question?"

"For their actions? Absolutely. The problem comes in when people disagree with what should be punished. You, for example, seem to believe that some companies should be penalized, marginalized, or outright banned because they refuse to follow your politics."

No.
If I go and defraud the local bank of any money then I could go to jail.
But if you are bank defrauding billions of dollars you can be sure you will be rewarded with government money as if nothing ever happened.All this talk from the Friedmanists about a level playing field just doesnt apply when talking about being punished.

This has nothing to do with "my politics".This is to do with individual responsibility.Dont twist words when you have such a poor argument.
It reeks of desperation.

"Their political leaders. And if you don't like those corporations, you DON'T have to do business with them."

Yes you are quite happy for these pseudo fascist tinpot dictators to repress the African people while your precious corporations continue their pillage and plunder,carte blanche?

"Ha! Its theft. How many bureaucrats take their share?

And, again, these corporations work there with agreements with these countries."

And again they make these agreements with pseudo fascist tinpot dictators which you obviously support.

">>>I exploit companies???

Well, you certainly are calling for the government to, yes."

HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

That is the most funniest insane verbal diahorrea that has erupted from any of your orifices to date!

"
>>>I am not calling for a boycott of goods in Vietnam or China???

Then you are clearly not making your original point clear; what is the solution you ares *specifically* suggesting? "

You know damn well what I am calling for.I have said it here for years!

Whereas you spew the same corporate Friedman crap,ad nauseum,which really just adds up to:

"Privatise the profits and socialise the losses."

flashie: most viewed alt news site on internet-

infowars.com


good thread jack

flashie: ^ not islamic, socialist but american and constitutional. check it out, check the facts out. dont belive anyone do the research for yourself infact.

davidk14: Outback,

And you bash me for my reference materials? As I stated, Democracy Now! Is a progressive, socialist and liberal organization which is ONLY a left leaning organization. The following are references to support my previous remarks about Democracy Now! from the timesnews.net, Columbia Spectator and Adelines.

________________________________________________________

Democracy Now! a rare liberal voice in conservative NET

By HANK HAYES Timesnews.net

JOHNSON CITY - At almost 6 o'clock on a Wednesday night, the public radio program loved by liberals.
________________________________________________________

Pacifica's Woes Continue

Columbia Spectator Newspaper

.... listeners committed to leftist political debate on the award-winning radio show, Democracy Now!, are concerned about the future of activist radio. With Democracy Now!'s future uncertain due to conflicts ... a blow to an important media outlet for the left.
________________________________________________________

Grad Nabs Progressive Prize

By ADELINE S. ROLNICK, CONTRIBUTING WRITER
Published: Monday, October 06, 2008
…Goodman, the founder and co-host of Democracy Now!, a weekly independent news broadcast….Democracy Now! is widely recognized as one of the leading progressive media outlets in the world.

So, Democracy Now! is a fair and balanced media outlet? I don't think so.

LiptonCambell: >>>You agree that the philosophy of the Free market is dead in the water and doesnt work?

Not at all- the concept of the free market is for individuals to exchage goods and services with no interference from outside parties, government or otherwise. The fact that the Government DID interfere, in this case by bailing out certain companies from bankruptcy, proves that this instance we are discussing is not at all free market.

As you said several times, this is a example of redistribution of wealth gone wrong- that the government is taking tax dollars and redistributing it to corporations. How is it this is an example of the free market failing, because people enacted socialist ways? Isn't it an example of socialist ways failing?

>>>Before we talk about any distribution of wealth we need to ask why the richest corporations in the world are redistributing OUR wealth.

No, I think "what do you think should be done about this?" is a perfectly reasonable question to ask at this juncture.

>>>Why do they need the money ahead of a billion people on the planet who are starving?

Why do you? You certainly have more money than the billions of starving people out there- but you purchase luxeries, such as computers and internet access- why? Couldn't you do with less? Shouldn't you? And since you clearly are not, then who are you to dictate how others should live, if you are not willing to live at that standard?

>>>Are you aware of the phrase "too scared to answer the question?"

A strawman argument, as Wikipedia wonderfully explains;

"s an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar yet weaker proposition (the "straw man", and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]"

>>>But if you are bank defrauding billions of dollars you can be sure you will be rewarded with government money as if nothing ever happened.

Show me where I suggested that banks should be bailed out? I made it clear that I don't think they should be

>>>This has nothing to do with "my politics"

That sitatuion? No. But you certainly do wish to punish numerous companies for not acting in ways that, while are completely legal, you feel should be punished.

>>>Yes you are quite happy for these pseudo fascist tinpot dictators to repress the African people

Its not my place to dictate how foriegn governments are run- nor is it yours, nor is it these corportations. You can't take on the world jack

>>>And again they make these agreements with pseudo fascist tinpot dictators which you obviously support.

Couldn't I stop both these corporations and these countries by simply boycotting these products? We all have that power to make that choice- but you want the power to make that choice for people. Why? Isn't that elitism?

You completely dodged my first point; if you penalize these corporations for doing business with these countries, our governments will certainly take their share of this penalization. Again, the devil is in the details- how do you propose giving this money "back" to the people of these countries? I'm certain their "pseudo fascist tinpot dictators" have no problem pocketing any money thats sent their way either......so what is your solution?

I'm not asking for additional critism of the problem- I'm asking for you to find a solution.

>>>HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

Everyone catch that? I accept that I cannot control foreign nations, and for that, I support dictators. Jack actively calls for government and ecconmic reform, and yet, he isn't. Gotta love double speak. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

>>>You know damn well what I am calling for.I have said it here for years!

You dodge the question-make your intentions clear- what is your solution?

flashie: take the constitution back and get rid of bankers and illuminati is the solution lipton.

its rotten

LiptonCambell: foggy answers flash. What needs to be changed? what needs to be kept?

flashie: makes sense to me to buy meat from a butcher. im a landscape gardener, so i leave rocket science to scientists.

solution? a good start would be to eradicate theives and corruption. the american constitution seems a good enough system to follow.

keep it simple

flashie: what would the founding fathers do? there seems to be a solution. they got rid of english monarchy rule. it worked and america became a great nation. its going to the dogs now tho.

vote ron paul

flashie: and get involved in your area too

flashie: ok i got shit to shovel. catch you later

chronology: Mr Flashie. Can you please explain something that will be baffling many (or any) Americans who read your posts. You keep telling people to 'Vote Ron Paul'. Yet practically everything you write on this Site is the opposite to Ron Paul's politics. Alex Jones keeps mentioning Ron Paul on his Radio Show because Ron Paul lives in Texas and is a right wing fanatic like Jones. Am not having a go at you Flashy, but there is no 'ryme nor reason' to your logic. If you must must vote for some one in Texas, vote for Bill White, for Governor of that great State.