France, the country which elected a Socialist president not long before we did the same for a second time, and the country which very recently tried to levy a 75% income tax rate on the the wealthy, is providing Obama with his latest European “social injustice” watchdog. So-named “star economist” Esther Duflo will help Obama “shape US global development.” Duflo, said she was raised in a “left-leaning Protestant” family and “became aware of economic divides and social injustice at a very early age.” Well, golly gee.
What is there about a French Leftist economist that the U.S. needs? Before getting to how France shapes up compared to the U.S. let me explain what shaping “Global Development” really means.
“Global Development” policy means the implementation of the United Nation’s Millennium Development Goal (UNMDG) and the further intrusion of Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development. It’s about how much money we give poorer countries, and how Obama gets the money to give it. It’s about wealth redistribution. The White House refers to it as “moral imperative” a strategy to be carried out with “commensurate resources.”
“Commensurate” means equal to something, in this case, I assume that ‘something’ to be our “moral imperative.” Wouldn’t you think billions to the Muslim Brotherhood, maybe illegal billions, would be enough, along with the massive foreign aid we provide around the globe?
Comparing Economies – U.S. and France
In 2011 in the U.S., with our woeful economy, the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was $48,282 per person (not per working person, but per every citizen). We were in third place behind Singapore and Norway, both of which came in with $60,000+ per person.
But look at this, if you consider only the persons working in the U.S., we produce $106,541 per working person, and this despite the huge bloating of the Public Sector, which produces nothing but words on paper (they produce only the words, not the paper).
Here’s a chart to demonstrate what happens when the Public Sector exceeds 10% of government to the total numbers of working persons.
Once public employment exceeds 10%, economic growth plunges.
The USA with 16%-17% public employment is growing at only 2.5%
George Noga, Florida Political Press
Only Norway outpaces the American worker.
The GDP in France for 2011 was $35,133 per person. The GDP per working person in France was $85,152.
Why are we going to France for an economist? I suggest we let Singapore and Norway commit to saving the world if they wish to do so, and task France and other countries with becoming better producers so they can “produce” for the masses.
What about Philanthropy? Americans give more to charity per capita as a percentage of GDP than the citizens of any other country. France ranks 21st – which doesn’t say much for social injustice.
The more studies you read about motivations for philanthropy, the murkier they become. One fact, though, does stand out: Among developed nations, those with higher taxes and bigger social safety nets tend to have lower rates of giving. In charitable giving as a percentage of GDP, nations with cradle-to-grave welfare systems rank far down the Johns Hopkins list: Sweden 18th, France 21st, Germany 32nd. Source: Forbes
Getting back to the U.S. Global Development Policy:
If you know nothing about Agenda 21 (so-called Sustainable Development), you should. Begin here and here, and please realize, this is a global effort and U.S. funding is the major funding source targeted by the U.N. with Obama’s distinct pleasure.
All following quotes are taken directly from the U.N. Millennium Goal Forum (MDG) minutes.
3. To move towards creation of alternative revenue sources for the United Nations. The United Nations should set up expert groups and begin the necessary intergovernmental negotiations towards establishing alternative revenue sources, which could include fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for airplane use of the skies, fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions (i.e., the Tobin Tax) and a tax on the carbon content of fuels.
1] Abolishing war through a worldwide freeze on militaries and achieving global disarmament:”
To initiate a worldwide freeze on armed forces
…the prohibition of the use of force,…must not be undermined
To explore the feasibility of a legally binding convention on overcoming poverty,…To carry out the objective of moving towards the abolition of war by practical means,…the United Nations Secretariat and interested Governments, or a separate group of Governments, should develop a draft proposal for global disarmament
2] Prohibiting advanced weapons technology
…devise ways of stopping the technological development of new and more advanced weapons that create new imbalances in global power relationships.
3] Monitoring small arms
4] Controlling the world’s immigration to allow for:
…the global principle of freedom of circulation for all
5] Controlling the world’s finances:
…To move towards democratic political control of the global economy so that it may serve our vision.
…Sustainable funds could be raised through a currency transfer tax…and a tax on the rental value of land and natural resources.
6] Controlling the world:
Globalization needs defining [and then they define it].…it is transforming our world into a global village…
7] Prohibiting “sanctions” against rogue countries:
…Stop imposing economic sanctions…
8] Controlling conservation through a global tax:
…establish a global habitat conservation fund to purchase comprehensive protection of threatened, critical ecological habitat worldwide. The fund should accrue revenues from a nominal (0.5 -1.0 per cent) royalty on worldwide fossil energy production oil, natural gas, coal, collecting at least $5 billion to $10 billion annually.
Take your pick, it’s about social injustice or social justice – one and the same.
Background and Related: